Bride kidnapping rape

You refute the notion that patriarchy and societal norms are relevant to the understanding of whether or not the kidnapping constituted rape, because, as you claim, patriarchy and the traditions it gives birth to are not always necessarily moral (1.1.3). However, "not necessarily" concedes that cases do exist in which the practices and traditions that exist within in a patriarchal society--and as constructed within the constraints of that patriarchal society--are moral. Because these practices are known, understood, and accepted by those who live in the community in which the practices occur, one must concede that the same patriarchal ideals that guide the residents" decision--including the kidnapped bride--to accept and to go along with the tradition of bride kidnapping and the marriage also guide the residents" moral compass. Patriarchy is so prevalent in the community, that the notions of morality and ethics accepted and shared by those living in the community are reflective of that patriarchy (29:05). And yet, morality, at least to a certain degree, must exist within this patriarchal society, as evidenced in the idea that a kidnapped bride"s consent is a necessary condition for a valid marriage (14:54). In the community, women, including the kidnapped bride, accept patriarchal ideals (29:09). Thus, women"s frame of reference and understanding of the contextual world are dependent upon this patriarchal design or framework. Hence, the reason that the women are obviously aware of and accepting of bride kidnapping (3:34). If you argue that this practice is immoral merely because it is patriarchal and/or an old tradition that has roots only in patriarchy, the you must concede that the kidnapped bride--and even the kidnapper--is incapable of executing moral thought and practicing moral decisions. Furthermore, arguing that this kidnapping is rape because the tradition is in contradiction with the interpretation of morality as you understand it rejects the idea that elements of morality are subjective and an appropriate reflection of the times and places they are applied to; the kidnapped bride can make decisions only within the context that she is aware of and understands to be truth. If the kidnapping is immoral because of its societal roots or origins, then the kidnapper and kidnapped bride are simply equal participants in an immoral or moral-irrelevant act. However, the real problem with arguing that the kidnapping constitutes rape because rape is immoral and the traditions, because they are patriarchal, are thereby immoral is that it forces you to concede that the kidnapped bride and kidnapper are both unaware of the significance or even existence of morality, and neither are others in the community. Thus, in your argument, morality does not exist at all in the situation in which the kidnapping occurred.The kidnapping could not have possibly been immoral, because an understanding of morality does not exist and therefore an understanding of immorality does not exist. Rape, however, as you imply is immoral (1.1.3). Therefore, this kidnapping could not have been immoral, which is something that rape necessarily must be and is.