Actions taken by husband in bride-kidnapping video evidence a Rape or nontraditional rape occurred

In response to your response, I am aware that according to Western law, an argument can be made as to the innocence of the husband in relation to the crime of rape proper or nontraditional rape. And as discussed in class, Kyrgyzstan Law has made Bride Kidnapping illegal; however, no laws have been made to distinguish the case of rape proper or nontraditional rape. I will not argue with you in these regards. However, I maintain my position that according to the premises that are included in Susan Estrich"s article entitled Rape, the husband commits an act of nontraditional rape. She provides specific instances which could constitute as nontraditional rape (161.1.3). I am not stating that all of these instances must stand true. However, I am proposing that premises included in Susan Estrich"s article could draw a conclusion that the husband committed an act of nontraditional rape. Therefore, what Susan Estrich is stating is not irrelevant to my specific argument. My premises are not based off of Western Law or even Kyrgyzstan Law or what any official court of Law would conclude. In order to change these practices, which women are forced into marriages that they may not necessarily want to be in, we must think outside of the current western law. As Susan Estrich states, rape within the criminal justice system is a sexist law (160.2.1). Is it okay to force a woman into marriage, which will ultimately lead to an act of sex? Why is it legal for a man to have sex with a woman if she has been forced or coerced into a marriage? What happens if the woman does not want the marriage or sex? Is it okay that she may live a miserable life because of this? It is these questions which could potentially be describing nontraditional rape. I understand your argument as to when someone if forced into a car, it does not necessarily mean that a rape is going to occur, whether rape proper or non-traditional rape. However, due to Kyrgyzstan tradition, I am stating that it is a fair assessment to conclude that the woman knew that a marriage was to occur and that sex would commence the marriage. It is this whole ideal of the woman admitting defeat and appearing unable to say no to the marriage (27:04), and thus the act of sex, that constitutes this as an act of nontraditional rape. The whole act of Bride Kidnapping fits the definition of nontraditional rape, which is defined as the view of sex and women which celebrates male aggressiveness and punishes female passivity (161.1.5). The woman in placed under a state of duress by the family, as well as her tradition, and she reluctantly agrees to the marriage, and thus the act of sex (27:04) (177.5.2). She is being punished by accepting a marriage that she does not necessarily want to engage in. Although you state that she had previously agreed to marry him, this is irrelevant because she states she did not want to get married in this way. I hold to my initial statement that forced marriages allow the man to remove himself from blame based on the ideal of tradition. In the video, when the husband states that everything went according to plan, he is removing the blame from himself (164.3) (18:41). By her eventually consenting to the marriage, which based on her tradition she knows will lead of a commencement of an act of sex, this can be viewed as a lack of force in the end, which is how he exculpates himself. This is one criterion which could constitute as an example of nontraditional rape. In conclusion, I hold that the husband is guilty of the crime of nontraditional rape, according to the premises distinguished in Susan Estrich"s article on Rape. Although, it can be agreed that our Western legal system would most likely not deem him guilty. It is unfortunate that women are still seen in some places around the world as possessions to be owned by men. Like Susan Estrich, it is my hope that the future will bring about change regarding women"s rights and equality.