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

In response to your argument"s intro, author Susan Estrich"s literature appears to illustrate the video of Bride Kidnapping in Kyrgyzstan as non-traditional rape, however, she does not conclude such claim because as she states, "most cases deviate in one or many respects from this picture, making interpretation far more complex." (161.1.2) In response to Premise 1, can we really observe from watching the video that the husband"s intention is to commence the marriage with non-traditional rape? Or is the act of sex a side effect of the marriage especially when we recognize the familiarity between the both of them. (161.1.3) (4:35") In response to Premise 2, being forced against your will to get into someone"s car, does not always constitute the basis for the commencement of rape or the beginning of non-conceptual force towards rape. For example, in an effort to avoid costly medical bills, victims of accidents try to avoid being taken by an ambulance to the hospital, however, as a result of their physical state are forced against their will into the ambulance. In response to Premise 3, the author Susan Estrich does indeed state that resistance is a condition of non-traditional rape. However, it does not necessarily mean that a lack of resistance is not non-traditional rape. In response to Premise 4, citation 162.2 illustrates language "describing the prohibited act [actus reus] committed by the defendant [The Husband] and the prohibited mental state with which he must have done it" making premise 2 erroneous based on the interpretation of actus reus and mens rea. In response to Premise 5, non-traditional rape does not punish female passivity, it is the law that "reflected, legitimized, and enforced a view of sex and women which celebrates male aggressiveness and punishes female passivity."(161.1.5) In response to Premise 6, indeed, the author does state that when there is a lack of physical force during the act of sex, the individual does not commit an act of rape proper, but neither does it mean that he commits a non-traditional rape. It is not an either or situation, where if one is not the case, then it must be the other. In response to Premise 7, there was indeed use of force at the moment when the "bride" was kidnapped (12:30) therefore, the statement that there was a lack of force is erroneous. The conclusion, primarily based of premise 6 and 7, is not valid. The conclusion suggests that because there was a lack of force, one of the qualifications of non-traditional rape, then the husband committed non-traditional rape. Nevertheless, we do not know the reasons why the lack of force existed. To name a few, their previous relationship prior to the marriage could be an explanation as to why the couple would want to avoid force during the act of sex. In the case of the husband and bride in the video, the fact that they were a couple prior to the marriage, shows that there was a lack of force because they already knew each other. While it is true under the definition of non-traditional rape (161.1) that a lack of force is one of the characteristic of non-traditional rape, it is not the only characteristic which defines non-traditional rape.