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

In response to Premise 1, Author, Susan Estrich does report that every statute regarding rape includes some form of combination of force, threat, and consent; however, she states that these definitions are based entirely on the victim"s response, which should not be the case (162.2.4). This focus has made the assessment of rape according to a male standard that dictates what is appropriate for a woman"s sexual conduct (162.3.1). Therefore, the law provides no definition of rape apart from the woman"s conduct (162.5.2), which allows for sexism from within our legal system. In response to Premise 2, the husband does not respect the initial answer of "no" to mean non-consent. Therefore, he further pressures her into "going along" with the marriage (177.5.2), as displayed in the video when the woman admits defeat (27:04). This represents non-traditional rape because the woman"s passivity places the blame on the woman (161.1.5). During the car ride, the bride is asking to be taken to her mother and she states that she does not want to be with this man; therefore, she is not providing consent. It is only when her mens rea is placed under a significant amount of duress, due to tradition being enforced upon her, that she gives in by saying yes to the marriage (162.2) (14:50). He takes her initial answer, which is no, to mean yes; therefore, his mens rea does not allow for her to provide consent because her consent is a non-issue. She lacks the ability to provide consent without being coerced by culture, family, and tradition. Furthermore, non-traditional rape is distinguished by the amount or type of force that is used (161.1.5). Although the bride eventually agrees to the marriage, she is initially forced into a car against her will by her future husband and his wedding party (12:32). The act of resisting constitutes non-consensual force (163.1.3). During the act of resisting, the woman risks bodily harm, which is a condition of non-consensual force (165.1.2) (12:33). Non-traditional rape ensures a male freedom to coerce a woman who is afraid, vulnerable, and powerless to her situation (174.3.2). As the woman in this video concludes, she is unable to change tradition so she gives in to the patriarchy system (161.1.5) (27:04). This is a form of force due to lack of any other option, which constitutes non-traditional rape. In response to your argument, Premise 4 is irrelevant to the determination of whether or not non-traditional rape occurred. An established prior relationship, or consent of future marriage, does not allow for the husband to take away her free will to choose on any given moment. Furthermore, according to our author, rape between two people who had a prior relationship is often considered non-traditional rape versus rape proper, all depending on the amount of force which was used (161.1.3). Therefore, our author is concluding that all forms of rape can occur with two people who are in a current relationship or who had a prior relationship. In response to your argument, Premise 6 is irrelevant based on the fact that she has been coerced to believe that her tradition should be respected. This is something that was instilled throughout her childhood; however, this coercion and duress has taken away her choice of free will. Therefore, she is being punished for her female passivity, which is a criterion for determining non-traditional rape (161.1.5) (27:04). Therefore, according to the Susan Estrich article regarding rape, the husband does meet the qualifications of committing non-traditional rape, as she was clearly coerced through duress and tradition and lacked the ability to reasonably say no to the husband"s request.