Phyllis Schlafly still thinks married women can’t be raped

Phyllis Schlafly, who is set to receive an honorary degree from Washington University this week has reiterated her support of marital rape. (Because, sorry, if you think that women who have gotten married have don’t have a right to refuse sex – you are supporting rape.)
In an interview with Washington University’s student newspaper, Schlafly held her anti-woman ground:

Could you clarify some of the statements that you made in Maine last year about martial rape?
I think that when you get married you have consented to sex. That’s what marriage is all about, I don’t know if maybe these girls missed sex ed. That doesn’t mean the husband can beat you up, we have plenty of laws against assault and battery. If there is any violence or mistreatment that can be dealt with by criminal prosecution, by divorce or in various ways. When it gets down to calling it rape though, it isn’t rape, it’s a he said-she said where it’s just too easy to lie about it.
Was the way in which your statement was portrayed correct?
Yes. Feminists, if they get tired of a husband or if they want to fight over child custody, they can make an accusation of marital rape and they want that to be there, available to them.
So you see this as more of a tool used by people to get out of marriages than as legitimate-
Yes, I certainly do.

Find out how can you can contact Washington University about this honorary degree nonsense here.
Via Right Wing Watch.

and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

54 Comments

  1. Posted May 13, 2008 at 12:41 am | Permalink

    without the active participation of one party, it’s not really sex.
    Without the active participation of both parties, at best it’s outsourced masturbation.

  2. Mina
    Posted May 13, 2008 at 6:12 am | Permalink

    “The thing about PS, for me, is that she’s a woman consistantly telling other women that their role in society is to sit down, shut up and let the men run it. And yet, she never sits down or shuts up. Which breaks my heart a little. She’s the only person who needs to hear her own advice.”
    Which reminds me, what if the dean or whomever introducing her at UW’s commencement starts off by congratulating her for being so outspoken and proving that women can succeed in careers outside the home…?
    “Interestingly, she always merely ‘seems to recall’ or somesuch.”
    I’ve heard of an anti-divorce faction firmly believing that abuse is justified in the name of preventing divorce, and I’m not just seeming to recall it this time (see the ending of http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3168638.stm ).

  3. Scilian
    Posted May 13, 2008 at 6:41 am | Permalink

    I never seen so many “strong”, “independent”, “empowered” chumps so scared of dissent.
    Did you ever think people see things differently, for different reasons? Onephile has many points in what he/she said.
    To shut someone down, belittle them, or call them names simply because the disagree but articulate their disagreement in such a friendly manner, well, is weak and pathetic to say the least.
    Shame, because the exact behaviors feminists bitch and moan about are egregiously displayed here.
    Kind of like child abuse, it has to stop somewhere… Why not here?

  4. Destra
    Posted May 13, 2008 at 8:20 am | Permalink

    Does her idea of forever-consent only apply to penis-vagina sex? When I said “I do” was I also agreeing to oral? Anal? Did my husband also agree to sex whenever I choose? Can I strap on a dildo and take my husband any time I feel like it? I bet she’d feel different about that.

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

167 queries. 0.650 seconds