Husband kana sue by wife for sex

[durex]

Saw this article two days ago,a bit tulan to see tis type of news,the so call victim the wife says she feel dirty when her husband push for sex on her,knn why marry in the first place,still want to bring the husband to court.
If she got problem with that she could easily move out or talk to him nicely,knn why bring own husband to court,now the husband got to say tor long,if the law is with the women and by the strange action this wife behave is encourage than we will
just cant understand why some women like that.

[nevi1977]

bro pardon me for saying this. this kind of woman is so call gian song kia tia.

[geylangbonker]

Hm....must be spore woman....like to play or act conservative towards open sex!Wonder how woman feel when their husbands has been playing pranks with other women....! what's the point of marriage and staying togeher only expect men to pay for most expenses than women only can substain huband and wife relationship!

[nevi1977]

i think this woman got some mental problem if not for a normal woman how will she bear to sue the husband.

[Archduke]

Do my eyes decieve me? By God what sort of wife is that? Does she not know of her wifely duties? It's called making love for crying out loud! How can it be dirty. That is one real frigid bitch.

[humpcheepang]

I think there will be more to come......a lot of other Singapore women will take advantage of this new ruling to sue hubby especially during the unhappy times with hubby, may it be a genuine or or fake case.

[Archduke]

I for one hope the judge has the common sense to throw out the case. Better yet I hope it is a woman judge who does that.

If the case does go thru, I hope the husband countersues her for failure to perform her wifely duties! Or obtain forncation rights free of adultery charges.

[geylangbonker]

Originally Posted by humpcheepang

I think there will be more to come......a lot of other Singapore women will take advantage of this new ruling to sue hubby especially during the unhappy times with hubby, may it be a genuine or or fake case.

yes bro..! i agree with u! below is an extract taken from the local news article!It may be long-winded but interesting to read and know more!thks!
Enjoy reading!

Lift marriage veil on rape


The Government has just unveiled its proposed amendments to Singapore's criminal law, one of which is to partially abolish a husband's marital immunity from raping his wife. While this is a step in the right direction, it does not go far enough.

Under the current law, a husband who forces himself on his wife to have sexual intercourse is not guilty of rape - even when the same deed involving a woman not married to him would attract a maximum jail sentence of 20 years plus caning.

Marital immunity is an old English rule dating back to 1736, based on the concept that a woman, upon marriage, becomes the virtual property of her husband - and this includes an unlimited right of sexual access to her. In England, the rule was abolished in 1991.

The proposal in Singapore now is to lift the husband's immunity in three circumstances: Where the wife is living separately under a judgment of judicial separation or interim judgment of divorce not made final; where there is an injunction restraining the husband from sexual intercourse with his wife; and where a wife has a protection order against her husband.

This would mean the wife must take legal steps to terminate her husband's marital immunity - she has to go to court to apply for judicial separation, a divorce, an injunction, or a protection order. Anything short of this will not do.

Yet, it is well known that wives in abusive relationships may not know what to do or live in a state of denial. For those who do not qualify for legal aid, legal representation must be paid for. The Government's proposals will not help such wives.

The changes will also not address the injustice of the present law as demonstrated in a case decided in 1999.

The man and woman involved were married in 1996, but because of frequent quarrels, the wife moved to her parents' home a year later. During a telephone conversation in August 1998, the wife suggested they get a divorce. The upset husband then threatened to kill her.

About two weeks later, she agreed to his request to meet, but they soon started quarrelling again. The husband then dragged her into his car and drove back to their matrimonial home. He ordered her into the bedroom, stripped her of her clothes, tied her hands with a bath towel and gagged her. He then had sex with her against her will.

As her husband, he could not be charged with "rape" - rather, he was charged with voluntarily causing hurt, wrongful confinement and criminal intimidation. He pleaded guilty. The trial judge imposed a total fine of $7,000.

Following an appeal by the Public Prosecutor against the mild sentencing, former Chief Justice Yong Pung How slapped on an additional 18 months' imprisonment. Although he remarked that "an offence committed against one's spouse should not be treated any less seriously than an offence committed against a complete stranger", CJ Yong's hands were tied by the sentencing maximum of the minor offences.

The recently-proposed changes to the law would still not have seen the husband charged with rape. The victim was living apart from her husband and was thinking about getting a divorce, but legal proceedings were not underway yet.

The Ministry of Home Affairs says the half measure is meant to balance "the needs of women who require protection and the general concerns about conjugal rights and the expression of intimacy in a marriage".

Is there something special about a marital relationship when it comes to sex? Of course there is. We wish there to be as little governmental intrusion into marital privacy as possible.

But where the same conduct between strangers is a criminal offence, such offenders cannot hide behind the shield of marital privacy. Our laws against family violence and child abuse attest to this.

Another argument frequently made is that the rule on marital immunity promotes reconciliation of spouses. This is highly unlikely.

If a husband's use of force to have sexual intercourse with his wife is an isolated act in an otherwise salvageable marriage, it is unlikely the wife will allege rape by her husband.

On the other hand, if the husband is guilty of ongoing physical and sexual abuse, there is nothing in the marriage worth saving.

The interest in protecting women from non-consensual intercourse certainly outweighs any privacy or marital concerns. Married women should be able to say "no" to unwanted sexual contact, just like their unmarried counterparts.

The Government should take another look at its proposals and give married women the protection that they deserve.

[Ronaldo]

I was also quite disturbed when I read the news. I think the women in the so called developed countries are overly protected by law. Whenever sex happens, there is always a chance that the woman is unwillingly or so she claims.

Imagine those women on the streets of Singapore, flaunting their hot body and stare at you when you look. I mean if they are in developing or under developed countries, I am sure they will be gang raped and killed.

I know this may sound extreme but the point I am trying to put across is that some of these women take men's chivalrous for granted. Just like the report, she married the man for love and not sex. And she even feel that her child is dirty. What is this world coming to? I think they watch too much Mediacock serial where a couple just kiss and they have children the next day.

How scary... Hehehehe..

[durex]

Originally Posted by geylangbonker

Our laws against family violence and child abuse attest to this.

Great infor bro. we are totally support and understand it,we are also against family violence,women only could fall back to the law for protection,and we does have regulation and laws for that from what i know,its good.
But there are some incident which for some women might abuse that strength given to them too,if the husband dont "ask" for sex from wife who should he look for
Will he kana sue or file complain againest him in court again if he went for went for Commerical Sex when he was being rejected for sex from wife for so call being betraying the wife
its more unlikely but there is still a small ratio of bros outside might be facing

[havana]

marriage no sex,what life can it turnout be

[nuclearkid]

I don't think its fair to coerce a person into sex, even in a marriage. Its a simple issue of personal rights and that choice should be respected. If you got married to a woman who turns cold fish overnight, too bad lor...

[evo3]

Under the current law, a husband who forces himself on his wife to have sexual intercourse is not guilty of rape - even when the same deed involving a woman not married to him would attract a maximum jail sentence of 20 years plus caning.

What Bro geylangbonker saying is correct. without the wife or the other party consent is consider as RAPE CASE.

If the husband want to have sex with the wife and if the wife is not offering to the husband on her on will, than the husband should spproach the wife slowly by doing some forepaly on her to test water and see if she really needs it not just force her into having sex with him, which is wrong.
If the foreplay does not have any reaction or if the wife tell the husband that she is tired or dont feeling like having sex at the moment, than why not do it next day instead of forcing it on her. It will also spoil the relationship if use force. Well this is my own view which I think is the correct way to do it. although is already married but we still need to respect each other when we need sex.

[evo3]

All Singapore Women or ladies are protected by the "Women Charter".

[airbrush]

What to do we are Sinkiaboh "Sin ga pore" Friend of mine from other country feel that Singapore women are very fortunate. In their country, the women need men to give them support and confident because their street is not as safe as ours. BTW is there any "Men Charter"?