‘Ello, lovelies. Last week, we discussed sluts, Jordin Sparks, and her pontificating on the subject of purity rings. This week, in equally happyfunshiny news, let’s break down a recent story regarding a man caught raping his wife on a hospital security camera as she lay in a coma. Romantic, right? (Assume everyone took that statement as sarcasm? Oh ho ho. Read on.) First, a few background details:

Police who videotaped a man having sex with his comatose wife in her nursing home room violated his constitutional rights, an appeals court ruled Thursday.

David W. Johnson, 59, had an expectation to privacy when he visited his wife, a stroke victim, at Divine Savior Nursing Home in Portage, the District 4 Court of Appeals ruled. Therefore, police violated his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches when they installed a hidden video camera in the room, the court said.

The news outlet reporting the story elected to call the act the man committed on his wife “sex,” and not specifically “rape.” Which seems patently absurd to us, given his wife is, you know. Unconscious. The equation “lack of ability to consent = rape” seems simple enough to us but, evidently, others disagree. Difference of opinion is what makes the world go round, after all:

Lucy7

First, it was his wife. She consented to maritial relations with her husband by entering in to the marriage, knowing full well that it was her responsibility “solely” to satisfy her husband sexual needs, within reason.

Does that mean that her husband has to ask her for sex every time? I would say yes, it is the gentleman thing to do, under normal circumstances. But this is not normal circumstances.

Sometimes desperate circumstances call for desperate measures. The court agreed that this man did not “rape” his “wife.” So STFU and stop imposing your poison from your past onto others! Understood?

And to think some people say “I love you” with chocolates. Or a lifetime spent sharing mutual admiration and respect. Like perverts or something.

We are terrified of the notion that because the man committing the rape happened to be the woman’s husband, he somehow has the right to unfettered access to her body whether or not she can grant him entry. We’re pretty sure we will never sign a contract allowing someone to use our bodies as that person sees fit, regardless on how we may feel about it. And we’re not keen on throwing a bouquet towards another woman who will be the next to feel flattered that her husband is forcibly entering her instead of paying a stranger to suck him off. Because, you know. Men are animals who cannot take no for an answer. They want sex, they’ll fucking get it, right? Of course. And if he fucks you even when you don’t agree to it, Miss Lady, it’s because he loves you oh so much. So take it as a compliment:

Foxyloxy

I think that is so sweet and special. Most men would be out banging some hoochie mama, but to love her and visit her and take care of her and express his love to her. I would hope my husband would love me that much and maybe if it’s God’s will, she may revive.

Yes, goodness knows we’re eternally grateful whenever someone deigns to stick a penis into us. Sex is a compliment!

…Ugh.

Look. We would hope that our husband would love us enough to hope that we derive an equal amount of pleasure from intercourse rather than resort to using us as a 5’4” Fleshlight. (This one, specifically.) And that, really, if we’re being completely honest, is what bothers us about this story. We’re used to news outlets referring to rape as sex and this stripping the act of being a violent, invasive, unwanted diminishing of another human being. We’re used to live in a society that doesn’t really get rape.

But, on an interpersonal level, we’re incredibly horrified that people can look at this specific instance and not automatically mentally recoil at the fact that this man, who people are arguing must have really loved and cared for his spouse, is using her as a masturbation sleeve with no thought as to her experience of the act. Sidestepping the question surrounding consent (She didn’t give it.), this man didn’t care for his wife’s sexual pleasure or her physical well-being.

This is not an act of love. This is not something you do to someone you care for: You don’t steal from them. You don’t take away their agency. You don’t dehumanize them by rendering them an object for you to unload your sperm into.

You look out for loved ones. You protect them from harm. You make sure they have a voice and that this voice is heeded.

And that, ultimately, is what saddens us most about this story. That people would be willing to defend this man who treated his wife as if she were nothing.

How do you all feel about this though?

Is consenting to marry someone also consenting to loan them your body until death ‘til you part (Or, you know. Even after.)? Does sex without consent automatically equate to sex without love? Let us know what you think…

Court: Cops illegally taped nursing home sex [MSNBC]