General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Marriage tips from a rapist, on ABC [View all]underahedgerow
(1,232 posts)that is how US laws frame the concept of rape. Other nations define it much differently, such as in the case of Julian Assange. Apparently he had unprotected sexual relations with a woman which constituted an aspect of their legal definition of rape.
While their intimate relationship was illegal in the eyes of the law, their relationship has stood the test of time. He is in no way suppressed, oppressed or coerced, he isn't a prisoner, has never been. He has been in a consensual, familial relationship for many years now, with this woman, his wife.
Was she wrong? Yes. Should she have been so viciously prosecuted? Yes and No. This was a consensual relationship from the beginning but in the eyes of the law, it was illegal, and why should an exception have been made? Should she have restrained herself? Absolutely! But, love is funny like that and people are weak. However, that being said, had she not been prosecuted it could have set a very unpleasant precedent with far ranging legal repercussions.
The lawmakers couldn't just say 'oh, they're in love, we don't need to prosecute her'. We cannot make exceptions in the law, especially regarding a minor.
It's complex, it's a strange relationship and very unique. But at the end of the day, they sound like a fairly normal and relatively healthy family unit even if there is a vast age difference.
I believe she should be cleared of the worst of the charges. I see no reason why she can't be a teacher and regain her career. She's not a predator or some sort of violent animal, she just did what she had to do for love. I hope she'll be ok.