It appears that getting married in Afghanistan, is consent.
This article raises some questions for me. Does a woman have a right to not marry? What is life like for a single woman in Afghanistan? Why is man entitled to relations every 4 days, but, a woman, only every 4 months?
If certainly seems like being female in Afghanistan is no walk in the park. We have it so good here. (So far)

The Qur'an says:

2:222. They ask thee concerning women's courses. Say: They are a hurt and a pollution: So keep away from women in their courses, and do not approach them until they are clean. But when they have purified themselves, ye MAY APPROACH THEM IN ANY MANNER, TIME, OR PLACE ordained for you by Allah. For Allah loves those who turn to Him constantly and He loves those who keep themselves pure and clean.

2:223. Your wives are as a tilth unto you; SO APPROACH YOUR TILTH WHEN OR HOW YE WILL; but do some good act for your souls beforehand; and fear Allah. And know that ye are to meet Him, and give good tidings to those who believe.

Islam appeals to insecure, chauvenistic men because under Shariah law, Muslim men are dominant and favored and macho gods.

I grew up in rural South Dakota in the 70's and 80's. At that time, spraying weeds in a roadside ditch without a permit was considered a greater crime (a class 4 misdemeanor, if memory serves) than beating your spouse. My mother, an R.N., worked on domestic violence issues for many of those years, even testifying before committees of the state legislature before this was changed. It took more years to get the county commission to financially support a local domestic violence advocate and transportation to a shelter, even though the nearest shelter was over 100 miles away and out of reach for the women who needed it. (And trust me, the entire county knew who those women were, but felt they should "mind their own business.")

So I'm a little queasy about the hypocrisy I see about this issue in the press. It would be difficult in many rural parts of the U.S. to convict anyone of spousal rape, whether or not the law is on the books. I wish people would get as pissed off about violence against women in the United States as much as they do about violence against women in Afghanistan. It's easy for us to point the finger, but we're not doing such a great job of protecting women in our own country either.

To Julie: I don't know how much time you've spent outside the country, but even comparing the situation here with respect to almost any civil right - racial animus, rape, corruption, you name it - is literally absurd. I too would prefer we spend more of our energy on internal problems rather than foreign ones (except where foreign ones genuinely affect our security) but to compare our situation to what I've seen overseas is just too much.

To all: Simple fact - Afghanistan is a shari'a society, and the Qur'an commands a wife to render sex to her husband whenever he wishes; and also commands him to satisfy her, but on much less rigorous terms, of course. I get a kick out of people who argue that all cultures are equal and we should be multicultural on the one hand, but absolutely reject other cultures when their customs don't correspond to their own values!

At one time in the U.S. there may have been societal pressures to look the other way during domestic violence, an attitude often perpetuated and enforced by abusers themselves and those too lazy/cowardly to take a stand against it, but it was never codified law and sanctified by our religion. That is the difference and it is a big one.

The effective trend in domestic violence prosecution in this country nowdays is victimless prosecution where the physical evidence, including photographs of injuries and victim reactions, rape kits, medical and psychological reports, etc. "tell" the story.

Julie,

You said:
"I wish people would get as pissed off about violence against women in the United States as much as they do about violence against women in Afghanistan. It's easy for us to point the finger, but we're not doing such a great job of protecting women in our own country either."

In the US, despite your assertions, DV (domestic violence) IS taken very seriously. The problem, Julie, is that it is ONLY taken seriously when it happens to women, and not to men.

In 1994 the VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) was enacted. It was proposed by a group of women's advocates who were using the "Duluth Model" of DV. In the model, and indeed the entire paradigm of their thought, was that women were victims and men were the abusers ... period.

Try finding a men's shelter in your area. Try finding one in your STATE. I thought discrimination based on gender was illegal, but apparently not.

Also, these same women's advocates from these shelters have endlessly advocated for the widening of the definition of "abuse", and sought greater and greater issuance of restraining orders.

Julie, restraining orders are unconstitutiona l, even if they are popular. You are not allowed, under the highest law of the land (the Bill of Rights, Constitution) to be deprived of your property or freedom without due process. During a restraining order hearing it is almost always done "Ex Parte" (meaning only one party is there in this case). wherein the man (it's often a man) is kicked out of his home and denied access to his children w/out even his knowledge the hearing is taking place.

Also, Julie, you should look into it, but more than 1/2 of restraining orders in the US are granted w/out even the ALLEGATION of violence, but simply "I'm in fear". Look it up.

Also, a man in the US, who is abused, who decided to take the kids (who might be abused or who are being abused) will be arrested for parental kidnapping, UNLESS he takes them to a shelter - but due to his genetic defect of having a penis he can't get into a shelter.

So, while you whine about how bad American women have it, take off the gender ideology blinders and realize that you have not showed any knowledge of how bad American men have it in domestic cases.

I hope I have added to the discusssion.

Steven