Rape in Marriage Exists—Just Because It’s Legal Doesn’t Mean It’s Right

If you’re married, your body isn’t yours anymore—at least that’s what centuries of patriarchy would have you believe. The idea that a wedding band equals unlimited access to a woman’s body is so deeply ingrained that even discussing consent within marriage feels controversial. Why? Because society still struggles to accept that marriage does not override bodily autonomy.

Let’s get real—how often do women feel truly empowered to say ‘no’ in marriage? How many wives comply with intimacy, not out of desire, but out of duty, fear, or guilt? How many times is silence mistaken for consent? In a world where marital rape is still not a crime in India, where women are gaslit into believing that fulfilling a husband's ‘needs’ is their wifely obligation, it’s time we tear apart this oppressive narrative and ask: Why is a woman’s right to her own body still up for debate?


Marriage does not mean a lifetime of unquestioned access. Yet, society treats wives as if their autonomy has an expiration date. Women are expected to comply, even when they don’t want to, because saying ‘no’ is seen as defiance, not a choice. The truth is, consent is not a one-time contract signed at the altar—it is continuous, revocable, and non-negotiable.
Many women agree to intimacy not because they want to, but because they feel they have to. They fear being labeled ‘cold’ or ‘unloving.’ Sometimes, it’s not even spoken—it’s just a heavy sigh, a look of disappointment, an unspoken expectation that lingers in the air. But when intimacy happens out of pressure rather than choice, is it really consent?
Economic vulnerability often forces women to tolerate coercion. When a wife is financially dependent on her husband, she may feel unable to assert her right to say no, fearing that refusal could jeopardize her stability. Many women stay in controlling marriages simply because they lack the financial means to leave. Financial empowerment is crucial in giving women true autonomy over their choices. Without financial independence, a woman’s ability to exercise her consent is significantly compromised, making economic freedom a crucial aspect of bodily autonomy. From childhood, women are taught that marriage means sacrifice. Their mothers, grandmothers, and aunts all say the same thing: “Shaadi mein adjust karna padta hai” (Marriage requires adjustment). But when does ‘adjustment’ turn into suffering? When does ‘compromise’ become coercion? Too many women are silently enduring what they shouldn’t have to.
A disturbingly common belief in many households is that a husband has a ‘right’ over his wife’s body. This entitlement is why so many women’s refusals are dismissed. But a relationship is about partnership, not ownership. No one has a right over another person’s body—husband or not.

From childhood, women are conditioned to believe that a good wife never denies her husband. This societal brainwashing normalizes marital coercion, making women feel guilty for prioritizing their own comfort over their husband’s demands. Films, religious texts, and even family elders reinforce the idea that a wife’s duty is to serve, obey, and satisfy her husband. When girls are raised to believe that their worth is tied to their ability to please men, consent becomes an afterthought—something to be sacrificed for the sake of ‘keeping the peace’ in marriage.

Many religious doctrines reinforce the idea that a wife must submit to her husband’s desires, positioning obedience as a virtue. Faith should never be used as a tool to strip women of their right to consent. Spiritual beliefs should empower, not enslave. Yet, in many conservative households, women are told that refusing intimacy is a sin, that their bodies are meant for their husband’s pleasure, and that submission is the key to a happy marriage. This distortion of faith creates an environment where consent is not only ignored but actively discouraged.
Women in many marriages are denied the right to make decisions about contraception and pregnancy. Being pressured into having children—or not having them—is another form of bodily control that disregards a woman’s agency over her own body. Many women face reproductive coercion in the form of forced pregnancies, pressure to have male children, or being denied contraception. Just because a couple is married does not mean a woman’s reproductive system becomes communal property.

Popular culture glorifies the idea that men should be ‘persistent’ and women should ‘give in.’ From Bollywood films to real-life marriages, men are taught that women’s boundaries are mere obstacles to overcome. The concept of ‘romantic persistence’ often blurs the line between affection and entitlement. When men believe they are entitled to intimacy, they stop seeing their wives as individuals with autonomy and start seeing them as possessions. Consent is not a hurdle—it is a fundamental right.
Many women are pressured into believing that sex is their duty in marriage. This mindset reduces women to mere providers of physical pleasure rather than equal partners. Sex should be an expression of love, not an obligation. Until the idea that women owe their bodies to their husbands is dismantled, true equality in marriage will remain a distant dream.
If ‘no’ isn’t an option, then ‘yes’ is meaningless. Consent must be freely given, enthusiastic, and continuous. A marriage that demands submission instead of respect is not a partnership—it is ownership.

It’s time to unlearn the dangerous belief that marriage equals entitlement. It’s time to call out coercion masquerading as love. It’s time to stop treating wives as duty-bound providers of sex and service.

Consent doesn’t disappear at the wedding altar. If ‘no’ isn’t an option, then ‘yes’ is meaningless.

The question is: Are we ready to accept that women—married or not—own their bodies, their choices, and their right to say NO?