本文選題：性自主權 + 丈夫豁免�。� 參考：《南京師范大學》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：婚內(nèi)強奸作為一個全球性、歷史性的問題存在已久,無論是中世紀歐洲教會法創(chuàng)設的“別居制度”還是我國維新時期的“廢纏足,興女學”似乎都是浮光掠影。但伴隨著婦女權益保護開始日益完善,女權主義運動不斷蓬勃發(fā)展,籠罩在婦女頭頂?shù)年庼步K得緩慢消散,夫與妻之家庭地位的平等逐漸邁向性權利上的平等。于是被世界多國所普遍接受的“丈夫性豁免的正當性”得到人們的反思,尤其是20世紀70年代以來,婚內(nèi)強奸構成犯罪與否的問題之立法與司法變遷,已經(jīng)進入到了一個實質(zhì)性階段,并且已初步形成全球化趨勢。在此趨勢之下,各國日益攀升的婚內(nèi)強奸問題漸露水面,其問題危害性的嚴重程度猶如冰山一角,繼而衍生的各異問題,形形色色,也自是破竹而出。 各國對婚內(nèi)強奸的認定并非一蹴而就,而是伴隨著女權主義運動經(jīng)歷了一個漫長的發(fā)展過程。在古代西方國家,通常認為丈夫享有“性豁免權”,從而阻卻婚內(nèi)強奸的犯罪性。就我國大陸而言,1989-1999年大規(guī)模進行的“性文明”調(diào)查表明：在夫妻性生活過程中,丈夫強迫妻子過性生活的占總調(diào)查總數(shù)的2.8%,受害婦女絕對人數(shù)有幾百萬之多。究竟婚內(nèi)是否存在強奸?婚姻關系是否能成為丈夫性暴力的保護傘?婚姻關系能否成為阻卻丈夫性暴力的違法性?“婚內(nèi)”與“強奸”是否是一個矛盾體?“婚內(nèi)強奸”犯罪化是否合乎刑法的基本觀念?國內(nèi)外學者各持己見。但是,就目前看廢除婚內(nèi)強奸中丈夫的豁免權、肯定婚內(nèi)強奸的丈夫構成強奸罪,這已經(jīng)是世界性的刑事立法潮流。 正所謂“他山之石可以攻玉”,本文擬以比較法之視角,通過對中西方有關婚內(nèi)強奸的文化背景、政治經(jīng)濟條件、制度構造等的歷史演變的比較,對我國當前是否適合將婚內(nèi)強奸犯罪化進行了一定的探究。在此過程中證明了由于強大的民族傳統(tǒng)文化等因素的制約,婚內(nèi)強奸若貿(mào)然以強奸罪來處罰定會造成刑法與社會大眾之間產(chǎn)生隔閡,產(chǎn)生異己狀態(tài)；同時也證明了當我們面臨婦女個體自由和婚姻家庭關系穩(wěn)定這一兩難的選擇時,更應當優(yōu)先考慮社會秩序,而不是一個違法的行為應該受到什么樣的懲罰。本文亦以犯罪構成的要件對婚內(nèi)強奸進行了考查,結(jié)合對我國婚姻法有關規(guī)定和婚內(nèi)強奸的司法可行性等方面的分析,指出在目前情況下將婚內(nèi)強奸以強奸罪論處,宜將其設置于強奸罪之范疇內(nèi)。
[Abstract]:Marital rape, as a global and historical problem, has existed for a long time. Whether it is the "alternative residence system" created by European church law in the Middle Ages or "foot-binding" in the reform period of our country, it seems that the revival of women's studies is a mere shadow. But with the improvement of the protection of women's rights and interests, the feminist movement continues to flourish, the haze enveloped in the head of women gradually dissipates slowly, and the equality of family status between husband and wife gradually moves towards the equality of sexual rights. Therefore, "the legitimacy of husband's sexual exemption", which is generally accepted by many countries in the world, has been reconsidered by people, especially since the 1970s, the legislative and judicial changes of the question whether marital rape constitutes a crime or not. Has entered a substantial stage, and has initially formed a trend of globalization. Under this trend, the growing problem of marital rape in various countries is coming to the surface, and the severity of the problem is like the tip of the iceberg. The recognition of marital rape is not accomplished overnight, but accompanied by a long process of development of feminist movement. In ancient Western countries, husbands were generally considered to enjoy "sexual immunity", thereby discouraging the criminal nature of marital rape. As far as the mainland of China is concerned, a large-scale "sexual civilization" survey conducted from 1989 to 1999 shows that in the process of husband and wife's sexual life, the husband forces his wife to have sex with his wife, accounting for 2.8% of the total number of surveys, and the absolute number of women victims is several million. Is there rape in marriage? Can marriage be a protective umbrella for husband's sexual violence? Can marriage become a violation of the husband's sexual violence? Is "marital" and "rape" a contradiction? Is the criminalization of "marital rape" consistent with the basic concept of criminal law? Scholars at home and abroad hold their own views. However, at present, abolishing the immunity of husband in marital rape and affirming that the husband of marital rape constitutes the crime of rape has become a worldwide trend of criminal legislation. This paper, from the perspective of comparative law, intends to compare the historical evolution of the cultural background, political and economic conditions and institutional structure of marital rape between China and the West. This paper explores whether it is appropriate to criminalize marital rape in China. In this process proved that because of the strong national traditional culture and other factors, marital rape if the crime of rape to punish will cause a gap between the criminal law and the general public, resulting in a different state; At the same time, it also proves that when we face the dilemma of women's individual freedom and stable marriage and family relations, we should give priority to social order rather than the punishment of an illegal act. This paper also examines marital rape in terms of the elements of crime, analyzes the relevant provisions of China's Marriage Law and the judicial feasibility of marital rape, and points out that marital rape is punished as the crime of rape under the present circumstances. It is advisable to set it within the scope of the crime of rape.
【學位授予單位】：南京師范大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D924.3

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 莫洪憲;論女性刑事被害人之權益救濟[J];法學評論;2000年06期

2 邵世星;夫妻同居義務與忠實義務剖析[J];法學評論;2001年01期

3 張賢鈺;婚內(nèi)有無強奸──評“婚內(nèi)無奸”[J];法學;2000年03期

4 陳興良;;婚內(nèi)強奸犯罪化:能與不能——一種法解釋學的分析[J];法學;2006年02期

5 阿文;婚內(nèi)強奸:沒有起訴的家庭暴力[J];法律與生活;1999年12期

6 關振海;;徘徊在倫理與法律之間:婚內(nèi)強奸犯罪化的思考[J];西部法學評論;2008年03期

7 梁根林;刑事政策視野中的婚內(nèi)強奸犯罪化[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;2003年04期

8 冀祥德;域外婚內(nèi)強奸法之發(fā)展及其啟示[J];環(huán)球法律評論;2005年04期

9 李立眾;婚內(nèi)強奸定性研究──婚內(nèi)強奸在我國應構成強奸罪[J];中國刑事法雜志;2001年01期

10 楊德壽;婚內(nèi)強迫性行為的法律責任論——由王衛(wèi)明強迫妻子性交被判強奸罪說起[J];中國刑事法雜志;2001年05期

相關碩士學位論文 前2條

1 陳靜;論婚內(nèi)強奸[D];中國政法大學;2007年

2 劉蘭云;婚內(nèi)強奸犯罪化研究[D];中國政法大學;2009年

，

本文編號：1818811