A woman’s ‘no’ means just that — this seemingly universally-difficult-to-accept concept was given the weight of a judicial verdict in China last week. Given that Chinese women are relatively more independent than their counterparts elsewhere, the fact that this concept needed to be pronounced by a judge was surprising. But what came as an eye-opener was the furore around this verdict.

The case concerns the rape of a woman by her fiancé the day after their engagement in a small mining city in May 2023. She filed a complaint that very night and, in December that year, the man was convicted and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. Last week, his appeal against the conviction was rejected and the sentence upheld. As happened with the first conviction, the second too has been so controversial that the judge held an interaction with the media afterwards.

The controversy arose because of the way the rape was linked to the negotiations around the ‘bride price’, a custom that continues to prevail, especially in arranged marriages in rural areas. The couple in question were introduced by a matchmaker in January 2023 and got engaged in May. The woman asked for a high bride price and also for her name to be added to their future matrimonial home. Half the amount was paid before the engagement.

The man’s mother alleged that immediately after the incident, the woman’s family insisted that the rest of the bride price be paid and her name be added to the property or they would cry rape. This testimony coloured public perception of the woman; she was seen not as a victim but as a greedy extortionist. The “engagement agreement”, flashed across the internet, became a recurring symbol; her character was maligned.

The perception did not change even after both courts went into great detail to show that rape had occurred. The victim’s repeatedly stated aversion to pre-marital sex; her resistance during the act and her distress after it — CCTV footage shows the man dragging the woman back as she fled the apartment — DNA testing of semen on the bedsheets; bruise marks on the woman’s arms; the man’s initial statements to the police; and recordings of his phone conversations with the woman’s mother all pointed to rape. While the medical examination of the woman showed her hymen to be intact, the judges ruled that an unbroken hymen was no proof that intercourse had not occurred.

In his appeal, the man not only maintained his innocence, but also demanded that the bride price and other gifts be returned. However, the court noted that the woman had already deposited these with the matchmaking agency a few days after the rape but the man had refused to accept them. He refused again when they were deposited in the appeals court.

High bride prices are widely resented and seen to be sullying the sacredness of marriage. However, the lack of sympathy for the woman pointed to a deeper sexist notion: that once bride price has been paid, the man has a right to expect sexual compliance from the woman. In the reactions to the judgment, there was only a grudging acceptance of the court’s clear stand that the woman’s consent was paramount.

However, the courts didn’t see the man as a complete villain. He was awarded the minimum sentence for rape because the couple was in a relationship and he had cooperated with the investigation. Despite the light sentence, the courts sent an unambiguous message: engagement did not imply consent and negotiations after the incident do not negate the fact of rape. A woman’s ‘no’ means ‘no’.