19 [40] The appellant’s defence was thus one of consent. He maintained that the complainant had willingly engaged in sexual intercourse on the only two occasions (spanning weeks) that he had requested this. She willingly travelled with him to Cape Town. She willingly remained alone in a house for days on end in a place completely foreign to her without any friends or support system, attending to chores and other duties for him. She never expressed the wish to return to school. On the contrary, her wish was to abandon her education. The appellant never forced himself upon her or abused her in any way; his testimony in this regard was contradictory: on the one hand he maintained that he had only asked for sexual intercourse twice; later in his evidence he conceded that there had been other occasions too but that he had not forced himself upon the complainant when she declined. [41] He also maintained that the complainant had only herself to blame for her leg wound. All that he had done was to discipline her when she became defiant and disrespectful after having a telephone conversation with a female relative. She knew that in their culture a “wife” was required to be completely submissive to her “husband”. The following portion of the record is relevant: ‘Okay so … did you buy yourself a wife? Did you pay her family money for her? --- No, I didn’t. No. According to the culture you don’t buy a wife. You pay lobola for her, not buying. Yes, but the lobola is so that she can be your wife. --- Yes, in that manner you