Conceptualizing the right to sexual autonomy as a core element of human agency faces significant challenges within Iran's legal system due to literalist interpretations of Tamkin (marital submission). At its philosophical and legal core, this right denotes an individual’s ultimate sovereignty over their bodily integrity and the exclusive capacity to make free, informed choices within marital relations, devoid of coercion. This descriptive-analytical study examines the theoretical foundations of this right to propose an effective, culturally responsive model that safeguards spouses' agency while preserving family stability. The findings indicate that reducing autonomy to the mere absence of physical force in courts contradicts the psychological realities of intimate relationships, while one-dimensional approaches to marital duties obstruct legal protection against domestic abuse. Accordingly, by analyzing normative shifts in international instruments like the Istanbul Convention and examining legislative developments in Muslim-majority countries such as Egypt and Indonesia, this paper demonstrates that focusing on the versatile concept of "Marital Sexual Violence" rather than the contentious label of "Marital Rape" can effectively institutionalize active agency and affirmative consent. This legal framework, aligns with the dynamic capacities of Islamic jurisprudence, requiring a reinterpretation of Tamkin as an empathetic partnership and utilizing judicial presumptions to secure familial psychological security.