"I shall never be ashamed of citing a bad author if the line is good." - Seneca

***

An interesting angle on marital rape:

C.H.Pig: "I am saddened by how this issue has become another excuse for male-bashing and dick-vilification in modern society. Of course you forget to mention that the wife(previously and still) enjoys complete 100% rape immunity as well: the crafty bitch, having ensnared the trusting victim into a life of servitude and obedience (i.e. marriage), is entitled to use and do as she pleases with his penis, his testicles, his anus, and his dignity anytime she likes. Yes, the law protects a wife from ever being charged for raping her husband. And while the Singapore government tries to break down the husband’s marital rape immunity, the wife’s remains entirely intact...

What you are advocating, if you were honest about it, is really that a married woman of fully sound mind and capacity should be able go back on a solemnly made promise, go back on a part of her vow, and refuse to keep her end of the bargain in marriage as she pleases for no reason other than that she feels like it, while still insisting that her husband still keeps his.

Note that the MAN cannot go back on many of the implied promises he is deemed make in marriage, for example (and there are many other examples) he cannot “withdraw consent” to go to work everyday to support the wife financially. He is bound to do so by having chosen to get married."


I hadn't actually considered this angle before, but the solution to men having to support their wives financially (one might extend this to other aspects of marital support as well) while women don't have to support their husbands sexually is to emancipate men, not to chain women.