Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Shouldn't we just do away with marriage?

33 replies

levington · 09/05/2012 09:49

Two issues have made me think about feminism in the last week. They may seem unrelated, but I actually think they are part of the same problem.

First up, gay marriage.
The second item being the case of the husband accused of raping his wife on their wedding night.

At first they seem unconnected, however, I think they are linked. Please allow me to explain:

Gay marriage sounds fair on first examination, but is it really? Are we not just extending the notion of conjugal rights -after all, marriage can be voided through non-consummation and adultery a reason for divorce to another group of people?

The man was cleared; make of that what you will. But comments underneath the story ranged from: 'men have right to sex on wedding night'.

By continuing with marriage and its intrinsic conjugal element, aren't we just encouraging this sort of crap?
I know that rape in marriage is illegal, but the general consensus seems to be that men are entitled to sex on wedding night. Is this a good thing?

My solution would be to turn the gay marriage thing on its head and gain true equality by offering civil partnerships to all.

What do you all think?

OP posts:
CogitoErgoSometimes · 09/05/2012 13:08

Marriage already makes no reference to sex. There's a brief & optional mention in the religious ceremony about the production of children but there's nothing in any ceremony, civil or otherwise, that says anything about sex.

Original poster
levington · 09/05/2012 12:35

Civil partnerships do not reference sex at all-this is why the two sisters who argued that they should be entitled to one, thought they had a case (or rather their lawyer did).

What's wrong with putting forward the idea that marriage should be banished to allow for civil partnerships? Wouldn't it help to have a system that made no reference at all to sex but provided same legal rights?

You know while rape is illegal within marriage, the conjugal aspect sends out the message that men are entitled to sex.

OP posts:
Sanjeev · 09/05/2012 12:31

Oh really. So when it is stated that 'but the general consensus seems to be that men are entitled to sex on wedding night', then by general consensus, we mean a few people posting on a web article. Okay, I stand corrected. Otherwise, the statement sounds like something far more sinister, which we wouldn't want - would we?

minimathsmouse · 09/05/2012 11:32

I have always, maybe wrongly (I stand to be corrected) thought that marriage is something that occurs in church or for those that are religious, it forms the same legal basis for a commitment/a marriage that is performed in a registry office. Is a registry office wedding less legally binding than a church wedding? Is a church wedding a more morally binding contract? Are the same rights and responsibilities not lawfully conveyed?

I'm not Christian so I don't have a bias but it seems to me that Christianity puts forward the claim that men and women should marry to procreate the species and that marriage occurs for that reason btw a man and a woman. The nonsense that is the act of consumation seems to be based on church doctrine, just as it always has but strangely remains lawful in other forms of marriage/legal union but is in fact related to the procreation the species that should spring forth from marriage, the whole basis of the institution.

If I were gay I might have a problem with the teachings of the church, the really fundamental things like "thou shalt not sodomise" etc,,,,,,, why do the gay rights lobbyist insist on changing the church from within, why not instead shun it.

msrisotto · 09/05/2012 11:29

Actually Sanjeev, she provided the reasoning behind saying that as through the comments under the article. It is common knowledge that such commentsare commonly found on articles online. Thanks for your contribution but do refrain from posting ignorant views.

Sanjeev · 09/05/2012 10:46

I know that rape in marriage is illegal, but the general consensus seems to be (that men are entitled to sex on wedding night.)

Well, is that just the perfect radical feminist statement? Firstly (outside the bracket) acknowledge that something nasty, perverse and simply wrong is in fact outside the law. Secondly (inside the bracket), ditch this in order to perpetuate an outdated, unsubstantiated myth that fits in with what you really want to believe, without any evidence whatsoever.

I am beginning to see two camps within feminism. One of them is really not nice.

Chubfuddler · 09/05/2012 10:11

I think a civil partnership can be dissolved for exactly the same reasons as a marriage. You use the same forms, same court process, everything is the same.

I haven't read about the wedding night rape but I jobs it hard up believe he was acquitted because there is a right to wedding night sex, because there quite clearly isn't.

Alameda · 09/05/2012 10:09

you need the anti-gay marriage poster, they go on and on and on and on and on and on about it and I think they were quite obsessed with consummation for a while and how our 'finest legal brains' would struggle to define it or something

surely the actual travesty is how any of our finest legal brains ended up drafting legislation though instead of making £££