Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

The 'right' to sex within marriage

14 replies

BollocksToBrexit · 01/04/2019 14:41

I've just come across this article, unfortunately it's the Daily Mail. I'm speechless, and that doesn't happen often. The Court of Protection is to make a decision as to whether a man can continue to have sex with his wife who social services say no longer has capacity to consent.

The judge thinks it's important to hear the case in full because 'I cannot think of any more obviously fundamental human right than the right of a man to have sex with his wife'. What the actual fuck. Have we gone back in time? When did men get this 'right' back?

OP posts:
Original poster
BollocksToBrexit · 01/04/2019 14:41

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6873123/Specialist-judge-rule-man-having-sex-wife.html?login&param_code=AQDcRx4GvVxLckudh5BClFfhHVsrIoPhmK8mzvOdrtOP9rrfF8V0yJBm0f3xbYx-cca6cFnZ2kjBqzxLCMTJ97eii3uIMXTyjvgFjtt8nILViKBtgqRbXeXZUD-ZvsctzSOqEOOsyeLLxCIeBkIMKAklPbMMCeSkN9viALqzhF3V0YAD_TcsgrniGXqQXMjys23icBWofJiVpjF4uoYGgEon5JPSbow2EpaZuIB-RDHY2kT4BkY1SKJq8xZ-jGD42--2Hxlsl4HUVNxx8t40TIV8m8haLd6yumMAm7D0NrsEKY1xLoAmfY4j36ILh6D_0wM&param_state=rememberMe%3Dtrue&param__host=www.dailymail.co.uk&param_hideMasthead=&param_hideFooter=&param_geolocation=row&base_fe_url=https%3A%2F%2Fdailymail.co.uk%2F&validation_fe_uri=%2Fregistration%2Fp%2Fapi%2Ffield%2Fvalidation%2F&check_user_fe_uri=registration%2Fp%2Fapi%2Fuser%2Fuser_check%2F&isMobile=false#readerCommentsCommand-message-field

OP posts:
Ineedacupofteadesperately · 01/04/2019 14:49

Bloody hell. That judge needs to be struck off with misogynistic views like that, if true (it's the mail after all). How about the wife's fundamental right to give consent to any sex act? What about that? If she can't consent, she can't consent.

Also, the fact the carers have brought this issue up at all suggests to me that they have concerns.

Spokk · 01/04/2019 14:49

No. The whole rape in marriage law means that men no longer have a ‘right’ to it. Bloody hell!

AssassinatedBeauty · 01/04/2019 15:11

I'm not a judge and I can think of many actual human rights, all of which are fundamental and none of them involve the right to have sex with another person. Wtaf.

How are judges held to account, does anyone know? Can complaints be made to some organisation?

newtlover · 01/04/2019 15:18

We aren't given much info about what the judge said, though, or its context. He may have been more intending to say that we all have the right to loving consensual sex. It's relevant that the woman has learning difficulties (and possibly he has too) and that not so long ago people with LD were not considered to have valid sexualities. The report also says that the man has volunteered an undertaking NOT to have sex with the woman.
It may also be the case that the carers/adult social care want a ruling with regard to her capacity so that she CAN give valid consent to sex, otherwise he would be potentially committing rape even though she had in fact consented.
I think it's more complicated than it appears.

thatdamnwoman · 01/04/2019 15:26

Mr Justice Hayden: 'I cannot think of any more obviously fundamental human right than the right of a man to have sex with his wife - and the right of the State to monitor that,' he said.

What? This is astonishing. Sex isn't a fundamental human right. Millions of people live without it. This judge needs to be removed. He has shown himself to be profoundly misogynistic.

LangCleg · 01/04/2019 15:38

Agree, newtlover.

I think this is misleading Fail reporting. Looks more likely that they want jurisprudence/precedent so that everyone knows how to proceed in future. The husband seems to have offered to agree to anything that would help matters - but this won't be any use in other cases that arise.

AssassinatedBeauty · 01/04/2019 15:45

There are two discussions here - the actual case which is no doubt complex and more nuanced than the DM reporting. Then there is the quote from the judge. Which I cannot get past. I can't think of any context where I would agree with the Judge's opinion on this.

LassOfFyvie · 01/04/2019 15:50

I don't know why you are getting your knickers in a twist about it being reported in the Mail. At least they are reporting it.

These are he judge's words - not the

'I cannot think of any more obviously fundamental human right than the right of a man to have sex with his wife - and the right of the State to monitor that,' he said.

'I think he is entitled to have it properly argued.'

OP posts:
LauraMipsum · 01/04/2019 16:09

The other media reports don't suggest "and the right of the State to monitor that" which sounds to me like obvious embellishment.

Goldmandra · 01/04/2019 16:38

I completely agree that he doesn't have the right to just use her for sex but is the judge also going to address whether she has the right to have sex if she is unable to give consent?

Being unable to consent to it doesn't necessarily mean she doesn't want it.

It sounds like a hugely complicated issue and taking anyone's comments out of context could be misleading and unhelpful.

badtime · 01/04/2019 17:55

The Court of Protection deals with cases which relate to capacity to consent all the time. There will be capacity assessments done and it may be that she is found to have the capacity to consent (which actually has quite a low threshold). She may want to continue the sexual relationship, and be distressed by the fact that this has stopped.

The quote from the judge sounds terrible, but I think we really do need more context. He is certainly not saying the wife's wishes and rights should be ignored.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page