Mexican Men Who Don't Want Sex Better Watch Out
A reader (thanks) sent me this news item on a new law being passed in Mexico, of all places, that would jail those men who avoid sex with their wives:
When I first read this, I thought it was a parody as it seemed so absurd--but sadly, I am not sure it is--is anyone familiar with these laws? And what does avoiding sex, indifference and not talking to your wife have to do with domestic violence? It sounds like the opposite to me.
MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexican men who display extreme jealousy or avoid sex with their wives could be tried in court and punished under a new law, the special prosecutor for crimes against women told a local newspaper on Friday.
Men who phone their wives every half hour to check up on them, constantly suspect them of infidelity or try to control the way they dress are committing the crime of jealousy, special prosecutor Alicia Elena Perez Duarte told Excelsior newspaper.
Those who stop talking to their wives, avoid sex or try to convince suspicious spouses they are "crazy" even if they are caught red-handed having an affair, are guilty of indifference, she said.
Men found guilty of jealousy or indifference could face up to five years in prison, the newspaper said. Mexico's individual states will determine the punishments, it said.
The progressive new law was passed this month to protect women from domestic violence.
When I first read this, I thought it was a parody as it seemed so absurd--but sadly, I am not sure it is--is anyone familiar with these laws? And what does avoiding sex, indifference and not talking to your wife have to do with domestic violence? It sounds like the opposite to me.
posted by Helen at 3:06 PM
47 Comments:
From the linked article: "It is exactly the same. They are wounds, psychological scars identical to physical scars."
It reminds me of a poster up at my daughter's hopelessly PC and liberal school: "Sticks and stones can break my bones but words can REALLY hurt me."
What is next? Leave me alone before I taunt you some more? Given the choice between being beaten and ridiculed, I take the ridicule. Even if it is indifferent or jealous.
Trey
What happens down in Mexico stays in Mexico....we hope.
What about wives who try to avoid sex...
Joe,
In Mexico, they are probably hailed as saints.
I don't suppose we could try a gender-flipped version in California? Just saying...
This world is getting more weird every day.
The way things are going, the time is gonna come when simply being a man is going to be illegal.
My first reaction was the same as Joe's. (I'm female, by the way.)
Now, in nearly 30 years of marriage I've never had a problem with having to enforce my right to marital intimacy, but I do have to wonder how that works. Women can generally participate whether they are in the mood or not, but isn't, uh, a certain amount of inspiration a necessity for the men?
I can't imagine how such a law managed to get passed in Mexico. Isn't Mexico the land of machismo?
Or maybe too many of the menfolk are away in America working, leaving the politics to a female majority?
just try to reverse it and see how people would react, that shows how sexist it would be.
MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexican Women who display extreme jealousy or avoid sex with their Husbands could be tried in court and punished under a new law, the special prosecutor for crimes against men told a local newspaper on Friday.
WoMen who phone their husbands every half hour to check up on them, constantly suspect them of infidelity or try to control the way they dress are committing the crime of jealousy, special prosecutor Alicia Elena Perez Duarte told Excelsior newspaper.
Those who stop talking to their husbands, avoid sex or try to convince suspicious spouses they are "crazy" even if they are caught red-handed having an affair, are guilty of indifference, she said.
WoMen found guilty of jealousy or indifference could face up to five years in prison, the newspaper said. Mexico's individual states will determine the punishments, it said.
The progressive new law was passed this month to protect men from domestic violence.
here is a big secret, sometimes men dont feel like sex, shock horror. so if you want too much (determined by her) sex, you can be arrested essentially for rape, if you dont you can be arrested for indifference, if your concerned about her health or are of that lovey dovey mindset, you can be arrested.
dont they realise all they are doing is creating more and more anti woman feelings, by promotin this pro woman laws.
anonymous 9:36 You ask about male inspiration towards sex: It's complex with men. Men can be forced to perform, there are several hundred known female offender male victim adult rapes. Dr. William Masters wrote about six of them. Erection is on a seperate system much like vaginal lubrication.
A man who is not interested will stay flacid UNLESS some force is used to press the issue.
What the law does is not only legalize spousal rape of men, but punish the victim for not going along with it.
That's the craziest thing I have ever heard.
And yet women are free to withold sex at any time. And engage in the other "criminal" behaviors. Don't they have some kind of "equal protection" doctrine in their constitution or laws? Can they really create laws that criminalize behavior when one gender performs it, but not the other?
Is it April 1? I think my calendar's broke.
Get it up or go to jail. Wow, talk about performance anxiety.
If you come out as a homosexual, do you get a pass?
Sgt Ted,
In some Mexican cities, the gay men are often referred to as as "Muxes" and they seem to have all kinds of special rights. The Muxes are born boys and their mother generally raises them as a girl and dresses them as a girl. They make extra money selling dresses and other items that they make so mothers often want their sons to be Muxes. It sounds rather like prostitution of boys to me. You can google Muxes and get more information or read an article like one in "Marie Claire" magazine this month where the editors brag that it "pays to be a girl in Mexico." The article tells the story of a Muxes who had his father arrested because his father did not like his son being dressed as a girl and "raised hell." I would raise hell myself if my boy was being treated like this.
Marie Claire? Muxes????? What the ____????
I beg you, doctor. Put down the Marie Claires and the National Enquirers and the E! Entertainment Weeklys.
I suspect we might be seeing a slight bump in illegal immigration soon.
Moral of the story: if you're male and live in Mexico, don't get married. That's the result this law will have. If it's real. And really, who could make this sfuff up?
We have a term for the act of forcing people to have sex against their will. I did not know it only applied to one gender.
Trey
It sounds like a pretext for bribery for me. It's Mexico, and the right amount of money can stop any prosecution.
It is also very macho. The assumption that a real man is always ready to go, so if he doesn't, he is refusing. There used to be a law in ancien regime France under which impotence was grounds for divorce. The woman. This may sound unequal, but the rest of the story was that a (rich)husband could just wall a wife up and let her starve, so this law balanced the system. Poor women would never wnat a divorce, because it would usually mean starvation. Oh, the only defense was to do the it right in fornt of the judge. Pretty macho. Maybe this is just a Latin thing.
Anonymous 11:25:
Okay, maybe you have a point.
OK, let me see if I have this right:
If a man refuses to have sex with his wife, the penalty is five years in jail - all the while unavailable for sex with his wife.
Is this really a deterrant? Shouldn't the penalty involve MORE sex with the wife, rather than less?
Sorry to inform, but refusing to have sex with a spouse in the United States is grounds for divorce and can cause years of alimony payments. An American is just as required by law as a Mexican to have sex if married, the penalties are simply financial as opposed to jail. Perhaps the whole institution of marriage should be reexamined in this modern age.
Michael,
That is true - implied consent or something - but it is also protected under marital rape laws in many states.
Thank you, Michael.
While this entire thing strikes me as absurd, a man who constantly calls his wife, tries to control the way she dresses, or becomes insanely jealous when she talks to other men may not be abusive, but is hardly someone to have a healthy relationship with.
Does "leave the bastard" ("leave the bitch" for the gentlemen) mean nothing at all to these ladies?
I bet this was passed so illegals could justify political asylum claims to avoid deportation ;->
Seems to me that those women would be wise to insist on blood tests before insisting on their legal right to marital intimacy if he's a philanderer. No telling what cooties he may be bringing home.
One might reasonably ask, what has brought women -- the so-called "fairer sex" -- to become so comfortably dedicated to their contemporary roles as persecutors of men; indeed as vile predators?
Is it just the toxic effects of forty years of feminism?
Or, has the inherent tendency to prey been there all along in the inferior gender?
something similar in India http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=E2FAC1957C0A4F0D
Hola Elena, como estas?
I've been too busy to blog, but this one got my attention.
If you speak Spanish, the text of the law is here.
http://diariooficial.segob.gob.mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=4961209
From what I can tell (and my Spanish legalese isn't perfect)It's basically a touchy feely sort of non-binding resolution which leaves enforcement up to the various states. It's official name is "The General Law of Access for Women to a Life Free from Violence".
From what I can see, it has no teeth, but anyone who has a better understanding of the Mexican legal system than I do is encouraged to correct me.
Alicia Elena Perez Duarte is an activist prosecutor who was expressing her views, but not actually the letter of the law, to a Mexican media outlet called Exselsior. The incredible comments you reference are the words of Sra. Perez Duarte rather than the actual text of the law.
Violence against women is indeed a terrible problem throughout Latin America. I know very few latin american women (and I know a lot) who have not actually been physically beaten by a husband or boyfriend.
Although this law seems silly to us, in the context of a developing society, where the norms and predjudices are probably 70 years behind what we consider to be modern, it is probably a step in the right direction.
It looks like violence against men is a much worse problem
http://adamjones.freeservers.com/juarez.htm
and yes the murderers are also overwhelmingly male, but remember that the question of whether men are good for anything is totally separate from the question of who actually has it worse.
Also, although I'm sure that I am on the other side of the ideological fence from Sra. Perez, when you read her comments in Spanish she is obviously using a little bit of satire to make a point; something which is lost in the translation.
anon 1:32
It's the wild west down there, no doubt about it.
A lot of it is fueled by the "war on drugs"; but that's another topic for another day.
In Spanish, she comes off sounding like sort of a James Carville. She's using hypothetical extremes to make her points.
In this case her point being that since women are regularly beaten or otherwise abused or even killed for refusing to have sex, men should suffer the same fate when they refuse to have sex. But again, that's Sra. Perez Duarte shooting off her mouth, it's not what the law actually says.
Tomcal wrote: "Although this law seems silly to us, in the context of a developing society, where the norms and predjudices are probably 70 years behind what we consider to be modern, it is probably a step in the right direction."
Well, it does seem silly to me. I don't see any connection between sexual abstinence and domestic violence though. The jealousy is symptomatic of some abusive partners, but I bet there are many more jealous spouses than violent spouses.
A more direct approach would be to jail people who beat up their spouses. Jail them for a long time. Who cares about the feelings of jealousy, it is the behavior of domestic abuse that is the problem, and that should be the crime. Criminalizing feelings strikes me as vapid and foolhardy in the extreme.
Trey
Jeez Trey, you made me read the whole thing again.
The word jealousy does not appear anywhere in the law. Like most legislation, the text refers to pre-existing laws, in which that that word may appear, but if it does, my guess is that it only appears as a reference to possible motives for violence against women.
The intent of the law is to set up a national education program which will supposedly train the population as to just excactly what violence against women is; as well as what constitutes discrimination against women in the workplace. You have to realise that it is coming from the context of a society where, de facto, women are still considered to be the property of their husbands.
The Law is trying to change this mindset through a variety of public education programs, including programs to teach women how to not be victims, and programs to teach men who have abused women that it is wrong to do so.
There are no penalties outlined or set forth, the closest thing is the establishment of a national database of known sexual abusers.
The rest of the text simply outlines the roles that various government agencies will play in this national education program.
There is a strong presumption in the text that men are always the abusers and women and children are always the victims, which we in this country know is not the case.
To me, it is interesting to see that societies have to proceed in there own way and at their own pace. This ligislation is basically an "equal rights ammendment", somthing which I don't believe (I was very young at the height of the ERA debate) ever became law in the U.S.
As for all of Senora Perez Duarte's blather, she is obviously Mexico's Gloria Steinem.
As a follow up, the text of the new law doesn't really speak about the motivations for violence or predjudice against women at all.
It just presumes that it exists, attempts to define it, and to establish programs to reduce it.
Sorry Tomcal, I was not trying to waste your time! I was referring to the quote: "Perez Duarte said indifference, jealousy or lack of love were crimes against women just as much as physical violence.
"Jealousy produces a particular type of stress in the person that comes up against it," she said. "It is exactly the same. They are wounds, psychological scars identical to physical scars."
That strikes me as moonbat nonsense. I think if you are trying to educate a culture to not abuse spouses, put them in jail for abusing spouses. It is more direct and less open to misinterpretation. But I tend to try to approach issues directly as it saves time and energy.
Trey
Sorry Tomcal, I was not trying to waste your time! I was referring to the quote: "Perez Duarte said indifference, jealousy or lack of love were crimes against women just as much as physical violence.
"Jealousy produces a particular type of stress in the person that comes up against it," she said. "It is exactly the same. They are wounds, psychological scars identical to physical scars."
That strikes me as moonbat nonsense. I think if you are trying to educate a culture to not abuse spouses, put them in jail for abusing spouses. It is more direct and less open to misinterpretation. But I tend to try to approach issues directly as it saves time and energy.
Trey
Why don't we just break down and codify that men are guilty of whatever any woman says they're guilty of, with sentencing by a commission of her mother, sister, and best friend?
brian said... "Is it April 1? I think my calendar's broke."
Interestingly, I am reading this post on April 3.
Just as American and European feminism was actually a propaganda tool used by the global elites for the purpose of expanding the size of government and destroying the western family unit, this law also has nothing to do with giving justice to Mexican women but it does have everything to do with oppressing Mexican men and destroying their families --which must bring down the Mexican birth rate.
The United Nations position on "sustainable growth" wishes for the human race to begin dying off until world population falls to less than one billion people. I'm sure this law complies with some kind of U.N. mandate.
When you see the big picture you'll understand why seemingly noble movements such as feminism, multiculturalism, global free trade, the World Trade Organization and the coming North American Union are all, in fact, nothing more than socialist schemes designed to destroy individual liberty and redistribute wealth on a planetary scale. Therefore, this crazy law is only one small piece of a very large and sinister puzzle.
Google "North American Union", "New World Order" and "sustainable growth". You'll be absolutely appalled when you find out what's really going on in the world!
I personally feel that it is a great law. I have experienced jealousy to the extent that I was being accused of cheating and cursed out almost everything for something that I wasn't doing. Also, I have experienced being cheated on. Naturally the best solution would be to get out of the relationship all together but I feel that if these laws were put into place in the US, the attitude that some men have towards women would definitely change. I believe that these laws will encourage those men to check themselves and their change in attitudes and behavior towards women to avoid the penalty of jail will in turn decrease the negativity that is involved in some relationships.
Nicole M.
Tampa, Fl
Mexico signed CEDAW, a female supremacist treaty with the United Nations UNIFEM branch. It means that a special branch of the Mexican government is established to make laws favoring women and prevent any laws favoring men, or in many cases, prevent any laws that are truly equal. Someone made a remark about how this must be Massachussetts and not Mexico they are talking about. But after signing CEDAW, Mexico is now under the oppressive bootheels of feminism and is every bit as misandric and sexist as Massachusetts. This law is real. We may joke about how insane it is, but it will be here in the United States soon enough.
In Tennessee, where I am, male impotence is grounds for a divorce, but female refusal to have sex is not.
Why laugh at this sexist law? We have VAWA, which is very similar. You should read it before you laugh at Mexico.
Hm. I haven't really found this law anywhere, not even in the media, and I live in Mexico. I do remember, however, something about a new law that made wifebeating a jailable offense. However, the flip side is that they also put some weird stuff that enables your girlfriend to sue you if you "promise to marry and not fulfill said promise after 3 years". It even applies if said promise wasn't made!
By the way, I had never heard about "Muxes", however what I do find refers to Oaxaca, and it seems to be one of those weird Zapotec customs. Note that this is the state where a female won the "presidente municipal" (mayor) post in a small town, but got her election annulled under the pretext of indigenous laws barring women from political posts.
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
Post a Comment
<< Home