A woman, who was blamed by French courts for her divorce because she no longer had sex with her husband, has won an appeal in Europe’s top human rights court, the court said on Thursday, reigniting a debate in France over women’s rights.
…
[Lawyer, Lilia Mhissen] “This decision marks the abolition of the marital duty and the archaic, canonical vision of the family,” she said in a statement. “Courts will finally stop interpreting French law through the lens of canon law and imposing on women the obligation to have sexual relations within marriage.”
I definitely agree that either person in the marriage has the right to say no. But I also think that this would be a good enough reason for the other person to want a divorce.
Now if the other person wants to divorce after one rejection, that’s clearly a lack of foundation, imho. But sustained rejection sure.
Now one would wonder why would a person be rejecting for this long. Medical issues are not the same as some other reasons.
There’s a difference between wanting a divorce, and the woman being legally at fault for not wanting to have sex.
I agree, lack of physical intimacy can be a legitimate deal breaker for a relationship, but the divorce should be no-fault.
A marriage is supposed to be a partnership, a joined life. Failing to support your partner is an issue.
But then we get squeamish about this specific example, but that’s where the logic should lead to no-fault divorce.
It’s not our business to say she must have sex with her husband nor to know why, but at the same time she’s not supporting their shared life. The easy, ethical way out of this is to agree with both sides: your sex life is no one else’s business and it looks like your marriage is not working
So is “no fault” a thing in France? Shouldn’t it be?
How dare you support rape like this!
/s