The Addams Family’s sexual spice vs. the abstinent ATM marriage
I have read men complain that, in long term marriages, their wives come to regard them as essentially “ATM machines” and co-parents rather than romantic and sexual partners. I have also read women complain similarly that their husbands have lost sexual interest in them.
It should be said at the outset that some people do not seem to mind when the marriage evolves into one that is essentially without passion. Some men and women may be content in a union chiefly devoted to keeping a common home and (perhaps) raising children.
However, many are not. A TV program that is appropriate to this Halloween time period and that showed a way to keep passion alive for a husband and wife who had been together for a good while and were raising kids together was The Addams Family.
In their marital relationships, Gomez (John Astin) and Morticia Addams (Carolyn Jones) were a stark contrast with that other Gothic sitcom couple of the time Herman (Fred Gwynne) and Lily Munster (Yvonne De Carlo). The latter were a married couple who had come to relate to each other on essentially a platonic basis. As a female (but non-feminist! She doesn’t want to see a woman President even if it’s not Hillary) friend of mine commented, “Like typical mens, Herman Munster was always getting himself into trouble and Lily was always having to get him out of it.” As observed on The Unofficial Addams Family World Wide Web Site, The Munsters was “essentially a straight-forward ‘Stupid Dad comedy.’”
As I wrote in a previous blog called The Munsters and The Addams Family: Happy Families Can Be Really Weird, “Gomez and Morticia had a relationship that was alive with passion. She had only to speak a few words of French and Gomez was enthusiastically kissing her hand and up her arm. The program did not, as far as I know, show them kissing mouth-to-mouth or even allude to sexual activity but sexual chemistry was definitely present albeit showcased in a way that was entirely appropriate for a family show. Moreover, this was not passion between star-crossed lovers but between a husband and wife who had been married for years and had two children together. A reviewer’s observation on the movie might also be applicable to the TV show: The Addamses, like many other middle-aged couples, created their own private storyline and role-playing games to keep the romance in the relationship.” One of Morticia’s pet names for her husband was “querido,” which is Spanish for “the man I desire.” One of Gomez’s pet names for his wife was “querida,” which is Spanish for “the woman I desire.”
Husbands who want to be more than ATM machines to their wives and wives who want to be more than the kids’ mom to their husbands can follow the example of The Addams Family in doing their own role-playing.
Since this will appear on a men’s website, I’ll direct some of my comments specifically to you gentlemen. Everyone likes a change, so YOU be the change. Sex roles can be exaggerated for erotic effect and some women are aroused by an appearance of extreme masculinity so ask your wife if she would like you to act like George Patton as least for awhile. Or if it would be different than usual, you might try doing your best George Michael, again after ascertaining if she would enjoy seeing that. Sex roles can also be reversed for erotic effect and you can look up my blog “Strap-on Dildos vs. Teenage Pregnancy” for some ideas on this which would still apply when pregnancy is not an issue and the partners are not teens but adult husband and wife.
Indeed the permutations of role-playing are endless. The following are just a few suggestions and I’m sure my intelligent and creative readers will be able to come up with many of their own.
President and intern.
Prostitute and customer.
Cowboy and saloon girl (Fantasies are not politically correct and adult women of the Old West were, especially if young, called “girls.)
Doctor or nurse and patient.
Police officer and possible arrestee.
Prison guard and prisoner (hopefully this will be a CHANGE from your everyday marriage and one assumed temporarily for erotic purposes).
Teacher and student.
Nun and schoolchild.
Priest/Minister/Rabbi/Mullah and penitent.
God or Goddess and lucky mortal.
Master or Mistress and slave.
Employer and maid or butler.
Incestuous brother and sister or other relatives.
Koko the gorilla and a man on whom she has crush.
Koko the gorilla and a woman whose nipples the ape wants to see.
Lion and lion tamer.
Dog and dog trainer. This may not even be that big of a change for many couples. Phyllis Schlafly has described sex as a way for a wife to “motivate, inspire, encourage, teach, restrain [and] reward” her husband, all things a good trainer would do with a pooch. (If David R. Usher is reading this, I admire Phyllis Schlafly. I signed her petition against the American action in Kosovo and support her on many issues.) So guys, if you’re playing the dog and you roll over and beg properly, you will probably anticipate an especially nice reward for your efforts.
Necrophile and corpse. As with prison guard and prisoner, this is hopefully not business as usual in a married relationship. It could also be varied with the theme that someone’s lovemaking is so good it wakes the dead!
There can be problematic sexual fantasies. A friend who works as a professional dominatrix told me about a few fantasies she had enacted that were racially based. There were two main types. One was that of men of African descent who wanted her to pretend to be a slave owner or overseer. She whipped them and called them the N-word. The other was that of Jewish men who wanted her to pretend to be a Nazi concentration camp guard while they were inmates. She wrote numbers in pen on their arms and called them slur words for Jewish people. This same friend told me that some Caucasian men seek out black dominatrixes for a kind of reverse racial role-playing in which the white are “enslaved.” These sorts of role-playing make me especially queasy because they could be viewed as making light of historical horrors in which so many people were hideously brutalized. However, the role-playing fantasies are not the horrors themselves. When the game ends everyone is all right. My friend said that the morning after one session in which she played a Nazi concentration camp guard, she answered her door to find that the grateful customer had had a large box of German chocolates delivered to her!
Some fantasies are intrinsically very difficult to pull off right. A rape fantasy is a good example of this. I talked to a lady who said a gentleman wanted her to pretend that he was raping her. He asked her to scream. Then he said, “Not that loud! Somebody could think I really am raping you!”
| More from Denise Noe
Stumble It!
October 30th, 2007 at 2:39 pm
Denise, thank you. Highly disturbing visuals there. Brrrr!
Seriously though: I believe Ronald Reagan told his son (the messed up one, but still good advice) that he could never get in trouble with his wife if he kissed her goodbye and goodnight every day and said “I love you” before going to sleep.
It’s funny that you write about two things that tie into many discussions we’ve had about marital rape: sex fantasies (both men and women) about a “Rhett Butler” ravishing his wife and women who complain about their husbands losing sexual interest in them. Clearly, in a society that does all it can to hit men on the nose with a wet newspaper if they dare to get an erection without first signing on form A and initialling Form B, men losing interest would be a good thing yes?
If women want sex, it’s not terribly complicated really. Er… initiate it! That’s what MEN do! Many married men may not be in the mood for sex at times (after a hard day at work or especially after a hard day at work!
but they can still “perform” if that’s what their wife wants. (Note: I’m talking hypothetically here.) In other words, women, especially American women from this puritannical culture, need to take some responsibility for their sexual desires.
October 30th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
PolishKnight said,
Denise, thank you.>>
(Denise) You’re very welcome.
PolishKnight: Highly disturbing visuals there. Brrrr!
Seriously though: I believe Ronald Reagan told his son (the messed up one, but still good advice) that he could never get in trouble with his wife if he kissed her goodbye and goodnight every day and said “I love you” before going to sleep.>>
(Denise) Then Reagan gave his son some EXCELLENT advice!
PolishKnight: It’s funny that you write about two things that tie into many discussions we’ve had about marital rape: sex fantasies (both men and women) about a “Rhett Butler” ravishing his wife and women who complain about their husbands losing sexual interest in them. Clearly, in a society that does all it can to hit men on the nose with a wet newspaper if they dare to get an erection without first signing on form A and initialling Form B, men losing interest would be a good thing yes?
If women want sex, it’s not terribly complicated really. Er… initiate it! That’s what MEN do! Many married men may not be in the mood for sex at times (after a hard day at work or especially after a hard day at work! but they can still “perform” if that’s what their wife wants. (Note: I’m talking hypothetically here.) In other words, women, especially American women from this puritannical culture, need to take some responsibility for their sexual desires.
(Denise) It may also be possible for men to gratify women sexually if the men do NOT have erections. Most men have hands with fingers and mouths with tongues.
October 30th, 2007 at 8:11 pm
Denise,
Nice article. And timely too. I guess the important thing is for each couple to do what comes naturally and try to have fun together.
October 31st, 2007 at 4:01 am
[...] The Addams Family vs. the ATM marriage [...]
October 31st, 2007 at 5:11 am
Hmmm. The 50’s something or other married woman at work that said to another 50’s something or other married woman regarding sex (both married) “I’m glad I’m done with all that stuff”. Overheard, not part of the discussion. The response was an agreement from the other woman along with a laugh.
Single, I’ve tried the dating on line thing and found a lot of women are really just looking for a guy to hang out with, not a sexual relationship. I have no idea what women are finding when they date men but the complaints I hear from the ones I date are that men “expect” sex from them. And no, no Priest/Nun fantasy, no astronaut/space alien- “We here on earth have this body part” trysts, just good ole…well, you probably understand my comment.
Can part of the problem be that “sex” has a different meaning? Romance ala the endless dinners, plays, movies, weekends away culminating in the flower filled candle lit luxery suite? Or, a that was a great evening _____ (fill in name) lets get to it?
“Put the costume on” can bring back the ole black magic? No pun intended.
Maybe the age thing has a lot to do with it but from a single man’s perspective I think it’s no different that being in a marriage for 20+ years (been there done that) (or, maybe been there stopped that). Anyway, as a practical matter I think it’s a great subject you brought to the table and one I would like to hear about from other men and women.
Maybe we’re supposed to stop enjoying sex after 45 and we’re only kidding ourselves.
Oh, for me anyway, every ad I read from a woman that states “friends first” is ignored.
Gomez
October 31st, 2007 at 7:47 am
I always ignore the singles ads that say the woman is “sassy”. In my mind “sassy” means “I’m overweight, and I have the same conservative, boring personality as my girlfriends, who all tell me I’m sassy.”. Sassy means that when it comes right down to it, the sex is boring and the price is high — i.e. there are lots of emotional, psychological and commitment hoops to jump through before she will want sex.
I have yet to meet a woman who wanted to participate in any of the role playing scenarios that Denise suggests. Nice ideas, though.
October 31st, 2007 at 11:27 am
Still trying to relate Hollywood to “real life”, are you?…………
Denise: “I have read men complain that, in long term marriages, their wives come to regard them as essentially “ATM machines” and co-parents rather than romantic and sexual partners.”
fourthwire: Not surprisingly, either…. since inequalities in gender rights as well as the monotonous drumbeat of female “experts” in women’s magazines, the estrogen channels and a variety of other sources too numerous to mention have pretty much marginalized husbands to “ATM machines” and “sperm donors”.
(I believe that you are being too generous in your assessment that husbands are being seen as “co-parents” since those husbands who are fathers are generally not seen as EQUAL parents, relative to the mothers of their children…. and certainly the courts seem to agree with them, in general).
According to Tom Leykis, who seems to understand the plight of those poor bastards unwary enough to marry in America, men who marry tend to become walking ATM cards and SPERM DONORS, not “co-parents”.
As far as women being “romantic and sexual partners”, the fact is that they tend to behave so…… at least until they find some sucker….. ooops man willing to sign on the bottom line.
In fact, there’s a joke with more than a grain of truth in it that explains why brides are so often photographed smiling at their own wedding….. with the punchline being that it’s because that they know that they will never have to perform fellatio ever again.
Denise: “I have also read women complain similarly that their husbands have lost sexual interest in them.”
fourthwire: While most men appreciate variety in their sexual lives, even in monogamous sexual relationships, what they would appreciate MOST is that their wives NOT PORK UP with weight after getting the sucker to sign on the bottom line.
Role playing is fine, but it’s difficult to keep an erection when Snow White or “the prostitute” has a gut on her.
Another key behavior that you fail to mention is that men don’t appreciate having to NEGOTIATE for sex…. as so often seems to be the case in terms of American wives.
And although such behavior has far greater implications than simply related to sexual relationships, most men would rather that their wives not behave like bitches, not try to change or control their husbands.
Of course you would know all of these points, Denise…. if you listened to Tom Leykis’ broadcasts.
October 31st, 2007 at 5:12 pm
KRS said,
I have yet to meet a woman who wanted to participate in any of the role playing scenarios that Denise suggests. Nice ideas, though.
(Denise) Too bad you didn’t meet me way-back-when. : )
October 31st, 2007 at 6:34 pm
Denise, I’ve noticed that you are attracted to and know about the weirdest, sickest subjects.
Why is that?
October 31st, 2007 at 9:08 pm
Denise, read Ouderkirk’s recap of a legal case involving marital rape by a man named Hetherington.
It’s located at the MND message board for Glenn Sacks’ article “Is Going To A Strip Club Domestic Violence”.
It provides a strong case for keeping the government OUT of our married couples’ bedrooms, at least for those of us with the least bit of integrity.
And it shows the extent to which our government is willing to crush men without due process, simply to please the feminazi vermin of our nation.
November 1st, 2007 at 3:09 am
Well done Denise. Any help for the average couple to get it together and keep it together will go some small way to win against the battle for destruction that is being waged.
It is fraught with old age problems though (even for those who ain’t old). Role play and dress-ups can be fun but the difference in male / female attitudes is a gulf few have crossed easily. The ideas and exhortations by Agony Aunts, counsellors, sex therapists and the high-street barber are much of a muchness and women’s magazines, though full of sex obsessed zanyness, are often of little practical guidance for the chaps. Men’s magazines are almost the same. Remarkably similar in fact. Still any stimulation is better than none.
Not that such a view is accepted by most women.
Men’s magazines often feature pictures of naked women, or beautiful girls in stunning lingerie. Sometimes, with their blokes for company. Men often get some pleasure looking at them.
Women’s magazines also feature pictures of naked women and beautiful girls in stunning lingerie. Some, also, with their blokes for company. Women often seem to get pleasure looking at them too.
His magazines usually contain about 54 pages, 25 of which feature the naked and under-dressed women.
There will be several, incisive, 4-5 page articles from prominent people. And reader’s letters and adverts from ladies who tell popular stories on the ‘phone.
Her magazines usually contain 278 pages with 204 devoted to naked women and beautiful girls in stunning lingerie. Some in the kitchen; some in the garden.
There will be 754 visually decorative paragraphs, with lots of coloured headings, and paraphrases in bright red or mauve or blue in boxes, about clothes or celebrities or both together, from whomsoever. Women are communication supremos. And reader’s letters. Also, 400 adverts from telephonic psychic healers, tarot card readers, horoscope charters, numerologists, soothsayers, dietitians, magic charm & potion sellers and a huge range of free offers for only $49.99 post and handling.
Women look at the pictures and fantasize.
Men look at the pictures and fantasize.
For some unfathomable reason, she make a lot of fuss, sometimes even cries, when he looks at his magazines.
This is a real gulf.
As for the role plays and dress ups…… Lets talk a moment about dressing up. As you say, it can add a wonderful spice to life, especially in the bedroom. And that’s where dressing up starts.
Women love to dress up. She will dress up, eagerly, to: visit relatives and friends; go to Dinner or a Show; go shopping; water the plants; answer the phone; read a magazine; get the mail; go to the toilet.
Very occasionally, she wil dress up for sex. I have heard.
If she is to be ‘going out’ she will look forward, with pleasurable anticipation, to the opportunity to dress- up.
She will ‘agonise’ when the time comes.
Rarely will she be satisfied.
She can, after diligent effort and several hours, look really fantastic. Everyone, excepting herself, will comment favourably. Even when she has very little on.
A man will dress up, reluctantly, for: weddings, funerals. No one looks at him.
When a man says he is ready to go out, it means he is ready to go out.
He will get out his trusty suit and be dressed in 30 seconds. He’ll wear the same shoes as he wore a few minutes ago. Socks and underpants, too.
She will make a greater effort to get ready than he will, however.
When a woman says she is ready to go out, it means she will be ready, as soon as she finds her other earring, makes one phone call, finishes putting on her make-up and goes to the loo.
She will inspect every dress, skirt, blouse and ‘top’, she has. Two to six changes are average until she finds something barely satisfactory. There will be several moments with each change devoted to altering the designed effect of the neckline by pulling out, or down.
Now, imagine dressing her up for a sexual role play…… it doesn’t bode well does it?
You’d think that just some nice knickers would not be too hard or take too long to get on.
If he and she are going to be out with other people, especially ones that she does not know, she will take 25 minutes choosing and selecting her best underwear. God alone knows why.
Her bra straps will be displayed.
On every occasion of getting dressed up, she will, at some point, look in his side of the wardrobe.
No one knows why she does this.
But back to ‘In the bedroom’: if he begs, a woman will sometimes dress up as a Whore, a French Maid, a Nazi SS Officer ( never a Lance Corporal in the clerical corps), Madam Lash, a Secretary (who never looks like an ordinary woman) or a Schoolgirl.
Each role-play will include stockings and suspenders, which I do admit would be unusual on a L/Corporal clerical troop.
She will always looks fantastic.
She would ‘love’ it if he wore a workman’s helmet and dungarees.
Now how many men keep dungarees in their bedroom??
He would only like to dress up as Barbie.
In fact this is just the tip of the foreplay iceberg-maker.
For him, foreplay is fraught with problems. Men prefer 30 to 45 Seconds of foreplay, less if at all possible. For the man, driving back to her place is considered a part of foreplay.
No woman understands why this is.
He has to make the foreplay. She expects it. She wants it. She never does any herself.
Women prefer 30 to 45 Minutes of foreplay, in addition to …….. a bubbly spa with Champagne and dinner out; and (if she is in a ‘relationship’) him doing the washing up, vacuuming, putting out the rubbish and mowing the lawn.
As well as grocery shopping, washing & ironing, putting up shelves, re-arranging the furniture.
And begging.
He is on a promise if he does the gutters.
Buggered if I have ever worked that one out.
This adds another 12 hours on average; sometimes a whole week. He often falls asleep straight after foreplay, especially when it has lasted three days.
It is a mystery to him why these things didn’t turn her on when she was single and did them all herself. ( Apart from the begging).
She “needs” to be turned on to, and by, him each time, generally with some effort on his part. The more effort the better it appears.
She expects him to be turned on to her all the time she’s there. Only her. Not the hem of any old dress. Not by any other female. Not by his own hormones. Her. He is to be totally disinterested in sex any time she is out of his sight.
He has to initiate.
He has to reach out to her, be sexually adventurous, interesting, open, inventive and daring.
She wants to be ‘taken’.
‘Swept off her feet’.
He has to wield the broom. Then mop as well.
She sees sex as a form of ‘communication’. She wants to know his most secret sexual thoughts. His history and experience with other women. His fantasies. She wants him to ‘Talk to her’.
He is reluctant. He wants to avoid this. He thinks she will not like it.
So, he asks for her secret thoughts, fantasies, history etc., too, to head it off.
Mistake. A big one.
She lists between 27 and 500 men who all ‘pursued her relentlessly‘ and she ‘gave in to’, was ‘swept away’ by, or was ‘forced to do it for / to him’ and were all either fantastic in bed or total jerks.
Her fantasies are few and when they do ’sweep over her’ they involve a 19th C Crinoline, hooped dress and a fan.
She doesn’t have any sexual thoughts at all unless she’s with him; and they are about herself. She does not use a single rude word. She swears it’s the truth.
He believes her.
So he tells her.
All. The truth, too. To be fair.
She hates him. He talks ‘dirty’.
The more initiating, adventurous, daring, interesting, inventive, open and reaching out to her he is, the more ‘demanding’, ‘needy’ or ‘perverted’ he is likely to be considered.
For him, foreplay is very complicated.
But, Denise….. that was great….. lets do it again.
(How was it for you?)
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:24 am
Denise said — Too bad you didn’t meet me way-back-when. : )
KRS said — Yeah, I guess so.
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:15 pm
So Denise……… after reading about Mr. William Hetherington’s prosecution, conviction, and ongoing imprisonment for “spousal rape” for the benefit of his scumbag ex-wife and Michigan’s feminazis, are you prepared to withdraw your pig-headed, misandry-laden opinion that our nation’s “spousal rape” issues call for the government to be more involved in married couples’ bedrooms?
Or perhaps like many other American women, you don’t give a rat’s ass how America’s misandry-laden laws harm men, as long as you continue to receive your entitlements and privileges?
I will be pleased to remind you periodically of this case, just so that you don’t forget……
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:01 pm
fourthwire said,
So Denise……… after reading about Mr. William Hetherington’s prosecution, conviction, and ongoing imprisonment for “spousal rape” for the benefit of his scumbag ex-wife and Michigan’s feminazis, are you prepared to withdraw your pig-headed, misandry-laden opinion that our nation’s “spousal rape” issues call for the government to be more involved in married couples’ bedrooms?
Or perhaps like many other American women, you don’t give a rat’s ass how America’s misandry-laden laws harm men, as long as you continue to receive your entitlements and privileges?
I will be pleased to remind you periodically of this case, just so that you don’t forget……>>
(Denise) I was already aware of the William J. Heatherington case as I copied an essay on it written by Phyllis Schlafly and posted it to newsgroups including soc. men and soc. women. I don’t know what happened in the Heatherington case as I haven’t read anything from the other side and don’t know what evidence convinced the jury of his guilt. At any rate, I believe “denies the offense” should not be grounds to refuse parole as it assumes a perfection that no justice system can claim. I also think that he should be released because he has served more than enough time for a forcible rape that was not aggravated by additional crimes such as beating or torture.
It is possible that Heatherington was wrongly convicted. If you want to see how I’ve dealt with cases of men falsely accused — and yes, convicted — of sex crimes, please go to http://www.crimelibrary.com and look up my story on Roscoe “Fatty” Arbuckle and go to http://www.crimemagazine.com and look up my story on Leo Frank.
Does the government belong in married couples’ bedrooms? I would say that if a wife stabbed her husband in the marital bedroom, a crime has been committed. Ditto if a husband stabbed his wife. If a non-consensual beating occurs in the marital bedroom, a crime has been committed. If forced sex occurs, a crime has been committed.
November 3rd, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Denise: “I don’t know what happened in the Heatherington case as I haven’t read anything from the other side and don’t know what evidence convinced the jury of his guilt.”
fourthwire: Permit me to assist you, in that case (the “evidence” mentioned in ouderkirk’s post that I quoted from): the “evidence” was Mrs. Hetherington’s STATEMENT that she was raped, plus apparent tape marks on her face.
Forensic investigation from a hospital checkup turned up NOTHING that would indicate that a rape took place.
And as I’ve pointed out already, Mrs. Hetherington was NOT cross-examined on the witness stand – she was protected by Michigan’s “rape shield law”.
So….. it looks as if an innocent man was convicted of a most heinous crime based on the testimony of a woman and some tape marks on her face.
How difficult do you believe that it is for a woman to lie for her own personal gain when she knows that she never has to face time in a witness stand, Denise?
And how difficult do you believe that it is for anyone to put tape on their own face?
Denise: “At any rate, I believe “denies the offense” should not be grounds to refuse parole as it assumes a perfection that no justice system can claim. ”
fourthwire: No arguments there, but that point seems lost on judges, prosecutors, and prison officials seeking to cater to feminazis and their supporters.
Denise: “I also think that he should be released because he has served more than enough time for a forcible rape that was not aggravated by additional crimes such as beating or torture.”
fourthwire: Ahhh….. your feminazi tendencies are showing through again, Denise.
William Hetherington should be released IMMEDIATELY because he never should have been convicted in the first place of rape, based on the word of a lying bitch who apparently wanted to keep the house, the children, and her husband’s pay, while porking her boyfriend……. an opinion shared by many familiar with case, excluding feminazis and their lackies in the court system and the prison system.
Denise: “It is possible that Heatherington was wrongly convicted.”
fourthwire: Close. It is HIGHLY LIKELY that William Hetherington was wrongly convicted, based on your beloved “spousal rape laws”, Denise. You know, the one that YOU believe is such a good idea……..
Now I realize that you’re almost certainly perfectly happy to allow cases like William Hetherington’s to continue to occur.
You will tut-tut, provide the appropriate lip service decrying their sentences, but you DO apparently believe that men should continue to be sent to prison, based on the word of a possibly lying (not to mention incentivized) woman…….
Denise: “Does the government belong in married couples’ bedrooms? I would say that if a wife stabbed her husband in the marital bedroom, a crime has been committed. Ditto if a husband stabbed his wife. If a non-consensual beating occurs in the marital bedroom, a crime has been committed.”
fourthwire: focus please, “Einstein”. I realize that you’re trying like hell to wiggle and twist, but that’s your intellectual cowardice showing itself…. not to mention a possible touch of misandry. And so you’re “playing stupid” again…….. As any intelligent individual ought to understand, particularly given the context of our exchanges on the subject of “marital rape”, there was no discussion of “stabbings”, nor is the topic of “stabbings” relevant.
So drop the pretense, please. By my question whether you STILL believe that the government “belongs in married couples bedrooms”, I was checking whether you STILL believe that the government ought to prosecute and try cases of “marital rape”…….. allowing lying bitches to have their husbands imprisoned on ZERO evidence.
Denise: “If forced sex occurs, a crime has been committed.”
fourthwire: Like a good little feminazi, you want to hang onto your dogma, no matter how many men have to suffer, don’t you…….
If “forced sex” occurred between a husband and wife, HOW THE HELL WOULD ANYONE KNOW?
DNA evidence? Don’t think so, sister…..
“small tearings and bruisings of the vaginal walls” (one of my personal favorites!)? Those happen during passionate sexual activity, not simply during rapes.
Based on the word of a woman? Feminazis certainly believe so….. not to mention benighted supporters of their dogma like yourself.
It seems that you’re a supporter of gender apartheid, Denise. You SUPPORT our nation’s raping of men, based on the word of a lying, adulterous bitch like Mrs. Hetherington.
And THAT’S why it is apparent to me that you have “feminazi tendencies”, not matter how much spin you care to attempt to apply.
Fish or cut bait on the Hetherington case, Denise!
November 3rd, 2007 at 1:41 pm
fourthwire said,
Fish or cut bait on the Hetherington case, Denise!
(Denise) I haven’t had time to study that case extensively. Here are two cases on which I did thorough research: http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/classics/fatty_arbuckle/1.html and http://www.crimemagazine.com/05/leofrank,0314-5.htm. Read them and tell me what you think, fourthwire.
November 3rd, 2007 at 2:01 pm
Denise: “Read them and tell me what you think, fourthwire.”
I will be happy to read both…. just as soon as I see that you have READ about the William Harrington “marital rape” case as “extensively” as you need to in order to determine that:
1. Hetherington was prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned through the efforts of a lying bitch of a wife…. who almost certainly wanted her husband out of the way so that she could pork her boyfriend in peace (while keeping the house, the children, and the family assets to herself).
2. That you realize (and better yet, OPENLY STATE) that you’re willing to allow American men to continue to face injustice, loss of freedoms, rights, and even risk their own lives…. simply to satisfy your feminazi programming.
Or in other words, that you openly state that you’re willing to allow men to CONTINUE to be legally raped, simply because like so many other walking vaginas, you’re obsessed with the thought of women being victimized by “rape”.
Instead of writing a nice “fluff” piece about Thanksgiving, start “studying that case extensively” – that case referring to William Hetherington’s imprisonment for “marital rape”.
An apparently fine man was imprisoned for a “rape” he never committed, and a scumbag of a woman was rewarded for claiming a crime that almost certainly never happened……..
….. and she never even had to face a witness stand in cross-examination.
Marital rape laws are simply another tool used by women to throw rocks at men, with zero consequences for themselves.
And women like you DO NOT CARE ABOUT MEN’S RIGHTS.
You are supporting a feminazi goal with your insistence that men ought to be subjected to prosecution for “marital rape” , Denise…… at least until you educate yourself.
I will be happy to start on those links that you kindly provided, as soon as you’ve shown a bit of intellectual integrity in this case, made some headway in that “extensive research” on the Hetheringtons, and re-stated your commitment to government involvement in the bedroom (and no, I don’t mean any cases involving crimes other than “spousal rape”).
Go ahead, suprise me, Denise.
I will continue to call you out on you apparent support for gender apartheid in America until you start to ditch your feminazi dogma about “rape”, particularly marital rape.
November 3rd, 2007 at 3:41 pm
fourthwire said,
Denise: “Read them and tell me what you think, fourthwire.”
I will be happy to read both…. just as soon as I see that you have READ about the William Harrington “marital rape” case as “extensively” as you need to in order to determine that:
I will be happy to start on those links that you kindly provided, as soon as you’ve shown a bit of intellectual integrity in this case, made some headway in that “extensive research” on the Hetheringtons, and re-stated your commitment to government involvement in the bedroom (and no, I don’t mean any cases involving crimes other than “spousal rape”).
(Denise) I simply don’t have the time and resources to make a complete study of the Hetherington case. However, if I had a contract with Court TV’s Crime Library to write on the case, I would certainly do so. Why don’t you write to them and suggest they give me a contract for the case? : ) If you go over the Arbuckle material, you might decide they should.
As far as government involvement in the bedroom, I agree that it is limited. A woman in Germany called the police to report a problem in her marriage. She told the police that her husband wasn’t having sex with her frequently enough. However, the police did not make an arrest. Is sex an entitlement for married people? If so, should they have arrested the husband for deriliction of his marital duties?