New Afghan law lets men refuse to feed wives who deny them sex

[AfghanDude]

If what you're saying is that Islam itself does not forbid women from working or obtaining an education, yes, that's a fact. However, there are those that twist the Qur'an. Under the Taliban, which was a religious based regime, women were denied educational and employment opportunities. Women were forced to keep covered in public, or be beaten by the Taliban. There are still those clergy who cite these beliefs and enforce them on their followers. Women's rights are still an issue in Afghanistan. This cannot be denied.

When I quoted you, you had said Muslim Sects, such as the Sunni and Shi'ia, which are Muslims Sects.

But when you said Muslim Sect you were referring to the Taliban, which isn't a Muslim sect, but a despotic group of people who came to power.

So why misconstrue the two? One is a tyrannical power, and the other a legitimate religion.

If your mind goes into "overload" because you see a revealed leg, that is about YOUR lack of self control, not about a leg. I would ask instead, how could a man be so weak as to have his mind run away so when seeing some skin?

Its a science that when you see a female, you brain goes into **** mode.

I'm not talking about a dude seeing a chicks leg, and he goes into hyper drive and busts a nut in his pants.

When he sees the leg, he thinks thoughts. The mental, and chemical process that is going is not actually felt, and you aren't acutely conscious of it, but its there.

You would have to be a homo, to not think dirty thoughts when a girl bends over, or when she re-crosses her leg.

Are you denying that men, in general, even DJ's don't think about women as sexual objects?

>> The assumption of strict legislation to keep their women with them is a ludicrous assumption.>>

The assumption I was talking about was that the men are weak and need laws to control the women.



Men are mandated to provide for their wife, normal stuff like a house, food, provisions. If the man cannot provide for his wife, she can divorce her husband.

Is that not fair? Men can be divorced for not providing the financial security she needs, and women can be divorced for not giving up the poontang.


Women are obligated to provide for their husbands sexual need when inclined.


Men are not responsible once a women breaks her obligatory duties to her husband, in this example; sex. Its as simple as its her DUTY to please her husband and vice versa.





You might personally hold beliefs which go against that. But I am of the belief that its a wifes duty to have sex with her husband when if he needs it.

>> The problem with the satire about the Prophet wasn't the satire, it was the fact that you can't draw the Prophet, you can draw his body, but not his face. >>

You ignore the points I bring up, go on a tangent, and talk about things that are obvious.

I mention the face, because its the first thing that I thought of. No one was asking an apology about that.

Like I mentioned earlier, you didn't read the comic, it wasn't a satire, but close to anti-Islamic, and to spite the Muslim population.


Now that I think about its funny that you are riled up over Muslims getting pissed about something that is your right as a American Citizen, but can't emphasize with Afghan men and what is their right as husbands and providers of their wives.

 

[MatureDJ]

Currently, after a divorce, a man may be required by law to pay his ex-wife to continue her lifestyle while they were married as she's become accustomed to it. However, the ex-wife is not required to provide him with the lifestyle he was used to, like sex every week and a BJ every month, for example. This is where Western countries can learn a little from our Afghan friends.

:crackup:

I would love for a divorce attorney for the husband use this ploy. Why should the women get the continued provisioning while the man is left without the benefits of his wife?

 

[picard]

Islamic law is a barbaric custom designed by crazy religious fanatics who intended to subjagated their population.


I feel sorry for Afghan women since they don't have the freedom and modern law to protect them. In contrast , western women are too decadent in their ways and take for grant the laws in this country. They exploit loop holes in laws for material gains, fame. They become like high class *****.

for example, The tv show, Sex in the City, is classic example of rich women who gone wild. They have nothing productive to do in life except bang every guy in the bar.

 

[Mr. Me]

The religious beliefs on which these abuses against women, such as the Taliban engaged in, and exercised by their fathers and brothers and other men, are not based on religious beliefs of certain sects? The Times, in their article "Life Behind the Veil: Mohammed boosted women's rights, but today Islam often means oppression", reported, "Pressures to curtail the rights of women come from various puritanical sects within Islam". You can ask them which sects they are.

You would have to be a homo, to not think dirty thoughts when a girl bends over, or when she re-crosses her leg.

There isn't anything "dirty" about having sexual thoughts, dude. It's your religion that has categorized it as "dirty". But that still evades the bottom line, which is, if you see a woman's face, thigh, leg, butt, breast or whatever, the answer to not having men think "dirty thoughts" or go into brain "overload", is not to cover her up. To have some sexual stimulus to the visual is a normal human reaction if you're a healthy male. But let the MAN have some control over himself, rather then putting that responsibility on the woman. Would you also cover the refrigerator under a tarp because you don't want to think of food and have gluttonous thoughts? Cover any currency to avoid greed? Are you going to cover your monitor because I mention women's butts and breasts and that may put an unclean thought in your mind? Where's the man's responsibility for himself and his own thoughts in all this? And what about homos since you mentioned them? Do men have to cover themselves up so that homos don't think not only dirty thoughts, but homosexual dirty thoughts?

Is that not fair? Men can be divorced for not providing the financial security she needs, and women can be divorced for not giving up the poontang.

You can't look at an uncovered woman out of concern for not putting dirty thoughts in your mind, but that same mind can write "poontang" knowing it's meaning a vagina?

If a woman can divorce a man due to his abandoning her support, then it would be fair if the new law was a man could divorce his wife on the grounds of sexual abandonment. But this law is not about divorcing and terminating the marriage, it's about starving your wife in return for her sexual abandonment. Or more accurately, starving your wife so that she complies with your sexual needs. That's cruel, that's coercion, and that's why I'm saying that men who need to coerce their wives by legal machination into lovemaking... well, what does that say about them as men?

I think real men would just divorce the b1tch and find a woman who willingly sucks your **** often. And if they can't get a woman that desires them - hey maybe that's Allah's will.

Like I mentioned earlier, you didn't read the comic, it wasn't a satire, but close to anti-Islamic, and to spite the Muslim population.

It linked Mohammed with being a terrorist. There's been worse. And not just about Muslims. And you know what? The sun still comes up tomorrow.

Now that I think about its funny that you are riled up over Muslims getting pissed about something that is your right as a American Citizen, but can't emphasize with Afghan men and what is their right as husbands and providers of their wives.

I think there's a vast difference between the right of free speech and starving one's wife. I just can't see starving someone as being "your right as a husband". And just because I don't agree that starving your wife is the way to compensate for her disregard and lack of marital relations, doesn't mean I don't empathize (that's what you meant, no?) with men in that situation.

I gotta go now and listen to the latest Yusuf Islam song, "No Tea For The Tiller Woman".

 

[3countriesPlan]

My cousin was in Desert Storm,she saw a woman say something to her husband and he knocked her down- When she got up, every man on the street that saw it knocked her down too. You'd think the feminists would be for any war against Moslems[instead of against],just think of how they would scream if we had their laws here[once, until we knocked them down] Not saying it's right,but it is potentially amusing[be funnier than he11 to see it happen to my ex].

Hahah, I could picture the knockdown as the guy walking with his wife then her pissing him off. Next, he makes her stop then proceeds to walk into her until she falls over... ha classic..

Anyways this law is not AFC. Those men have hard lives there and no real way to get azz outside the marriage or before it so they have one source of puss and thats afghan wife puss. If the afghan wife wants to be a b1tch and not put out then what are the men to do? Damn right she is lawfully required to let him hit it! Pull that burka up and hit it doggy while looking at that poster of Pam Anderson over the bed. No objections here! Whoever passed that law is a true hero.

 

[picard]

Afghan men are still primitive if they hold belief that they have the right to starve the woman. They are cut from same cloth as the Taliban.

Saudi Arabia has the same law too but western countries are scared to condemn them for fear that the Saudi might cut off oil.

 

[piranha45]

yeah, they don't share our fundamental western value of equality for all. what an outrage.

 

[Jeffst1980]

As much as we in the US lament the laws that have served to weaken marriages and break up families for no good reason, we should remember that we have the freedom to remain single. In fact, guys that remain single have the potential to get laid a lot more here, so society actually REWARDS it. Until a law is passed that compels a man to marry a woman, I don't think we can equate our situation here with that of Afghani society.

Claiming that cultural relativism makes it acceptable to starve one's wife doesn't cut it for me. When your religious beliefs are used to impose on the freedoms of others, they should be called out for what they are. That goes for any fundamentalist religion that is primarily based on man's interpretation of historic texts; saying that a law is mandated by God when it was created by man does not justify it.

As for us in the West, the solution is simply to avoid marriage until you are reasonably certain you have a good woman that is committed to make the marriage last. Don't let passion guide you--a passionate relationship may have high highs, but even lower lows. Use pragmatism instead, and make a smart decision. Don't marry a feminist, or any woman that complains about the nature of men--antagonistic views towards the opposite sex will wreck a marriage by the five year mark. Look for someone that is genuinely kind and happy.

Of course, this is all easier said than done, because most of the single women we encounter will NOT be marriage material. Also, our egos will compel us to chase women that are untrustworthy because it's more exciting. This is ok, so long as you stick to your guns and don't get suckered into an LTR and then a marriage because you think you're in "love." Realize that true "love" is a consequence of a successful marriage, and not a basis for it.

 

[ketostix]

I think real men would just divorce the b1tch and find a woman who willingly sucks your **** often. And if they can't get a woman that desires them - hey maybe that's Allah's will.

Yeah a man should divorce his wife, and she gets rewarded with over half his assets and his kids for not having sex with her husband. That seems fair . And if the older and now poorer divorced man can't find a better woman, then that's fate (feminism)!

 

[Tazman]

Interesting discussion.

 

[picard]

although I am not expert in women, I want to treat everyone equally. No man should enforce some stupid law to enslave women in the whole country. It is heinous crime against humanity.

if a couple get divorce, let it be happen. We should strive to change divorce law so those dam feminists don't exploit the law for their gains.

 

[SXS]

If a woman doesnt work and dont have a carrer, how is she going to live ?

I think the law has nothing to do with anything. Just avoid marriage. The laws have more to do with cultural mindset than with rational thinking. Marriage is prostitution in one way or the other. But in marriage today you pay the *****, but she still can deny you the service.

It says in the torah(which was written around 3000 ago) that if you have sex with a woman, you must pay the father the vow(it was bigger if she was a virgin, and there was a "market") and IF the father consents, you take her home and support her and her children for the rest of your life.
In other words, in the ancient world, women were for sell, and the father was the pimp. And that's where our traditions, like marriage come from. If thats not prostitution, I dont know what it is.

And its not like in today world some senators or whatever will ever sit on a table and think about how to improve the laws for more efficiency and fairness.

In the muslim wolrd, the laws are dictated by traditions and the Koran, but despite all,I am sure that:

There are certainly less prostitution and pornography there.
Certainly lower STD rates.
Lower number of single mothers and divorced ones.

So neither here or there is the paradise. Anyway, when the economic situation improve there too, I am sure everyone there will throw all the traditions in the garbage and it will be exactly like here.

 

[SXS]

although I am not expert in women, I want to treat everyone equally. No man should enforce some stupid law to enslave women in the whole country. It is heinous crime against humanity.

And enslave men is not a crime against humanity ?

And do you think this law whose purpose is to make women have sex WITH THEIR HUSBANDS is enslavery ?

And how about all the prostitutes here who have sex with thousands of men to support themselves ? Is that less slavery because she have a choice in the matter ?