Recently my super-hot and endearing Partner In Crime has been keeping me up-to-date on a lawsuit that has been filed against United Fire and Rescue Service, the company through which he volunteers as a fire fighter. In Fall 2006 a woman who frequently attended United's weekly BINGO fund raiser fell and incurred injury (I believe she broke her hip). So, she's suing for hospital bills, etc. Fine, whatevs. However, my PIC then told me that her husband is suing for lack of sex during her incapacitation. Come again(har har)?
Granted, I can understand the frustration involved in going months without being able to physically have sex (my hospitalization a year ago kept the PIC and I from doing the deed for a good -er, bad- 2 or 3 months). However, in what fucking realm of crazy is it assumed that the husband has the rights to sexual intercourse with his wife during that time. Fine, he didn't get any for a while because he's monogamous by choice. Doesn't it strike anyone else as fundamentally fucked that he is putting forth charges over his wife's sexuality? If the couple is pissed that they didn't get to have sex, then, by all means, she has every right to include it in her suit (not that I'm sure of its overall legitimacy). Talk about body politics in action.
I wish I had articles to share, however, the news sources in my area are pretty shoddy and nothing about the suit seems to have yet been publicized. If I find more material on the subject, I'll be sure to post it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment