In what universe do you live in? Because in this one, it's not the men who are being beaten, abused and raped in their own home by their own partner, is it? Look up surveys and studies, if you find this in any way surprising.
I fail to see your problem with "withholding intimacy". Nobody is forced to consent to anything, and if someone no longer wants to have sex with you, then that relationship has very serious problems.
Lack of sex is a symptom, not the cause, and if you think it's being used to "punish you", then you need to take a step back and have a very long think about what is going on from your partner's perspective. If you're unable to do that, then find help - a therapist, a psychologist, a councillor, someone that is unbiased and that can help provide insights.
Ultimately, you may come to the realisation that your partner and you have needs that the other is not willing or able to meet, and that it's time to go separate ways. Or you may both come out of it with a better understanding of each other, and live happier lives because of it.
But let me tell you, the fact that you assume that you're being punished because you're not getting sex, that's one massive red flag.
NO. It is, quite literally, the opposite. How do you misinterpreted it that badly?
A marriage is a legal contract, and it binds the parties to mutual support, fidelity, respect, and cohabitation.
This serves to clarify that sex is NOT included in that list of obligations, but do note that fidelity IS. You don't get to get to justify cheating with "I wasn't getting any...".
That said, the parties are obviously free to come to an agreement on what works best for them - and if that includes extramarital sex, then that's fine as long as both agree.
Yes, divorces still go through as before, that doesn't change. What does change is the context of fault in the divorce.
If sex is a marital obligation, the party refusing it can be considered at fault for the marriage failing. This usually carries consequences when it comes to splitting the assets, with the judges usually penalising the party "at fault".
This makes it so that refusing to have sex cannot be grounds for being found at fault, and makes things more balanced.
This is an often overlooked aspect indeed. I'm amazed at how much people underestimate the impact that being dead has on one's humour.
Delivery becomes impossibly hard. Having a working respiratory system and vocal tract is often expected by the audience, and typical physical humour becomes a stiff challenge.
"Resolving incongruity" is often a key component of humour, but the brain struggles to make sense of something that is out of place when it becomes completely electrically silent.
Gallows humours, hilariously ironic to the living, loses some of its impact when you become the literal subject of the joke.
After dying, our audience is notorious difficult to read, and don't really offer laughter.
More importantly, humour carries a dopamine reward, which is greatly reduced to zero, which further disencentivizes it.
What I'm talking about is late 90s and early 00s, with WinZip being the prime example but others like ACDSee or even mIRC also coming to mind, where the whole shareware model for the era was companies testing out just how inconvenient they could be and still get the users to buy their apps.
The glorious counterpoint to this was WinAmp, who not only whipped the lama's ass, but was also free (for non-comercial use) shareware and users paid voluntarily, which I gladly would have if I wasn't a broke kid at the time.
This era died off completely after that, as the internet became more accessible, open source and libre licenses exploded, and many apps migrated to web browsers.
Yeah, but it was a poster child for nagware. Edit to be fair so did WinRAR, but that sweet sweet compression and multi-volume splitting made it the best tool for those sailing a jolly roger on those slow, stormy seas...
"African American" is such a weird subset of people. Like, aren't all humans from Africa? Then why is this term used only for black people?
Or do they mean to specify the African diaspora caused by the slave trade? But then aren't we wrongfully including people who moved freely on their own to the US, and those that may even come from other regions?
I get that the word is basically a synonym for black people but with less attached prejudice. I'm just sad that we live in a world where that prejudice still exists.
That's about how I picture America - 35% now love Iran, other 35% are outraged out of their minds and think that Trump should nuke Iran, and the rest think iRan is a fitness app and instantly blocked that source of ads.
There's also smooth ones if you hate the texture that much.
Or for a different, more velvet-y feel, you could go with courgettes?
If this isn't hitting the spot, there's always eggplants, and if you're feeling crazy, there's a whole universe of pumpkins and squashes for the brave to explore.
Maybe it's an evolutionary thing. People who are attracted to what they see in their locker room have extra incentive to stick with that activity, giving them a performance edge.
No. What he said is that whatever is spewing out of those eyesores is unrelated to the fact that they're fucking eyesores.