|
|
Post by hopingforachange on Jun 11, 2018 8:19:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bballgirl on Jun 11, 2018 9:16:55 GMT -5
I love that!! I love the precedent that is set as well. I believe the monetary amount should be higher. I'm thinking a range of at least $1000 for each year of sexual/ affectionate abandonment with a max of $5000 per year. A judge would determine the amount paid based on the assets acquired.
I think if that was a law and people knew of consequences upfront there would be less marriages first off and therefore less SM.
I also understand there are circumstances due to medical conditions where a person is not capable of sex, so there can be exceptions to the rule but if a man can't stir the peanut butter jar he better learn to love licking it!! A man choosing to wack off to porn instead of choosing his wife does not deserve to have a wife, and should be sued for alienation of affection.
Good for France!
|
|
|
|
Post by hopingforachange on Jun 11, 2018 10:23:42 GMT -5
I also understand there are circumstances due to medical conditions where a person is not capable of sex, so there can be exceptions to the rule but if a man can't stir the peanut butter jar he better learn to love licking it!! A man choosing to wack off to porn instead of choosing his wife does not deserve to have a wife, and should be sued for alienation of affection. Good for France! If he's stick can't stir the jar, he could strap on a prosthesis just like anyone else that has a non working limb. |
|
|
|
Post by bballgirl on Jun 11, 2018 11:17:26 GMT -5
I also understand there are circumstances due to medical conditions where a person is not capable of sex, so there can be exceptions to the rule but if a man can't stir the peanut butter jar he better learn to love licking it!! A man choosing to wack off to porn instead of choosing his wife does not deserve to have a wife, and should be sued for alienation of affection. Good for France! If he's stick can't stir the jar, he could strap on a prosthesis just like anyone else that has a non working limb. That's right or just use a dildo. A man that I liked as a person (he's a fifty something year old firefighter) - good guy but not what I was looking for in a relationship. I dated him a couple of times and then told him I didn't think we were compatible but we stayed in touch and every once in a while we have a little fun together. Anyway he has this amazing dildo and a very submissive side to him so at one point we are in 69 position but one side of the dildo is in me and the other side is in his mouth and it was like I was fucking his face. That was really hot! |
|
|
|
Post by h on Jun 12, 2018 11:11:29 GMT -5
The article was from 2011. I wonder if this law has been used since then by anyone else.
|
|
|
|
Post by baza on Jun 12, 2018 21:25:56 GMT -5
I remember this 2011 story back on EP.
Whereas this was a court sanctioned payout for lack of rooting, I doubt that it altered the refusers attitude to sex with his missus by one iota, either before, during, or after, the divorce.
Even if this set a legal precedent (that a spouse could be up for $XXXXX for "failure to fuck") I doubt it would make a blind bit of difference to a refuser.
|
|
|
|
Post by obobfla on Jun 12, 2018 21:48:58 GMT -5
Víve le France!
|
|
|
|
Post by saarinista on Jun 12, 2018 23:31:47 GMT -5
bballgirl geeze, where do you live? Maybe I need to move there, "forget" to change the batteries on my smoke detector and hoping that your firefighter friend shows up to quench my flames! LOL 😂
|
|
|
|
Post by h on Jun 13, 2018 16:58:14 GMT -5
I remember this 2011 story back on EP. Whereas this was a court sanctioned payout for lack of rooting, I doubt that it altered the refusers attitude to sex with his missus by one iota, either before, during, or after, the divorce. Even if this set a legal precedent (that a spouse could be up for $XXXXX for "failure to fuck") I doubt it would make a blind bit of difference to a refuser. While it may not change anything now, if it were widely known, then in the future it could prevent or deter some of the bait and switch situations that many people here found themselves in. |
|
|
|
Post by baza on Jun 13, 2018 21:58:29 GMT -5
This French chick had been married 21 years and sued for 10,000 Eur. That's about U$ 11,800. That's about U$ 562 per annum over the marriage. Assuming that the average rooting expectation was twice a week, that's 104 roots per year. So the chick valued a missed root at approx U$ 5.39 per missed root. The court awarded her U$ 10,030. That's about U$ 478 per annum over the marriage. Expecting rooting rate 104 per annum. Court valued each missed root at U$ 4.60. I've always had a feeling that the French regarded themselves as great lovers and well into sex and suchlike. But they sure as shit don't put much monetary value on it. Somewhere between U$ 5.40 and U$ 4.60 a root !!! Anyway, doesn't look like much of a deterrent to me Brother h !!!  Addendum - this is a re-draft (as a couple of the currency conversions were wrong) The original, Brother h quotes below. Sorry for any confusion - it was just a "timing" issue. My draft got quoted before my re-draft got posted. |
|
|
|
Post by h on Jun 13, 2018 22:33:22 GMT -5
They'd been married 21 years, and she got an extra 8,500 pounds (about US$ 11,400). That's about 400 pounds (US$ 535) per annum. "If" the norm is supposedly 2 roots a week, that would convert to 104 roots a year. That would extrapolate to the French courts placing a value of 3.85 pounds (US$ 5.15) per missed root. Doesn't look like much of a deterrent. Had the chick got what she asked (EUR 10,000 - or US$ 11,793) that'd put the annual cost at US$ 561 , and the price per missed root at US$ 5.40. Her claim - of US$ 5.40 per missed root doesn't value the missed rooting very highly either. Quite true that it isn't much of a monetary deterrent. Although, who wants to be known as that guy (or gal) that got sued for not rooting their spouse? Lawsuits mostly become public record. Kind of awkward having to explain that to your friends and family. Even more awkward if the defendant in such a case tried to re-enter the dating scene. Good luck finding a second spouse when a simple Google search turns up that little tidbit of information. Just like sex-offenders have an official permanent registry so everyone knows what they did (at least here in the US they do) , refusers would end up with an unofficial permanent record of their infractions for anyone to research at will. |
|
|
|
Post by baza on Jun 13, 2018 22:50:04 GMT -5
Read your bit on having a "Registry Of Sex Avoiders" Brother h - and thought "what a top idea". Then, after a re-think, I thought "Fuck !!! I'd actually be on that list myself" (reason being that the last 5 years of my deal I had no interest in rooting my then missus - not that she was offering !!!) |
|
|
|
Post by h on Jun 13, 2018 23:14:54 GMT -5
If she wasn't offering,then you weren't refusing baza . In my completely worthless legal opinion, you'd have won that case as long as you were first to file. 😉 |
|
|
|
Post by baza on Jun 13, 2018 23:29:00 GMT -5
I guess by the same metric, I wasn't offering either, so she wasn't refusing !!
It was just one of those ILIASM stand-offs.
Dead in the water but neither of us prepared to call 'time' on it.
|
|
