Monday, September 12, 2011

The Ol' Hydraulic Frolic

Hey, did you hear about that French fellow who had to pay damages to his wife for not having sex with her for "a period of several years"?

I have to admit I'm appalled at the injustice of it. No, no, not that someone saw fit to attempt to legislate someone else's sex life - what really knots my knickers is that Monsieur B. failed to comply with Unspoken Spousal Agreement Number 6, a.k.a. the Proper Quantity and Type of Sex Agreement, as follows:

6 With respect to the Proper Quantity and Type of Sex to be entertained in the marriage:
 6.1 The spouses shall participate in some quantity of sex;
    6.1.1 at least some, and preferably all, of which shall occur with the marital partner;
    6.1.2 the spouses' fantasy lives notwithstanding;
    6.1.3 chance encounters with George Clooney also notwithstanding.
 6.2 The quantity of sex to be allotted within the marriage shall be mutually disagreeable to both parties;
    6.2.1 the sex shall be distributed spatially such that it occurs in a non-random manner;
    6.2.2 the sex shall be distributed temporally such that it occurs in a non-random manner.
 6.3 The type of sex to be allotted within the marriage shall also be mutually disagreeable to both parties;
    6.3.1 the sex shall be enacted in a non-random fashion.
 6.4 The disagreeable nature of the sex lives of the spouses shall be trotted out regularly;
    6.4.1 in any and all arguments longer than 10 seconds in duration;
    6.4.2 in moments of pique, as seen fit by the parties; and
    6.4.3 whenever drinking with friends.

So you see, Monsieur B. was clearly acting in violation of clauses 6.1 through 6.3, and one may infer 6.4 as well, although this is not essential to the case.

I'm an advocate of alternative sentencing in these types of rulings, so I would be very interested to know how exactly the judge assigned a dollar figure to the judgement. Perhaps Madame B. presented receipts for any "alternate means" she was forced to employ?

Although, even at cost plus 10% over several years, it hardly seems possible that one woman could burn through that many thousands of dollars' worth of hardware... she must have been awarded a battery stipend as well. Plus maybe a wee "pain and suffering" amount for any carpal tunnel incurred. Then multiply the lot by Madame B.'s subjective Hotness Factor - as determined solely at the discretion of the judge - and you've got yourself a quality alternative sentence.

I applaud you, crazy French judge.

Coincidentally, I predict a 6oo% increase in job security for positions within the French legal system as a result of this precedent-setting/ floodgate-opening case.

1 comment:

  1. LMAO as always highly entertaining~ C