Does Justice Secretary Chris Grayling read this blog? He may do as he announced in The Sunday Times (behind a paywall but the Guardian cover it) that he will end the Marital Coercion Act on the basis of being 'out of tune with gender equality' and 'not in keeping with the modern world.' A point made in February.
It was always of the greatest hypocrisy that such a liberal and 'progressive' such as Vickie Pryce was to try and use a sexist law to try and get her off from going to jail. Inadvertently, by bringing this to everyone's attention and if Grayling pushes this through, she will have succeeed in progressing the cause of equality for men and boys.
As Groan pointed out in his comments on a previous piece (his and MaleMids32 have been added in the comments section so not to be lost - and thanks MaleMids for highlighting) what will the feminists say about this. More so, who will speak out against the change in Parliament or elsewhere when it goes through. Who will show themselves to be hypocrites and anti-equality?
Posted by Skimmington
Ha! Looks like pressure from J4mb might be having an effect already!
Just today it was announced in the Sunday Times that Chris Grayling is planning all of a sudden to scrap the law of marital coercion, because it is 'out of tune with gender equality' and 'not in keeping
with the modern world.'
Wow, since when have Tory politicians been concerned with striking off anti-male laws?
Is it not the case they know that if J4MB gets it act together, they will harness the 'UKIP' effect and knock out all those weak, Tory marginals up and down the country?
Well they're gonna have to do more than that if they want to win back voters' trust before election time! :-D
Now here is a test. How will the radical feminists respond to an obviously discriminatory and paternalistic law being scrapped. Support for Chris Grayling?
As with the few other discriminatory laws that were mainly swept away in the seventies this is another example not of "patriarchy" but the now outdated impulse to protect the "weaker sex"
My own mother widowed young and with two sons to support fell foul of two such laws in the 1960s ;one with regard to mortgages and the other bank loans. Both had been put on the statute books to spare women the genuine horrors of Debtors Gaols by making husbands responsible for debts. This was in the mid sixties and these Victorian statutes were swept away in the seventies. Clearly these old statutes created problems for my mother( and indeed for husbands with profligate wives) but they were emphatically not some plan to subjugate women and actual barely lasted a century. What is more many such laws had their genesis and support from women's organisations of the time!!!
So good luck Mr. Grayling.
I wonder if this implies will spread to changing the legal definition of Rape. As in the USA where it is a crime men and women can commit. A bridge too far for this Parliament