Tuesday, 30 July 2013

Why some men share and some women don’t

I am now officially a vegetarian. I cannot imagine what our poor animals have to go through just to make it to our tables and I am not just talking about the slaughterhouse. At the rate people are turning to our domestic animals for sexual comfort it’s only a matter of time before a half-human half donkey person is born. Thanks to a fellow from Nyeri taking exception to his son’s poultry we now have an idea why the chicken crossed the road; to get away from the Nyeri man. 

As if the act itself was not insane enough, because the bird died, the police sent it off to the Vet to establish a cause of death. I don’t know what is scarier in Nyeri, the men who like chicks or the police who sent a dead bird to a vet. 

In all sincerity what is going on in this country? Are women really THAT hard to please? Being a lady myself I am inclined to protest – you cannot blame women for the dastardly places men choose to put their appendages. It is a known fact that men will chase after anything in a skirt; these recent “creature comforts” are just an expansion of the things men like to play with. 

May I ask if it’s cheating if your husband sleeps with the dog? The Marriage bill recently introduced for debate in parliament should have had consideration for such matters. Why not, after all in attempting to police marriage in the manner they did, the drafters were truly delving in the absurd.
One particular clause just showed to the extent parliament wishes to dictate relationships – a man/woman can sue their ex- partner for not marrying them after promising to do so. Instantly proposals are no longer a proposal, something to be considered, but a deed of indemnity where either you marry the person or you face a lawsuit. It is completely absurd to enforce a relationship by state law, in other words, in Kenya you either get married to that person or face jail or a loss of property.  That is not a marriage that is slavery. It’s actually a clause that is unconstitutional in essence. 

I cannot even imagine what frame of mind they were in when they thought that up. Maybe someone had been jilted and was bitter about it. How in the world do you insist on marrying a man or woman who doesn’t want you? The possibilities of psychological abuses and fraud alone are mind boggling.
At first, the claim behind this marriage bill was that in totality it should give some level of equality and empowerment to women.  At second glance, certain tenets of this bill just express what fragile, insecure, sadistic and miserable creatures we are perceived to be. Do we really need a law to force someone to marry us “or else”? 

It looks like women have taken our way of relating to men to a whole new level of nastiness. What happened to choosing to love a partner and choosing to marry them? With this marriage bill, women will be able to claim a promise of marriage after a careless drunken sms.  It’s all the proof you’d need really coz otherwise how do you prove you two even know each other well enough to marry. Not unless you get me to sign some sort of pre-nuptial contract or agreement, can you prove I agreed to marry you.

Such clauses aren’t going to solve anything – how can government lend mending to a broken heart in such a manner! Being jilted is part of the relationship cycle, it can happen when you are with the wrong person and no law can eliminate that possibility. Marriage itself is hard enough without forcing two people to marry because they made a promise that they can’t break by law. Actually this is like getting divorced before you even get married!

As if that was not enough, yet another absurd clause is inserted – A man cannot marry a second wife without the consent of his first wife. The very idea that a man needs to request permission or seek consent from one woman in order to have a relationship with another woman is the reason we have mistresses.  I don’t see any woman granting consent if she required to be asked by law in the first place.

Let’s face it, if your marriage was so good that you could approach your wife and ask for consent to marry a second wife and she agreed then your relationship is so sound that you really wouldn’t need a second wife.  

We seem to have become women who wish to possess our men as though they are commodities. The attitude behind this is expressed by this one sentiment, “I don’t share some things.” I don’t know when a husband became something that can be shared or not shared but I do know that it doesn’t matter what you think you are sharing or not – he will do what he wants, just a fact. A man does not need your consent to share out his body and love. This is why we have some sharing their bodies with all sorts of animals.

If this marriage bill passes as it is, it will result in even more divorce and sheer misery. Certainly it will not empower the average woman living in the villages; she can’t run to her lawyer whenever her boyfriend or husband cheats on her or dumps her.

No comments:

Post a Comment