Can, or should, a wife get a divorce because her husband’s penis is too long? This apparently is a case in Taiwan right now. And the Taiwanese court allegedly ruled against the wife. The wife in the case said (and this is all information I picked up from a couple of blogs. I haven’t actually read the case or the report so I am not even sure if it’s true….can’t believe everything you read.)
Check out one link to the story here: http://www.sindhtoday.net/news/1/56836.htm
But the wife allegedly claimed in her divorce petition that it pains her every time she bonks with her husband because of the length of his phallus – which I guess is unusual. Mama mia!
That’s clearly an issue, I would think, eh? Because bonking should not be painful. Fullstop. It shouldn’t be. It should be lovely and sweet and delicious and great. And just because you are married does not mean that you have to endure pain every time you make love to your spouse. I’m just saying.
The problem is, from what I read, she moved for divorce 10 years after the marriage. That mitigates, I think, against that being a valid reason for the divorce. I mean, if she had moved right after marriage on the basis of, say, “physical incapacity” I think in New York she could make out a case (I’m playing devil’s advocate and assuming for argument’s sakes that this was a New York case; obviously, I have no idea what Taiwanese divorce laws say on this issue).
But not for divorce. She couldn’t get a divorce on that basis. She could move for an annulment. Domestic Relations Laws section 7(3) allows and annulment if a party to a marriage is incapable of entering into the married state for physical cause. In other words, a party to a marriage “must be able to perform in normal sexual intercourse with the spouse.” As Alan Scheinkman says in New York Law of Domestic Relations, “capability of consummation is an implied term in every marriage contract.”
Here, if the wife had moved immediately upon marriage on the grounds that she is incapable of consummating the marriage due to her mistaken notion that she was physically able to consummate her marriage with her husband, it might be a valid cause of action. Scheinkman says in his West Series on Domestic Relations, “excessive sensitivity on the part of the wife which causes sexual intercourse to be practically impossible due to severe pain and discomfort is also a valid ground if the condition is incurable.” See the case Devanbagh v. Devangagh 5 Paige 554, 6 Paige 175, 3 NY Ch. Rep. 827 and 945, 28 Am. Dec. 443 (1836). In that case, the court held that the “incapacity must be in existence at the time of the marriage, and must continually be in existence from that time, and must be incurable.”
But she waited 10 years! If she were in New York, she would only have been able to get an annulment on these grounds up to five years after the marriage only. After that, it’s condonation, pure and simple.