A Domestic

Here's a story that made me think a bit. Regarding the religious angle I need only say that it makes me even less inclined than I was before to watch the Gibson film.

But consider this: a couple argue. It gets heated. She retreats to the bedroom. He follows her and tries to tear off her wedding ring and her watch. She reacts by grabbing his neck but lets go before it gets dangerous, leaving him with nothing more than red marks on his neck and a graze on his forehead.

Who, if anyone, would be facing an assault charge? Isn't his attempt to pull off her ring and watch the point at which it tips over into violence (I'd certainly feel assaulted if someone did that to me)? Wouldn't she therefore have little difficulty representing her reaction as an understandable one in the face of threatening behaviour (which according to the Home Office constitutes domestic violence in itself)?

And wouldn't sending both of them on an anger management course be a more constructive, cost-effective and compassionate approach than prosecuting either?

I don't know the answers to my questions. But I do know now that that's not how it works when the roles are reversed. Melanie Phillips has often cited evidence that domestic violence incidents are about equally likely to be started by a man or a woman. So there must be an awful lot of cases like this one. And in every one the domestic violence industry wants its pound of (male) flesh.

Gay marriage and Anglican fudge

From Spain, news that confirms the experience of other countries: the legalization of same-sex marriages has not exactly been followed by a mass stampede to the registry offices:-

'Since the law took effect last July 3, until May 31, only 1,275 same-sex marriages took place, reported the Madrid daily newspaper ABC last Saturday.

'Comparatively, that would add up to a mere 0.6% of the 209,125 marriages contracted in Spain during 2005.'

(from Canon Kendall Harmon)

When you bear in mind that this figure must include a backlog of couples who have been waiting for years for the chance to marry, the lack of enthusiasm becomes even more striking.

Of course this is not necessarily any reflection on the quality of the relationships of those who have tied the knot (though I've seen some interesting data on this, which I may get round to writing up eventually). But as an Anglican I do feel that the Anglican Communion's apparent determination to hit the self-destruct button becomes all the more tragic when the issue precipitating it turns out, in practice, to involve such a very small group of people. Have the reserves of good old-fashioned Anglican fudge really been exhausted?

O brave new world

'On the first date or two, Julie’s obsession can be easy to hide; often it’s under the guise of being concerned about appearing “too forward”. But soon she has to use a variety of techniques to avoid sex: pretending to have her period; claiming to suffer headaches; to being physically sick; and orchestrating a row to make her partner leave her alone.'

- psychotherapist Lucy Beresford, writing in the Times about 'sexual anorexia'.

I don't want to dispute the claim that compulsive avoidance of sex can be a medical problem. I'm interested in what is revealed about our brave new world by the writer's assumption, evidently shared by 'Julie' and her dates, that postponing sex beyond the second date is conclusive evidence of pathology. Surely Aldous Huxley would have been astounded at his own prophetic powers.