Let’s talk about love—or rather, the antiquated legal framework defining it. In a move that screams "too little, too late," **France is abolishing the 'conjugal duty' of marriage**, finally admitting that signing a marriage license shouldn't function as a lifetime subscription to **sexual obligation**. For centuries, French law effectively treated the concept of **conjugal rights** as a business contract: you provide the ring, you get the goods. It implies a transaction where consent is secondary to the institution.

This legislative shift aims to remove the archaic notion that marriage grants a "right" to someone else's body. While the **French Justice Minister** might frame this as a progressive victory for **consent in marriage**, don't start clapping yet. The fact that we are debating whether **marital rape** is acceptable in 2024 proves just how stagnant our moral evolution really is. We possess fiber-optic internet and space travel, yet we require a parliamentary vote to decide that a spouse isn't property.

Think about the implications of the old **marital duty law**. It suggests that upon saying "I do," a partner ceases to be a person and becomes a vending machine. If the machine malfunctions—meaning they exercise bodily autonomy—the partner could theoretically sue for breach of contract. That isn't love; it's a gross transaction that turns the bedroom into a courtroom. If you need a judge to enforce intimacy, the relationship is already dead.

Politicians in Paris claim this is a massive stride for victim protection. They are technically correct, but tragically late. This reform highlights the ugly truth beneath our societal veneer: we romanticize marriage in cinema, yet our legal systems have historically treated it like a property deed. For eons, the exchange was shelter for access to a body. We are essentially evolved primates trading resources for security, masquerading as civilized.

Naturally, the **abolition of marital duty** will trigger the "traditionalists" who believe this erodes the sanctity of marriage. They are delusional. There is no sanctity in coercion. If your definition of holy matrimony relies on legal force, your institution is trash. Conversely, progressives will pat themselves on the back for "inventing" freedom. Spare me. You are correcting a moral failure that predates the lightbulb. You don't get a gold star for acknowledging women are people, not cattle. It is performative nonsense designed to generate headlines.

This legal pivot exposes the rot at the core of human relationships. We needed a law to explicitly state "no means no" even with a ring on, because humans are fundamentally opportunistic. If a statute says "it is my right," people will exploit it. Changing the ink on the paper won't fix the human condition. Misery, manipulation, and power struggles will persist because legislation cannot cure the fact that we are broken creatures.

Good job, France. You deleted a barbaric rule. But let’s not pretend the world is fixed. The government is stepping out of the bedroom—where it never belonged—but the monsters are still inside.

***

### References & Fact-Check

* **Original Event**: The French government has moved to explicitly abolish the concept of "marital duty" (devoir conjugal) to ensure the law reflects modern understandings of consent. **[BBC News: France moves to abolish concept of marital duty to have sex](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgjwxdz45ywo?at_medium=RSS&at_campaign=rss)** * **Context**: Under previous French civil code interpretations, a lack of sexual relations could be cited as a fault in divorce proceedings, implying a "duty" existed.