No, I take it back.
Few days ago I observed that the new Afghan marriage law may be awful but it was adopted democratically, so we should respect it. After reading details of the law instead of the distorted version given in our Communist media, I hereby take back the "awful" part.

The Afghan law is not only democratically adopted, it's more egalitarian than our marriage law.

Down to basics, what is marriage? Man provides money, woman provides sex. Or a bit less crudely, man provides house (money, security, protection) and woman provides home (caring for kids, affection for husband).

The Afghan law codifies both sides of this basic understanding.

In a copy of the law obtained by Reuters, Article 132 states “a wife is obliged to fulfill the sexual desires of her husband.”

It also states that a husband should spend one night in every four with his wife, have sexual contact with her at least once every four months and that a woman has to wear makeup if her husband demands it.

Another section says a woman cannot inherit any of her husband’s wealth when he dies. Amendments made to the law show that the age of marriage for women was raised to 16 from nine and that a woman would be allowed to leave her home unaccompanied for medical treatment, to go to work or for her education.

Note that some of these provisions are actually Westernizing, forcing the husband to give the woman more freedom and respect than he would traditionally allow, and forcing him to stay home more often than he might want to.

But on the basic transaction, money/sex or house/home, the Afghan law is egalitarian because it requires both husband and wife to contribute their appropriate talents to the marriage. Modern American laws are anti-egalitarian because we require the man to continue paying even after the woman totally abandons him and remarries, while we require nothing at all from the woman.

In true Orwellian form, our media have gone along with the Stalinist line of Friedan and MacKinnon in describing normal marriage obligations as "rape". This is a recent change of language, and it has taken hold completely. In fact our own marriage laws were egalitarian, though not nearly so specific as the Afghan law, until the 1970s. You'd never learn that from the media.

We have always been at war with Eurasia and we have always been at peace with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia and we have always been at peace with Eurasia. We have always been at war with Eurasia and we have always been at peace with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia and we have always been at peace with Eurasia.

Rectification reigns supreme.
  ¶ 8:00 AM