Women are not Chattels
Damn, am I glad of that. (Trammel v. U.S. 445 U.S. 40--spousal testimony privilege)
Imagine with me the complications...
If you're the man:
Wife is your Chattel. First of all, if your wife cheats on you, you have a bigger mess than just a possible divorce on your hands. Man can press charges against the "other man" for, at least trespass of Chattel, if not possible full on Conversion of Chattel, which, depending on her life insurance value, would be a felony because of the value of the Chattel. (grand larceny)
Also, think of the tort responsibility. I'm thinking along the lines of vicarious liability/landowner liability. What if Wife/Chattel decides to go out and hit someone because they make her angry. Does a "one hit" rule apply to creating a duty for the man kind of like the "one bite" rule creating a duty for owners of dangerous animals? Or, would she just be like an employee and fall under the vicarious liability standards--but then, she would always be on the job, so I'm thinking more along the lines of the "one hit" duty rule. What about treating Wife/Chattel like a child--split jurisdictions on parental responsibility because it's such a tough issue. So, some states would become incredibly populated because everyone would move to the jurisdictions where the Man was not vicariously liable for his Wife/Chattel. This is just the tip of the iceberg folks!!!!!! Think about the liability insurance a Man would have to take out on his Chattel.
If you're the woman:
Right to privacy might be a TINY issue. Scalito's issue over spousal consent to adoption would definitely not be a problem. (at least for the man) (we think we have privacy issues now?)
No legal redress for domestic violence (or anything else for that matter). How can property sue a person? Individual property is not an entity like an estate or a corporation, so Woman would have no standing in any court of law or equity.
Where would all the feminists go?
Going back to my tort liability theory above, Woman could control man by amount of liability she creates for him. hehe, funny thought. "Honey, I'll cook dinner for you if you let me steal that Gucci purse. Just use the liability insurance as a tax write off." oh, what fun.
I could go on, but you get the point. Aren't we all glad Women are not Chattels?
Imagine with me the complications...
If you're the man:
Wife is your Chattel. First of all, if your wife cheats on you, you have a bigger mess than just a possible divorce on your hands. Man can press charges against the "other man" for, at least trespass of Chattel, if not possible full on Conversion of Chattel, which, depending on her life insurance value, would be a felony because of the value of the Chattel. (grand larceny)
Also, think of the tort responsibility. I'm thinking along the lines of vicarious liability/landowner liability. What if Wife/Chattel decides to go out and hit someone because they make her angry. Does a "one hit" rule apply to creating a duty for the man kind of like the "one bite" rule creating a duty for owners of dangerous animals? Or, would she just be like an employee and fall under the vicarious liability standards--but then, she would always be on the job, so I'm thinking more along the lines of the "one hit" duty rule. What about treating Wife/Chattel like a child--split jurisdictions on parental responsibility because it's such a tough issue. So, some states would become incredibly populated because everyone would move to the jurisdictions where the Man was not vicariously liable for his Wife/Chattel. This is just the tip of the iceberg folks!!!!!! Think about the liability insurance a Man would have to take out on his Chattel.
If you're the woman:
Right to privacy might be a TINY issue. Scalito's issue over spousal consent to adoption would definitely not be a problem. (at least for the man) (we think we have privacy issues now?)
No legal redress for domestic violence (or anything else for that matter). How can property sue a person? Individual property is not an entity like an estate or a corporation, so Woman would have no standing in any court of law or equity.
Where would all the feminists go?
Going back to my tort liability theory above, Woman could control man by amount of liability she creates for him. hehe, funny thought. "Honey, I'll cook dinner for you if you let me steal that Gucci purse. Just use the liability insurance as a tax write off." oh, what fun.
I could go on, but you get the point. Aren't we all glad Women are not Chattels?
posted by Nik | 8:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home