[DEBATE] : Re: rape and common law marriages

[Peter Mahlangu]

Charlene, I have decided to no longer comment on this
issue.

On the question of so-called common, issues like
nominating your partner as a beneficiary in your
pension, etc,are fairly straightforward, and have been
clarified through litigation by public interest law
firms like LRC and ALP. But your "common law" couple
does not need a decree of divorce if they separate,
because they are not married in the eyes of the law.
And there is no legally enforceable duty of support
between the parties.

--- Charlene Smith <clsmith at global.co.za> wrote:

> Common law marriages are recognised in law in South
> Africa - I thought you 
> were a lawyer?  If a couple whether straight or gay
> co-exist for a period of 
> time (no period has been defined) they may:  adopt
> children, leave their 
> estate to each other; have the other included on
> their pension scheme as a 
> beneficiary in the event of their death; include
> their partner on their 
> medical aid; etc... This has been confirmed by all
> the courts of the land 
> and operates in practice.
> The most common forms of rape are those where the
> women/child/man 'knows' 
> the person, in my experience date rape and
> especially incest are by far the 
> most common types of rape and those that cause the
> deepest confusion and 
> lingering trauma.
> **"Reciprocal legal obligations" is a euphimism to
> force boyfriends to 
> legally support their girlfriends.**  And the
> problem with this is?  The 
> same happens in the event of women supporting men, I
> have two friends who 
> are by far and away the primary breadwinners, but
> they love their partners - 
> are all relationships to become a factor of weight? 
> How much each does? 
> How much each contributes?  Does love and respect
> and sharing not exist in 
> your world?
> It is so outrageous that you wrote this, that among
> all the other truly 
> insensitive postings this falls into a category of
> its own, thank heavens 
> this list is closed because I cannot begin to
> imagine the ridicule this 
> comment would get: ***Wolf-whistling is not sexist
> (just inappropriate and 
> to be discouraged in certain circumstances), and no
> amount of politically 
> correct propaganda can change this, and there is no
> need to deal with it 
> through the agency of criminal law or dismissal
> procedures at work. 
> Construction workers in a lorry do no harm to anyone
> when they whistle at a 
> beautiful woman.***   As a woman who has experienced
> this, I cannot tell you 
> how it angers me.  It is profoundly sexist and
> certainly falls under the 
> ambit of sexual harassment, which as a "lawyer" one
> would have hoped you 
> would have known.
> 
> CS
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Peter Mahlangu* <tshankimahlangu at yahoo.com>
> Date: May 10, 2006 5:57 PM
> Subject: [DEBATE] : Re: Proposed code for listings
> To: debate at lists.kabissa.org
> 
> Just to clarify my position, which has been
> deliberately twisted and taken
> out of contest by Alan to buttress his position
> about my imagined sexism:
> 
> On date rape, it is conceivable that the woman might
> have consented to sex.
> Contrasted with so-called stranger rape, it is
> inconceivable that a woman
> who is attacked in a dark alley or in her house by
> burglars or robbers can
> consent to sex. In the latter case, rape has been
> committed. No questions
> asked. The same cannot be said of date rape rape,
> that's why I take it with
> a pinch of salt. This is not sexit, it's
> self-evident.
> 
> So-called common law marriages are a creation of the
> media, and are no
> marriages at all. SA law recognises only civil
> marriages or those in terms
> of African customary law, hindu or muslim law. Rape
> is about sex, just as 
> hijacking is about greed or the morally
> reprehensible desire for quick, tainted moeny. The
> fact that violence is
> used to achieve the objective does not change this,
> even if the violence is
> disproportionate to the resistance or the need to
> subjugate the victim.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 5/10/06, Peter Mahlangu
> <tshankimahlangu at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > I want to stop posts on the emotional subject of
> rape
> > forever. I hope this is my last:
> 
> 
> So do I
> 
> 
> 
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DEBATE mailing list
> DEBATE at lists.kabissa.org
> http://lists.kabissa.org/mailman/listinfo/debate
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DEBATE mailing list
> DEBATE at lists.kabissa.org
> http://lists.kabissa.org/mailman/listinfo/debate
>