3.18.13
“Then she resumed her earlier theme, saying, ‘A further reason, and one to be found in most women in abundance, is that, when a woman feels that her husband has turned from her or is indifferent to or distant with her, even though she still loves him, offers herself to him, and is docile toward and intimate with him, fecund with advice and with children, affectionate toward him, eager to please him with obedience and attire, obliging, kindly, companionate, cheerful with him, intimate with him, lighthearted, quick to slip out of her drawers, full of levity, responsive to his requests for coupling, yielding, retentive of the semen in her womb, submissive as the hen to the cock, attentive to her husband’s needs while making love, gripping his member tight with her slit, not to say head over heels in love with him and perfectly willing to entertain any request he might make for anal intercourse, she will turn her attention to someone else, to incite his jealousy and make him love her as he did before. Some imbeciles only recognize their wives’ worth when they see other men loving them. In such cases, her love for another becomes the cure that restores his love for her, and this we call daghdaghah or zaghzaghah (“tickling”) or saghsaghah (“working to and fro like a loose tooth”).
3.18.14
“‘As far as men’s faults are concerned, I swear they are more than women’s, though if their only fault was premature ejaculation that would be enough. Whether dissolution of the marriage is permitted or forbidden in such a case is a matter of debate. The Christians forbid it, even though they claim that the purpose of marriage is, specifically, procreation and the preservation of mankind, while the natural scientists and philosophers require it on precisely the same grounds, as well as out of consideration for the woman’s marital rights regarding her husband, which are a natural thing both necessary and unavoidable. Thus the marriage remains a matter for the two partners to decide: if they wish, they may remain as they are, or if not, they may separate, which is better — and I swear that any woman who consents to reside with her husband without consummation of her conjugal rights deserves to have a day set aside to celebrate her at the beginning of each year. Does not your mentor, the author of the Qāmūs, whose words you quote whenever some topic concerning women comes up, say, “Rajul (‘man’): too well-known to require definition; also, one who has frequent intercourse”? If, then, the husband isn’t a man, why should he keep in his possession a woman whom he does not provide with her rights? Is it lawful for a man to own a riding animal if he cannot feed it?’ (I seek refuge with God from this comparison!) ‘Or for a man to own land if he doesn’t plow it, or sow it, or water it? Is it not, in such a case, the duty of the legitimate ruler to purchase it from him and put someone in charge of it who will maintain it and exploit it? And if procreation and the preservation of mankind are the joint responsibility of the man and the woman — with, indeed, the preponderance of their basic elements being specific to her and dependent upon her — why should not divorce also be their joint responsibility, when occasion requires? Divorce for no cause is, in my opinion, wanton and shameless.
3.18.15
“‘Uglier still is the fact that the Christian leadership permits the separation of the husband and wife in such cases but does not allow them to remarry, even though the man’s disorder is inveterate and it is not to be expected that it will be cured during the period of his separation from his wife. Where is the wisdom in that, and what harm is there in her marrying someone else who can cause her to bear boy and girl children? If one of her boys should turn out to be lazier or lamer in his use of Arabic than most, he can always become a monk or a metropolitan, and should any of her girls turn out to be particularly fond of confusions, delusions, and dreams, she can become a nun. What’s more, it is told in the Old Testament that the Almighty Creator said, “Multiply and fill the earth”247 (ignoring the exaggeration, for if the earth were to fill with people it would necessarily be ruined, not made prosperous) and Saint Paul says that “a woman saves herself by raising righteous children.”248 Is the suspension of husband and wife from remarriage an application of what these two authorities have laid down? Look at the people of this island and you’ll find that most of the men are separated from their wives and living in sin, and their priests insist that this is more proper than legal marriage even though the priests know nothing about conjugal rights because they aren’t married. Would it be right to choose an army’s leaders from those who are not skilled at the art of war and combat?’