Sometimes things cannot go unsaid

By: Ashley Slocki

Posted: 7/18/07

There are some things that just cannot be ignored. Things that are happening in the world that people don't mean to ignore, but seem to be left out of the list of important issues.

This Saturday I was doing my usual weekend routine, browsing CNN.com, as lame as that may seem for a Saturday morning. I came across an article I had to assume was just a spoof, but oh no, it was the real deal.

The story begins with a Chicago man named Arthur Friedman and his wife. The couple had been married for 10 years and apparently he grew bored with their sex life. The husband had a request for his wife: to begin sleeping with other people in front of him ... so she did it. Friedman said her doing this would "keep their marriage going," as stated by The Associated Press, as well as many national newspapers. But hey, that is their business and who are we to judge any one's sex life?

Natalie fell in love with one of her multiple partners, German Blinov, and stated she had fallen "out of love" with her husband.

"If he'd been such a great husband, wouldn't he protect me instead of making me do these things," Natalie said in a Washington Post article. Yes, she agreed to it, but the circumstances behind her agreement are unknown.

As soon as Friedman discovered his wife's new lover he filed suit against Blinov. Why do you ask? Well, according to the Washington Post Illinois is one of the only nine states that allows what is called "alienation-of-affection" lawsuits, which are also sometimes referred to as "heart balm torts."

The whole basis of the suit relies "on the belief that a wife was the property of her husband."

Meaning if a wife becomes not only sexually but also emotionally involved with another man she is considered to be stolen [the husband was robbed of his wife.]

It is not exactly the wife being stolen, but her love and affection for her husband. Just to clarify, the legal definition of robbed according to the Web site Law.com is "the direct taking of property from a person through force, threat or intimidation." However I never thought it was possible to steal something intangible, let alone an emotion.

Natalie was quoted in the Chicago Sun-Times saying "German was not the cause of this, I stopped loving Arthur. He made me do all of these things. How could he love me? ... Then he cries about losing his love? When I'm having sex with other men."

I will admit as a liberal studies major, with an option in women studies, I do have some bias on the topic of women's rights, but I think everyone will or at least should see how wrong this is. It is not just about women, but how old frivolous laws still on the books can affect us, such as laws found on the Web Site Dumblaws.com (these laws do not only pertain to certain states, not all): it is illegal to skateboard without a license, fish may not be contained in fishbowls while on public buses, pickles cannot be eaten on Sundays, chickens may not cross the road and interracial marriages are still illegal, just to name a few.

You will be surprised to know that in Oregon dishes must drip dry and one may not whisper "dirty" things into a lover's ear while having intercourse ... hmm how many of you are breaking this law?

But these laws are still on the books, and you can be charged with them - if the police even know about them. As for women in certain states, women can not even receive property after a divorce, a man can legally beat his wife - but no more than once a month, women must also have written permission from their husbands to wear false teeth and women may not be tickled. And of course - as stated before - in Illinois women are the property of their husband.

You might think that such an illogical case would even go before a judge - not only did it go before a judge, but also a jury.

Yes, 12 people were taken away from their daily lives to listen to this case. Even David Shults, Friedman's lawyer was surprised, stating in the Washington Post article it was "kind of remarkable," that the case wasn't thrown out immediately. Why? Because as long as the law is on the books, it is still permissible, if a judge agrees.

To prove that Natalie was indeed his property Friedman had to prove that there was once love between them and that it had been destroyed because of "malicious interference."

How can something be malicious when Friedman is the one who wanted his wife to sleep with this man ... hmm? This simple fact should have been enough to convince the jury that this case was completely asinine - but no.

The jury foreman, Eric Heisig, did say that many jurors repeatedly said how stupid the case was, and that they did not agree with the statute. They did reach an agreement, but not without disagreement. Some wanted to give him nothing, others wanted to give him what they made in a day of jury duty - $17.20 - but in the end Friedman was awarded $4,802.87. (Yes, that is the correct amount, even though the foreman said the jury were not happy with the case.)

Where did this number come from? It was from a formula which considered her contribution to the household for a period of time.

"This law allowed him to put a price tag on me," Natalie said in the Chicago Sun-Times. "That hurts more than anything." She was completely humiliated to have a number placed on her life.

Another attorney of Friedman claims that money was not his concern. "This case was never about money. This was about vindicating Arthur for what German did to him and his family." Blinov's attorney sees it differently, "this type of lawsuit is not designed to be a vehicle for vengeance or vindication. Sadly, in this case, it was used for both."

There you go. This is what our society has come to. Once again putting a price on someone's life. The once implemented dowry system seem to have returned. I have no doubt that this case will cause a domino affect for men whose ego's have been hurt.

How many more women will have a price tag placed on their life? And well, just incase people are not aware: women can now vote, have jobs, own property and are no longer supposed to be the property of any man, but I guess that is not the case in Illinois.