Saturday Night Live predicted the divorce angle in one of their "commercials" early in the Viagra media craze. Young women with older, grinning men on their arms looked sourly at the camera and with infinite sarcasm declaimed, "thanks, Viagra."

The reason that you are acting somewhat bemused or shocked over this, CC, is that Americans and people throughout the world absolutely refuse to address sexuality head-on. In the US, divorce is largely no-fault (and in states where it isn’t, it practically is because people just need to be separated for a year.) However, if divorce were “with fault” we might actually begin to have a discussion about how people are supposed to behave in a marriage.

Anyway, in what remains of fault-based divorce, we know a few things are impermissible:
1) cheating without the other spouse’s consent (or similar behavior) – adultery of the other spouse is a defense to a charge of adultery in NY
2) physical violence;
3) mental cruelty

However, the top two prohibitions are really just analogues from other fields of law. Mentral cruelty is hardly ever used anymore because it is just too vague.

Nevertheless, people are still asking for divorces on the grounds that spouses are not living up to their obligations. The problem is, we don’t quite know, as a normative matter, what a “sexual obligation” is. Are spouses expected to have sex with each other? If so, what KIND of sex are the expected to have?

Are they expected to keep in shape? Lets face it, having a fat spouse is not what a lot of people bargained for. Maybe if both parties get fat, the court can rely on the doctrine of “unclean hands.” However, in most circumstances a woman who previously only ate one carrot per day will let herself go after she snares the BIGLAW partner. Many would say that this is worse than gender-deception! What should a court do. Someone probably misrepresented themselves.

Are sexual desires (and hence obligations) supposed to decline over time? If they don’t follow a pre-set curve, are people eligible to get a divorce? Would cheating people excused?

Now, if prostitution were legal, I think that a lot of these problems would disappear. People whose spouses were not meeting their needs would simply hire someone, the way they do with a maid or a mechanic. Nobody gets divorced because someone one spouse is too busy to clean, and hires a maid instead. There would be none of the stigma attached, and less of a need for a divorce.

State and Federal governments are not helping matters. They discourage prostitution. For the most part they don’t even want to regulate it (in the same way they regulate plumbers or carpenters), and pr0n, dildos, and the like are also being chilled. So, any defense that a spouse might have to a charge of not putting out such as “use a marital aid” or “watch some pr0n” could be countered with “but it is illegal.”

Yes, Viagra must appear to be the Devil's own elixir to many older married females, shaken out of their comfortable assurance that old Fred is beaten down and no trouble THAT WAY any more. How irritating to be rudely awakened by the march of events and find themselves muttering, like dear Dr. Frankenstein of the cinema, "It's alive! It's alive!"

Good on ya, Fred, go for it.

I also got a kick out of the reference to "sex therapists" urging the notion of "good communication" between partners. As it happened, my wife and I watched three of these creatures ["sex therapists"--all female]for a few minutes on television last night while we were waiting for another show to begin . The topic was impotence, of course, and the three most voluably stressed that Viagra was not REALLY the answer.

Instead, they eagerly chanted the "communication" mantra, although what exactly was to be communicated to solve Fred's impotence was never stated. But that they tried to offer an alternative therapy is no wonder: Viagra is a great threat to their livelihood, which is based on open-ended ad libitum discussion to no lasting effect, insofar as impotence is concerned.

I'm told that Viagra is effective for most men who use it. On a personal note, I can only say that I'll certainly put its efficacy to the test if the need arises.

As for Viagra encouraging [making possible!]marital infidelity in some cases, it should be remembered that, like firearms, who you shoot is an act of personal volition. Regarding the act itself, the drug is neutral.

Bennett is correct. Viagra is effective. it remains to be seen whether it is safe, but I think many people are willing to take the risks, and there doesn’t seem to be any evidence anyway. However, in this country, and others, people seem to like the idea of not discussing what proper sexual behavior is.

Maybe the therapists (all of whom are girls, and therefore double-idiots) should try and articulate what people SHOULD communicate. Should wife tell husband “I don’t want to have sex anymore.” If so, should husband ask wife, “Do you mind if I visit a prostitute who will want to have sex with me? I promise that I will still fix the pipes, and I will do it while you play bridge with your frigid gold-digging friends?” If she response, “no, no, and no?” I think he should ask her, “Why don’t we just get a divorce, as we have obviously grown apart. It used to be that we both liked sex. Now you hate sex, and you have nothing in common with me. Oh, and by the way, I will tell our kids that their mother is a frigid dyke.”

Lots of lawyers mull lots of ideas for suits. Heck, I think of suing people all the time. Sometimes I float a trial-balloon on a blog. This doesn’t mean that I even have a client or even whether I have determined that the matter is honestly debatable under the law (or whatever I swore to do when bringing a lawsuit.) This morning I thought of suing two major corporations for various trade practices. I won’t tell you which ones.

Maybe I am particularly bitter. Not because of my personal life, but because I was nearly reduced to tears (yes, Taint cries) after reading a deposition which described the breakdown of a marriage due to, inter alia, sexual disinterest – which probably could have been avoided.

Now, as I said, I think that a lot of these problems could be dealt with in a more productive way by taking any conversation about what is a sexual norm seriously.

So, why don’t people start talking about sexnorms?