Editing Consummation (section)

==Controversies==
{{Seealso|Discrimination against asexual people#Institutionalised discrimination}}
In the [[family law]] defining [[civil marriage]] in some jurisdictions, particularly those where the civil [[marriage law]]s remain influenced by [[religion]] (albeit they are officially secular), non-consummation of a marriage may be a ground for [[annulment]] (an annulment is different from a [[divorce]] because it usually acts retrospectively). This stipulation has been in recent years heavily criticized on a wide variety of grounds, ranging from the mixing of religious doctrine into secular law, to being degrading to women given its negative historical connotations of ownership of the wife.<ref name="Family Law pp. 96-99">''Family Law: Text, Cases, and Materials'', by Sonia Harris-Short, Joanna Miles, pp. 96-99</ref> It has been argued that the purpose of this ground is not clear: it is neither procreation (the act need not end in pregnancy, and neither is there a need of the ''possibility'' of it, given the fact the consummation is legally valid even if one or both parties is sterile), neither is it the expectation of sexual satisfaction in marriage (one single act of sexual intercourse is sufficient, even if the spouse following the consummation says they will never again engage in intercourse).<ref>''Body Lore and Laws Essays on Law and the Human Body'', edited by: Andrew Bainham, Shelley Day Sclater, Martin Richards, pp 171- 182</ref> Andrew Bainham argues that this law (in [[England and Wales]]) is outdated and must be abolished "in a modern society committed to equality and human rights in personal relationships".<ref>''Body Lore and Laws Essays on Law and the Human Body'', edited by: Andrew Bainham, Shelley Day Sclater, Martin Richards, pp 175</ref>

In a 2001 report, the [[Law Society of Ireland]]'s Law Reform advocated abolishing the concept of a [[voidable marriage]] altogether (since divorce had been introduced in 1996) and criticized the consummation ground, writing the following:<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.lawsociety.ie/Documents/committees/lawreform/Nullity2.pdf|title=Page Not Found|website=www.lawsociety.ie|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304092125/https://www.lawsociety.ie/Documents/committees/lawreform/Nullity2.pdf|archive-date=2016-03-04|access-date=2015-04-08}}</ref>

{{blockquote|The rationale behind this ground is not immediately apparent. It is not concerned with the capacity of either or both parties to procreate, still less with the ability of the parties to satisfy each other sexually during the marriage.{{nbsp}}[...] It remains a rather curious anomaly in the law, a relic perhaps of medieval times, when the first act of intercourse was thought to 'mark' a new bride as the 'property' of her husband. Whatever its origins, it is not entirely clear what modern purpose this ground serves and it is suggested that it should be dispensed with.}}

Another concern is [[sexual violence]], especially since in most countries the criminalization of [[marital rape]] is recent, having occurred from the 1970s onwards; the maintaining in law of the concept of consummation is argued to foster cultural and societal attitudes and understandings of marriage that make it more difficult to acknowledge these violations; and to be a remainder of an oppressive tradition.<ref name="Family Law pp. 96-99"/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.solicitorsjournal.com/blog/case-point-consummation-legal-oddity|title=Case in point - Is consummation a legal oddity? - Solicitors Journal|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150416100405/http://www.solicitorsjournal.com/blog/case-point-consummation-legal-oddity|archive-date=2015-04-16}}</ref> Commenting on the case of ''R v R'', which criminalised marital rape in England and Wales, Harris-Short and Miles write:

{{blockquote|[A] historical view again throws useful light on the matter: until 1991, husbands were permitted to have sexual intercourse with their wives regardless of whether they were then actually consenting, the original act of consummation and the resultant marital status entitling the husband to sexual relations thereafter.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=HVqcAQAAQBAJ&q=a+historical+view+again+throws&pg=PA96 ''Family Law: Text, Cases, and Materials''], by Sonia Harris-Short, Joanna Miles, pp. 96</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1991/12.html|title=R. v R [1991] UKHL 12 (23 October 1991)|website=Bailii.org|access-date=2017-03-30}}</ref>}}