So the wife tries to withhold sex from her husband . . . and he gives her a black eye? But wait . . . it's played for laughs, you know, 'cause she got a punch in on him too! Yuck Yuck Yuck. This movie turned my freaking stomach. You accept that watching a 50 year old movie means wrapping your mind around the mores of the time period, but this movie was like watching some creepy woman-hater's manifesto.
shareI agree with your comment, but what's more important to consider is that for most of human history this movie represents how women were treated and expected to behave in a marriage. Sadly, this is still how the majority of marriages in the third world--and even some in Western society--are conducted.
I'm very grateful that my two daughters are perhaps the first generation of human beings that have choices other than "having babies" and being considered property of their husbands.
There is still a lot more work to do, but just the fact that there are people like you who have such an adverse reaction is quite a sea change from the days when The Honeymooners' Ralph Cramden balled up his fist and yelled at his wife, "To the moon, Alice".
Lighten up,its Sicily in 62 and at the time you couldn't have changed anything...be happy, now you can marry an animal....a real animal....
share"You’ll realize in your private life that at a certain point seduction is over and force is actually being requested." -- Don Draper, Mad Men
shareBTW, the real solution to this problem is for "one size fits all" boilerplate marriage contracts to be replaced by semi-customized marriage contracts where BOTH parties can spell out their expectations in detail, and the penalties to be incurred by the other party for failing to meet those expectations.
I know that's terribly commercial, and steps all over the mythology of "(unconditional) love and honor and obey", but, there's no such thing as a free lunch. Life = Tradeoffs.