Q&A: Is a Woman Acquired?
Originally published:
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.
Is a Woman Acquired?
Question
This is how tractate Kiddushin opens. A. Does this mean that she belongs to her husband? B. If this is an acquisition in the sense of prohibition, why is it called an acquisition? C. If it means ownership over sexual relations [so that he can have them whenever he wants], that is really neither nice nor moral, right?!
Best regards
Answer
A common mistake. See my article here:
Discussion on Answer
Almost nobody holds that way. Read the article.
See the medieval authorities (Rishonim) on Gittin 9: “for the woman is not her husband's property” (and presumably Rabbi Michi elaborated more on this in his article). Besides, you cannot sell a woman, so she is not exactly yours.
Why is it a mistake? Quite a few halakhic decisors and commentators hold that way. For example, Nachmanides on “and your desire shall be to your husband,” that the woman longs for her master. Or the author of Etzei Arazim, who held that the husband has absolute ownership over marital relations, and even permitted a husband to force his wife when she is rebellious.