>>11264576
>should be the "third option". It's not slavery, but there are few protection
>raises men to have at least SOME respect for women who they actually marry
With slaves being a thing, free women willingly choosing to be prostitutes is seen in a /d/egenerate good thing.
Women's place is serving men, if they choose prostitution over failing to pay their debts and getting enslaved.
Then at least these women know their place instead of slave women who were too stubborn.
Thus the truly horrendous treatment is reserved for slaves.

>men would get a societal pass to "slum it" every once in a while
>After all, what's his wife gonna do?
An even more lewd/misogynist is simply having rules of sexual exclusivity only applying to a man's wife(or wives).
It's the norm for men to sleep with whores and even father a few bastard daughters.
Wives just see it as "boys being boys", she's has his legitimate heirs anyways and has legal protections of being married.
Could also be a deeply ingrained /d/ culture of cuckqueening for married women.

>>11264602
>>11264591
>"protection" against sexual assault, But in reality it's only married women
On the topic of "consent" it might well just be outright rape culture that when applied to unmarried women it's open season.
Legal system is against them, so women are forced into accepting that this is how men with "use" them.
So eventually they accept harassment at work or become prostitutes, at least they're getting paid for it.
Better then going against your rapist and getting further into debt.
And as a added bonus there's just no concept of marital rape, if she's one of your wives then she's all yours.