daf bit: Ketuvot 75

[cellio]

A mishna discusses cases where a man can divorce his wife without paying her ketubah. One such case is if she is found to have certain bodily defects -- the defects that disqualify a priest can also disqualify a wife (if the husband chooses), according to the gemara. However, the mishna teaches, if the defect was visible the man has no recourse, and if she resides in a town with a public bath he has no recourse even if it was invisible. Why? Because it is presumed that he had his female relatives check her out before betrothing her. (75b)

(Aside: two pages later is the mishna that discusses the man's defects and when he can be compelled to divorce her.)

Comments

[jerusha.livejournal.com]

Are there bodily defects in this class that are invisible even when the person is undressed? If not, the "female relatives checked her out in the baths" doesn't count for much...

[cellio]

They seem to be talking about physical defects that would be visible if you could see the relevant parts of the body. (There is, for example, a discussion of breasts.)

[zevabe.livejournal.com]

Yes, one that is cited as an example of such is bad breath.