Jump to content

Has marriage outlived it's usefulness?


Recommended Posts

It seems as though marriage as an institution may no longer have a place in modern times. All you hear about is the 50% divorce rate, the alimony, the child support, the infidelity, and sometimes even one spouse trying to kill the other one just to get out of it. You rarely hear about happy couples that have no complaints about their partners, or well adjusted kids that don't have to split their time between two parents. What's the point of marriage anymore? It's disposable now. You get married, pledge to love and cherish each other, then when you get tired of them you just throw it away and find someone else. It seems as though in the earlier part of the last century, people were more dedicated to making their marriages last. Why was it different then. How could people stay married for fifty or sixty years, yet now you'll be lucky to make it five years. Most people I know who are fifty years or younger have been married at least twice. I'm not saying that there aren't any couples that last past ten or twenty years, but the numbers seem to be dropping each generation. Is it even worth getting married anymore? It seems like things may work out better if you just perpetually date. I know people that hated each other during their marriages, but are the best of friends after their divorces. Why go through the pain and financial hardship of building a life together, just to have the courts dismantle it. Has marriage outlived it's usefulness? Should marrige requirements be changed to reflect society as it is today. May be a marrige license that has to be renewed every year, or one that requires a substantial fee. Maybe a requirement that you live together for at least a year. Does anyone have an opinion on this topic?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm. We debated this at length recently. If you do a search on 'marriage' in title, I'm guessing you'll find the thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

I just wanted to create a thread that didn't have anything to do with porn. I feel as though I will be forever known as the Larry Flint of this site. I can be thoughtful, and considerate, and discuss topics of life that are close to womens hearts. Somebody just give me chance PLEASE!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You get married, pledge to love and cherish each other, then when you get tired of them you just throw it away and find someone else. It seems as though in the earlier part of the last century, people were more dedicated to making their marriages last. Why was it different then.

 

well, Larry :p

 

I think that couples from generations before have a different definition of marriage and commitment than we do. If you look at the first 50 years of the 20th century, couples had to endure two world wars, an economic depression in the US and change and upheaval in social standards (sexism, racism, etc), and you figure if they could cope with those things, they were able to cope with the changes brought by an ever-redefining relationship like marriage and they valued the idea of commitment to a point where they weren't afraid to work for it even if it meant a sort of "dying of self."

 

My generation (post-Yuppie)? Well, we grew up with the idea of the drive through window at restaurants in place of a sit-down-at-the-table meal, disposable items and instant gratification because we just didn't have time to mess with things because we were too busy doing "important stuff." And I think that transferred into our way of thinking socially, affecting our views of marriage.

 

Yes, we're empowered with the knowledge that we can walk away from a bad situation at any time because we don't have to submit outselves to that bad situation, but how often have we circumvented a relationship just because we were too afraid to be hurt, but called it self-defense? If a situation in our marriages wasn't what we liked, we could justify just throwing in the towel without really working things out, simply because we feel we are Entitled to A Little Happiness. Now multiply that by the generation before and the one that follows and you've got a whole lotta people sh*t-canning what marriage stands for because they have no real sense of the commitment their grandparents did.

 

That's MY two cents ...

quank

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why go through the pain and financial hardship of building a life together, just to have the courts dismantle it.

 

Courts don't dismantle marriages. People do.

 

And I'm not sure the divorce rate is tied to the *usefulness* of marriage but perhaps to other issues, some of which Quankanne touched on.

 

But perhaps I don't know what you mean when you refer to the "usefulness" of marriage. Care to elaborate on your frame of reference?

Link to post
Share on other sites

actually, i would be interested in this as well. i'd love to know the history of it - i heard some vague theories about marriage as an economic stabilizer, etc, as well how women both in the workplace and in full possession of birth control might de-emphasize locked-in monogamy if it wasn't for massive "wedding commercialism." y'know, that kind of stuff.

 

is this the kind of stuff you meant? it was just a first year class, and a dim memory, but i remember it being fascinating material at the time. any deconstructing of 'emotional untouchables' like marriage or mothering usually is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Originally posted by cdn

 

 

Courts don't dismantle marriages. People do.

 

And I'm not sure the divorce rate is tied to the *usefulness* of marriage but perhaps to other issues, some of which Quankanne touched on.

 

But perhaps I don't know what you mean when you refer to the "usefulness" of marriage. Care to elaborate on your frame of reference?

 

 

When I said that courts dismantle marriages I ment in the respect of divorce proceedings, where belongings are divided and issued to either party, where children and visitation is decided upon by a third party who must make a guess at where the child will be better cared for. As far as the divorce rate and the usefulness of marriage, I am referring to the idea that because marriage seems to be a lot more disposable nowadays, what purpose does it serve? Couldn't the benefits of marriage be attained by long term "dating", or maintaining a relationship that doesn't require the merging of each persons life with the others. By usefulness I mean the long term security that marriage used to provide. A stable home, an investment in a joint financial future. The emotional and physical certainty that comes with only sharing your intimate life with one other person, preferably for a lifetime. With the odds heavily stacked against your marriage lasting for a lifetime, is the initial investment, financially, emotionally, spiritually, worth it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Marriage Dead?

 

I suspect that marriage is useful to minor children, parents of minor children, the billion dollar wedding-industrial complex, Government (as a form of social control and domination) and our consumerist market economy.

 

People now live too long to be married forever. Marriage should be reworked as a contract between parents to raise children until they reach their majority. After that, the parenting contract terminates as a matter of law. Then, at their option, mom and dad can continue in whatever arrangement that suits them. Or not.

 

Marriage, almost more than any other social institution, is honored in theory as much as it is dishonored in practice. Americans pay lip service to the idea of marriage but many of us practice a serial monogamy. Look at the divorce statistics--we all can't be evil reprobates.

 

Marriage is the perfect consumption unit that late capitalism needs to keep folks buying and on that treadmill. It starts with the wedding consumption, and it's downhill from there.

 

Marriage, as our grandparents understood and experienced it, is dead.

 

R.I.P.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

People now live too long to be married forever.

 

This is possibly true. But who wants to be dating at age 70?

 

Here is another question: Do men and women leave marriages for the same reasons? And what percentage of people leave with the safety net of a new SO in place? Would they still leave if they had no prospect(s) on the immediate horizon?

 

Ok, that is more than one question sue me. :laugh:

 

P.S. I am curious as to how you see this idea working, especially in cases where one spouse forfeits career (and future earnings potential) in order to raise children:

 

Marriage should be reworked as a contract between parents to raise children until they reach their majority.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

I believe that marriage as the idealistic institution it was founded as is dead. If marriages had to be renewed every year like a car registration, how many people would actually do it? Would it provide a more convienient way of bowing out of relationships that show early signs of not working. This may provide a healthier way for people to separate who may otherwise feel trapped due to the emotionally and financially draining aspects of divorce. Would it be posssible to arrange the split of assets and custody arrangements prior to the marriage, so that a split could be more amicable. People would be a lot more open and agreeable to the terms of a possible future divorce if the animosity and hurt feelings hadn't developed yet. What about the possibility of being married without cohabitation? I have a feeling that relationships would last a lot longer if you were not forced to see that person every single day. The romance and passion may continue to blossom if you had to make an effort to see that person. Dating, I feel is the best part of a relationship. Not being able to wait until you get home to find out how the other persons day went. Arranging times and places to go and spend time together. When it's not so "in your face" I think you desire it more. Besides, for those times when you don't get along wouldn't it be a lot healthier to not be in the same residence? Just some thoughts of mine about how marriage could be restructured to fit our modern way of life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
P.S. I am curious as to how you see this idea working, especially in cases where one spouse forfeits career (and future earnings potential) in order to raise children:

 

Yeah, cdn, I thought of the contributing homemaker spouse issue. Perhaps the parent contract could have a buy-out provision that would be based on some equitable property distribution model used in the forum stae.

 

I think it's doable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I refuse to believe that social standards that move in one direction are capable of erasing everything behind it. Marriage is right for some, and will always be so. Some institutions aren't always retained for their "usefulness" per se, it's often more emotional than it is economic. At least, it should be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
marriage as the idealistic institution it was founded [to be]

 

OK, now we know you're not a history major. The foundations of marriage had nothing to do with idealism. Marriage has ancients roots, involving control of property, and the reproductive capacity and labor of women. Over the millennia in the European world, marriage has been dressed up a bit with romantic trappings - but many current-day customs, such as bridal parties and carrying the bride over the threshold, still echo the primal roots. In many societies even today, marriage follows the ancient pattern. The industrialized marriage model has certainly changed over the centuries, but you would be hard pressed to find a competent historian, sociologist, philosopher, family advocate, or policy analyst who thinks marriage is no longer "useful".

 

You may want to study the facts a bit before announcing your conclusions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you SoleMate.

 

The dating process is relatively new practice. I believe it originated with guys taking prostitutes to dinners, dancing, etc.

 

Maybe it is a combination of things that are eroding marriages.

- Self-gratification. Everyone wants to be happy.

- People are spoiled. They take it for granted

- Dating. Fake love is so much more appealing than the real thing.

- Divorce. The only people who profit from it are the lawyers.

- Feminism. Some women are shedding their husbands.

- Laziness. Some people don’t want to put in the effort required in marriages.

- Infidelity. Some people cannot cope with the availability of sex.

- Lack of respect. Some people just don’t take it seriously with the high divorce rates.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yahoo News posted this article about urban dating after I posted, here. Here's a tidbit:

 

The results, released Thursday, are part of the Chicago Health and Social Life Survey to be published this spring in the book "The Sexual Organization of the City."

 

 

Laumann and his staff at the university examined how race and sexual orientation play a role in forming relationships, and how multiple sexual partners and jealousy also work into the equation.

 

 

Among other things, they found that, between the ages of 18 and 59, those surveyed cohabited an average of nearly four years and were married about 18. The rest of the time — an average of about 19 years — they were dating or alone, with no steady companion.

 

 

This Sex and the City survey/study is discussed at the link below:

 

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=533&e=7&u=/ap/20040109/ap_on_re_us/urban_coupling

 

Something's definitely eroding marriage , and it's happening right under our noses. And these major social changes reflect more, much more, than a mere decline in character (or what are perceived to be old time values).

 

"Something's happening here. What it is I'm not exactly sure."

 

For What Its Worth,

Buffalo Springfield

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Originally posted by SoleMate

 

 

OK, now we know you're not a history major. The foundations of marriage had nothing to do with idealism. Marriage has ancients roots, involving control of property, and the reproductive capacity and labor of women. Over the millennia in the European world, marriage has been dressed up a bit with romantic trappings - but many current-day customs, such as bridal parties and carrying the bride over the threshold, still echo the primal roots. In many societies even today, marriage follows the ancient pattern. The industrialized marriage model has certainly changed over the centuries, but you would be hard pressed to find a competent historian, sociologist, philosopher, family advocate, or policy analyst who thinks marriage is no longer "useful".

 

You may want to study the facts a bit before announcing your conclusions.

 

 

No I'm not a historian, but I wasn't aware that I was presenting a doctoral thesis either. I thought I was loosely discussing a topic on a an internet forum. When I am presenting my research to the library of congress I will make sure that I review my data for any possible miscommunication. How about I substitute "the Idealistic institution that it was founded to be" for the idealistic institution it is sometimes considered. I was also referring to marriage as it exists in more modern times, not when a wife cost you two wildabeast and a donkey. When I asked if marriage was still useful, I meant as it pertains to our everyday interpersonal relationships, not its impact on the economies of industrialized civilizations, or the psychological effect it has on behavioral or enviornmental stimulus as it pertains to human growth and developement. This is love shack not Oxford so can we save the overly intellectual analysis for the next MENSA meeting? Some of us find comfort within the confines of our low brow existence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people have become so convinced that the way to true happiness is to focus on self, self-fulfillment, and self-satisfaction that some of the elements which can build and maintain relationships can no longer be found.

 

People seem to have scorecards at the ready, toting up every disgression and every gift given and sacrifice (if any!) made by themselves and, when the count reachs +1 on their side, they shut down and quit.

 

I think people are far too self-involved to be in relationships anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

^^^I couldn't agree with you more. You have summed up my feelings perfectly. Finally someone who doesn't make me feel as though my opinons originate from another dimention. :laugh:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally someone who doesn't make me feel as though my opinons originate from another dimention

 

Oh hold on just one second. I just read where you said that some fellow should ditch his girlfriend because she has photos of her ex. You also indicated that you should be happy all the time in a marriage and a bunch of other stuff which is the complete antithesis of what I've just said. You adovcated ditching a relationship at the first sign of trouble!!!!!!!! I'm saying that too many people do just that. We could not be farther apart in opinion if that's what you believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by moimeme

I think people have become so convinced that the way to true happiness is to focus on self, self-fulfillment, and self-satisfaction that some of the elements which can build and maintain relationships can no longer be found.

 

Amen to this. I think that the notion of personal happiness (or fulfillment, if you will) has taken over relationships. People seem to believe that they have a right to be happy, not just in overall terms, but in the moment. Ironically, the only time they don't focus on themselves is when they are looking for the reasons their marriage has failed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

capitalism and self-fulfillment are just greater forces now, which is exactly why marriage, as an institution, is petering out and being replaced with shorter realtionships. as an institution, i don't think marriage will or should die out, but it does have to evolve if it wants to survive.

 

i think we should make distinctions between types of marriages. someone here posted a great link once on the difference between intrinsic and functional marriages. one is not better than another, they just serve different purposes. in any event, while i was looking for it, i found a much more interesting link - check it out if you've time:

 

http://www.science.mcmaster.ca/Psychology/dalywilson/ep&mc1996.pdf.

 

it's not specifically on point but there are some great bits in there about the history of marriage. surprising information, too!

 

though i'm tempted, i think it's too easy (and ironically too self-satisfied) to say people are just selfish now. i agree that priorities change, and people adapt to priorities. most people can't rely on stable jobs, stable identities, most people have not grown up with ideal role models: stability is no longer a given anywhere. most of all, to many people, 60 years with one person does not necessarily equal success. think of those who grew up in homes where divorce was not an option because of religion or shame, and watched two people who fundamentally did not like each anymore have to sludge it through hopelessly; or those who watch role models spouse-hop happily and without censure.

 

this is not the ideal prediction, but i think more and more people will start to view divorce as a right rather than a tragedy and a failure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

cdn, many culture critics blame that old punching bag the "self" for the decline and fall of marriage. An improper focus on "self," in the form of a preoccupation with self-fulfillment, selfishness and and self-gratification is to be blamed, they say. If only people were less self-focused all would be right with marriage, they toot.

 

I think this "self" centered analysis of the decline of marriage , while it gives the critic a "virtue" high, begs a number of questions. Social character cannot be understood, or even denounced, in a social, historical and economic vacuum.

 

First, people marry for different reasons today than they did 150 years ago. Today, people marry for love after a romance. Self-fulfillment, self-gratification and self-pleasure are the reasons people marry today. Given this self-gratification motive at the outset of marriage , in the form of love and romance, as aided and abetted by dreamy trappings of the billion dollar wedding industry, we cannot be shocked that this self-centeredness does not cease after the wedding--despite all the "hard work" metaphors for marriage, which make the institution sound like a sweat shop. Historically, love had very little to do with marriage, which was more akin to a business partnership. Hard headed realism, not "Modern Bride" sentiments governed.

 

Second, the urbanization of society, the economic and political emancipation of women , the decline of self-denying religions, the rise in educational levels , the development of a market economy driven by consumption as opposed to production and a culture of affluence, all of which breed a self-actualization focus, also are to "blame."

 

People are less tolerant of unhappy marriage today because their expectations are greater. Is that a character defect, or merely an expected byproduct of late capitalism in a consumerist culture, where people are constantly buying the latest and greatest products that help them feel fulfilled (at least until the next best thing comes along)?

 

This is more, much more, than a mere "character " problem. The human heart is turning into the equivalent of a Wal Mart shopper--always searching for the next best deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by bark

 

The human heart is turning into the equivalent of a Wal Mart shopper--always searching for the next best deal.

 

[color=blue].......I'm still looking for the 'blue light' special....or is that KMart.......GAWD I'm in the wrong store!!!!!.......[/color]

 

PS Bark....I agree!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...