Casablanca Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 I was talking with one of my best friends about dating. She isn't a traditionalist and we joke about her just finding some rich guy to get hitched to down the road. So I joked about how it sounds like she just wants to be married off like in medieval times....this transitioned to her talking about how love is overrated and that we've only been truly marrying for love for maybe 100 years. That did get me thinking, and I somewhat agreed with her. How long have we truly been marrying for love? For a long time, people did get married out of convenience or family alliances. Sure the last 100 years people have married for love, but it was so much harder to get out of it if you married the wrong person and even easier to marry someone who was just okay for you. People got married younger, why? Well three reasons, life expectancy was a lot shorter, it was looked down upon if you were in your 20s & not married, and there wasn't any goals outside of graduating high school (if you even went). Very few people when to college, even rarer for women, it was hard to travel and there was just less to experience. Divorce has been so frowned upon until recently, I've heard a few stories of older couples who stayed together just because divorce "wasn't" an option because of the bad stigma. Even today in certain cultures we have arranged marriages. So how long have people been free to marry for true love, 50 years? I'm not saying our grandparents didn't love each other, but it seems the idea of marrying for true love when you're ready instead of when society says you should be ready is a fairly novel concept given how long human society has been around. What is everyone's thoughts on this?
Els Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Throughout history, some people haven't, and some people have. Even now, I'm positive there are some who don't marry for love (and I'm not even talking about arranged marriages). 1
Author Casablanca Posted June 19, 2013 Author Posted June 19, 2013 Throughout history, some people haven't, and some people have. Even now, I'm positive there are some who don't marry for love (and I'm not even talking about arranged marriages). Oh, I know that still happens, but I don't think people have quite had the choice or felt like they had the freedom to get married when they wanted to until recent history
carhill Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 How Long Have People Been Marrying For True Love? For as along as marriage, or its peer of the times, has existed as a social/religious/legal contract and people have felt 'love' in their psyches. In decades/centuries past, the parameters may have changed over time, with humans adapting to the changes, just as we have in our lifetimes, but the basic impulsion to 'couple up' has been around as long as we've been reproducing the species. Perhaps we just investigate and more precisely and tightly define it now, both the 'love' part and the 'marriage' part.
crude Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 I don't think the concept of marrying for love has kicked in yet. Think of all the women who get married so they won't be the old maid of their group of friends, or the women who marry for money, or because society pressures them to, or just to have children. That's the overwhelming majority right there alone. And how about you marrying a rich woman, why is it only women who can marry for money. Affluent women are hardly rare today, they need a man, so why not Casablanca. 1
Els Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Oh, I know that still happens, but I don't think people have quite had the choice or felt like they had the freedom to get married when they wanted to until recent history Yes, that's definitely true, especially in some societies. I think the timeline really varies a lot depending on social status, country, culture, etc. I don't think anyone could give you a definite timeline for this. Seems like it would have been possible for longer in America, given the whole 'pioneer' and freedom from social classes thing. In the UK, perhaps for over a century or so? More recently in some parts of Asia, but my grandmother married for love, so, still quite a while there.
Author Casablanca Posted June 19, 2013 Author Posted June 19, 2013 I don't think the concept of marrying for love has kicked in yet. Think of all the women who get married so they won't be the old maid of their group of friends, or the women who marry for money, or because society pressures them to, or just to have children. That's the overwhelming majority right there alone. And how about you marrying a rich woman, why is it only women who can marry for money. Affluent women are hardly rare today, they need a man, so why not Casablanca. There will always be people who do this, some people just want a MRS degree, but people who choose to wait and accomplish things first, arent looked down upon like they would have just a century ago
Buck Turgidson Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Casablanca, that's an excellent question. You and your girlfriend should head to the library and grab a copy of Stephanie Coontz's "Marriage: a History (Or, How Love Conquered Marriage)" A historian of relationships, she's written a really fascinating book on the subject. Here's a hint: there's a reason it's called "romantic" love. It's because the concept was basically invented in the romantic era, the early 1800s. Prior to that time, strong mutual attraction was considered volatile and dangerous, and way, way too fickle to be the basis of an institution as legally important to the family and inheritance as marriage. Prior to the Enlightenment, you married whoever your parents told you to marry, i.e., whoever had a plot of land next to yours, or forwarded the family's upward mobility, etc., and you really had little say in the matter. Your liege lord had more say. And if you happened to be in love with that person, it was considered *bad* for the match, because in order for the match to work, both partners had to work the farm, herd the animals, and make the clothes. And so for the same reasons you'll see people here advise you never to date people you work with (because as soon as the attraction turns to resentment and hate, you can't work with that person any more), kids in love were usually *forbidden* to marry. Today, you can change jobs if you have to. Back then, if you and your wife couldn't work the farm together, you would die. Strong mutual attraction was the stuff of extramarital affairs, which were far more accepted than they are today, although the wives generally had to exercise more discretion about them. Anyway, read the book. It's great. For as along as marriage, or its peer of the times, has existed as a social/religious/legal contract and people have felt 'love' in their psyches. I'm sorry, but with a few exceptions, that simply isn't so.
MrCastle Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Marriage is an antiquated institution. Especially now that women are more independent than ever before and have equal rights. It's not like before where women couldn't/didn't work and needed to marry a man at a young age so he could provide for them while she stayed at home and popped out babies. Women are in the work force. Women are capable of living alone. Article I read last week in Esquire talked about how more men want to settle down and have kids than do women. Women want to go out there and be self sufficient and accomplish their career goals. So people are getting married later and having kids later. Also, life expectancy is rising. In the old days, being married at 19, 20 was expected, as was passing away in your 60's. People are living to their 80's and beyond. I really don't understand how someone in their 20's can marry with the expectation of being together their entire life but the odds are certainly not in their favor. The days of people being married 15, 20, 25 years--that's over. This generation isn't into that. People break up over status messages on facebook. This is the instant gratification generation. If things aren't perfect 24/7, they bail. No marriage is lasting decades with that kind of mentality. I can understand living with someone, having kids, being committed, and even throwing a party to celebrate that love--what I don't understand is why the courts have to be involved. Why you need a paper that says "this is my wife, this is my husband." I respect people who still hold out hope that they will find someone and be married forever and ever but in this day and age, that is hard to do. 2
Pompeii Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Marriage is an antiquated institution. Especially now that women are more independent than ever before and have equal rights. It's not like before where women couldn't/didn't work and needed to marry a man at a young age so he could provide for them while she stayed at home and popped out babies. Women are in the work force. Women are capable of living alone. Article I read last week in Esquire talked about how more men want to settle down and have kids than do women. Women want to go out there and be self sufficient and accomplish their career goals. So people are getting married later and having kids later. Also, life expectancy is rising. In the old days, being married at 19, 20 was expected, as was passing away in your 60's. People are living to their 80's and beyond. I really don't understand how someone in their 20's can marry with the expectation of being together their entire life but the odds are certainly not in their favor. The days of people being married 15, 20, 25 years--that's over. This generation isn't into that. People break up over status messages on facebook. This is the instant gratification generation. If things aren't perfect 24/7, they bail. No marriage is lasting decades with that kind of mentality. I can understand living with someone, having kids, being committed, and even throwing a party to celebrate that love--what I don't understand is why the courts have to be involved. Why you need a paper that says "this is my wife, this is my husband." I respect people who still hold out hope that they will find someone and be married forever and ever but in this day and age, that is hard to do. Not only that, but the rules of the game have changed. Dating is vastly different now than it was in my parents' era and it will be for the next generation. Dating seems to get more and more progressively shallow as the years progress. That's why I can't seem to figure out if the human species is evolving or devolving. Every indicator of progress I see gets dashed by something else that highlights us being slaves to our baser instincts. I have already thrown in the towel on dating after seeing what it takes and seeing what women really go for. Why not throw out marriage with that as well. Ever since I've heard horror stories of divorce, its just not something I want to get involved in. I can be optimistic and hope for the best until the sun shines out of my ass that I'd find an awesome girl and have a nice family life forevermore but I'm realistic that it simply will not happen. When 50%+ of marriages end in divorce, that's just something that's not really that great of a guarantee. That is why I devote myself to mastery and being elite. Because after all, it's all I have left.
carhill Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Quote: Originally Posted by carhill For as along as marriage, or its peer of the times, has existed as a social/religious/legal contract and people have felt 'love' in their psyches. I'm sorry, but with a few exceptions, that simply isn't so. With a sweeping statement like that, essentially refuting centuries of existence, the burden of proof is upon yourself. What does 'a few exceptions' amount to over trillions of lifetimes? Think about that, then bring back the concrete information to back up your point.
Star Gazer Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 Oh, I know that still happens, but I don't think people have quite had the choice or felt like they had the freedom to get married when they wanted to until recent history Freedom in the general sense didn't exist until recent history. With freedom comes choice. 1
Leegh Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 I believe many people that marry may not have been romantically in love with the person, but felt a deep attachment. In addition, there are many people that are in love when they marry, but several years down the road they fall out of love, so now you have a marriage where you are not in love with your spouse anymore. Also, when people marry, are they marrying their first choice of a marriage partner? Is their marriage partner their second choice? In addition, it's surprising that quite a number of people marry three or four times, as it can be quite costly to get a divorce.
Buck Turgidson Posted June 19, 2013 Posted June 19, 2013 With a sweeping statement like that, essentially refuting centuries of existence, the burden of proof is upon yourself. What does 'a few exceptions' amount to over trillions of lifetimes? Think about that, then bring back the concrete information to back up your point. I believe I have given you an excellent reference already. You should read it. And if you think that marriage has been around for "a trillion lifetimes," then you are seriously deluded.
sillyanswer Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 How long have we truly been marrying for love? About 4000 years.
Recommended Posts