Why do women marry?

[Gloria25]

What? They're some of the first questions they ask. "What's your home life like? Who lives with you? How do you all get along?"

 

You sound like you have no idea what you're talking about sometimes Gloria.

 

Ok, then explain why in this day/age we have such an alarming rate of kids who are depressed? Schoolwork and after school activities?

[Jabron1]

Up until maybe 100 or so years ago, marriage was viewed as more of a financial or business arrangement for the most part. Divorce wasn't acceptable or even legal in many cases. It was also almost impossible for a woman to earn a living on her own. Women had few options, and marriage was a way for women to have protection and be financially supported. A lot has change for the better IMO. If someone is "shacking up" and it works for them, what's the problem? To each his own.

 

The original marriage contract was that women owned a man's provisioning, and a man owned a woman's sex.

 

In other words, if a woman had an affair, both she and the man she slept with had to answer to the husband.

 

A man also was in possession of the children in the case of divorce.

 

One of the main priorities of the first feminists was to change this contract, which they did successfully, and we still see the effects today.

 

The contract was changed so that a woman gets default custody over the children. Men no longer owned the sex, yet women still owned the man's provisioning.

 

The next change was to make divorce easier, so that there doesn't actually have to be a reason for divorce.

 

Not saying that any of this is right/wrong or the other - that's not the point (before any SJW get itchy trigger fingers ). Just that it was an institution made for a specific purpose. It has clearly ran its course.

 

Modern marriage is nothing more than a bauble, an anachronism.

 

And the Roman Empire fell too...

 

When in the last days of Rome, do as the barbarians do.

[lana-banana]

Ok, then explain why in this day/age we have such an alarming rate of kids who are depressed? Schoolwork and after school activities?

 

Is this a serious question? Gloria, the reason we have "such an alarming rate" of children with depression and anxiety is because we are only now beginning to diagnose it. Thirty years ago we didn't recognize children had mood disorders, we just called them "touched", locked them up in asylums and/or lobotomized them. We can't compare the mental states of children now versus thirty or even twenty years ago because back then nobody was recording that data. We don't know how many children were certifiably depressed back in 1950 any more than we know how many women were abused by their husbands or how many people were psychotic murderers.

[lana-banana]

And the Roman Empire fell too...

 

Um, the Roman empire fell because it had become dependent upon slavery and outdated institutions. It was unable to compete with more technologically sophisticated societies that had better armies. The state's adoption of Christianity caused massive fractures in cultures throughout the empire. Maybe that's not the analogy you were going for.

Edited May 4, 2016 by lana-banana

[letmoc]

What? They're some of the first questions they ask. "What's your home life like? Who lives with you? How do you all get along?"

 

You sound like you have no idea what you're talking about sometimes Gloria.

 

That's because instead of actually living her life she is watching everyone else live theirs and commenting on it. I don't think many people had perfect parents but that should not stop you from taking a chance. Who knows? You might have a great marriage/relationship someday.

[amaysngrace]

Ok, then explain why in this day/age we have such an alarming rate of kids who are depressed? Schoolwork and after school activities?

 

My daughter has depression and nearly all if not every mental healthcare professional she has seen told her to become more involved in after school activities.

 

One thing about depression is that you no longer enjoy doing what you once did. Of course you're going to complain about soccer if you're depressed because you no longer feel up to playing.

 

But that's not soccer's fault. That's the depression.

[Jabron1]

That's because instead of actually living her life she is watching everyone else live theirs and commenting on it. I don't think many people had perfect parents but that should not stop you from taking a chance. Who knows? You might have a great marriage/relationship someday.

 

That's a frame, and an unfair one. I'll offer another: perhaps she's just trying to figure this sh*t out like we all are.

[letmoc]

That's a frame, and an unfair one. I'll offer another: perhaps she's just trying to figure this sh*t out like we all are.

 

And sometimes the best way to do that is to stop analyzing and live.

[Jabron1]

And sometimes the best way to do that is to stop analyzing and live.

 

And who are you, her new life coach?

 

A life unanalysed isn't a life worth living.

 

Might as well just live like an animal, bundling from one situation to another.

[letmoc]

And who are you, her new life coach?

 

A life unanalysed isn't a life worth living.

 

Might as well just live like an animal, bundling from one situation to another.

 

Nope just somebody who can see she is unhappy from her other threads and in a bit of a funk and just offering some advice. Sometimes we can get in our own heads a little too much and miss out on experiences out of fear. Life is not always black and white and sometimes it's ok to make a few mistakes.

[Jabron1]

Life is not always black and white and sometimes it's ok to make a few mistakes.

 

The intelligent learn from the mistakes of others.

 

If she wants my opinion, her problem is that she is swimming against the tide.

 

She needs to remain switched on, but learn to accept things as they are (not as she would have them be), quit worrying about the worlds problems, and focus on #1.

[dreamingoftigers]

Then why did she have kids with a guy who needs her income?

 

This isn't the Middle East - where women are forced into arranged marriages.

 

If you and your husband need two checks, then get a pet instead of having a kid.

 

Blah ha ha.

 

Where do you live that the average middle class family doesn't need AT LEAST 1.5 paycheques to have kids?

 

And I'm in a position where my parents are more than happy to throw whatever money I would need at me. (Grandkids get them pretty excited).

 

So we should give up on family and children because Gloria25 thinks we need to live the way she says so?

 

No thanks. I like being able to bring food to the table and not sitting by to chase a man's slippers. I'll chase after my kids instead.

[letmoc]

The intelligent learn from the mistakes of others.

 

If she wants my opinion, her problem is that she is swimming against the tide.

 

She needs to remain switched on, but learn to accept things as they are (not as she would have them be), quit worrying about the worlds problems, and focus on #1.

 

And sometimes the best lessons are learned from your own mistakes

[dreamingoftigers]

Oh, so the shack-ups, and "roommates/partners" thing going on now a days is better than that "antiquated institution"?

 

I just think it's sad that women spit on nurturing (cooking, cleaning, mothering) and see it as some form of enslavement through "marriage"

 

I enjoy cooking. Actually, today and Sunday I rocked in the kitchen. Puts a smile on my face to "feed" my family.

 

BTW, I do landscaping, car maintenance/repair, and handiguy stuff (plumbing, electric, HVAC). I also have degrees and am a kick butt professional....gosh darn, how dare I lower myself to that of a barefooted and pregnant slave would have to do (cooking, that is).

 

Just because you enjoy it all doesn't mean it works for everyone or makes them inadequate for not participating the way you prescribe.

 

I am LDS (Mormon) and I associate extensively with plenty of SAHMs, part-time workers and full-time workers.

 

Those domestic arrangements come with plenty of variation.

 

I think the number one priority in a family is making sure EVERYONE gets theirs needs met, not just ONE person or SOME people. That's what separates a functional family from a dysfunctional family.

 

Right now we have a VERY challenging newborn. He is very pukey and can easily choke. He is also VERY fussy. I stayed up until 6 a.m. with him last night.

 

Luckily, I have a husband that gets it isn't "all my responsibility." He's a Dad too. Historically, I would be pretty much around the clock with my baby. At this point we are on sort of shifts and my mother helps a few hours a day too (except yesterday/today, but she will come by tonight).

 

Having one person completely do the hard end of things when they arise seems pretty counter-intuitive when there are two people that can split the labour, especially when one is healing after CHILDBIRTH.

 

Being considerate of your marital partner is IMHO, much more important thanakong sure rigid rules around labour and gender roles are maintained.

 

Our child will remember both his parents being there and bonding with him. Instead of one total stress-case mother about to pull her hair out at the roots because she's so sleep deprived.

[cocorico]

LOL.

 

This was entertaining as hell to read.

 

Here's a little reality, now.

 

I absolutely agree that women can do things out of love and a desire to make her husband's life easier/happier/better. I've done it and I'm sure many women do as well.

 

But you tend to think this should only be a ONE WAY street. That only women should be the ones constantly giving and sacrificing and doing for everyone else while she gets nothing in return.

 

That's where your logic takes a drastic turn to the absurd.

 

I don't know a soul who has a maid or a nanny. But I know plenty of women who work outside the home then spend the whole night working their asses off only to get up the next morning and do it all over again. Studies and statistics show this is the case for the majority of households. Of course there are exceptions.

 

But women are only human for God's sakes. We're not super heroes - but we're expected to be. I don't think the overwhelming majority of women are working because they're anxious to climb the corporate ladder. I think a good lot of them are working because they HAVE to. They work because of the incredible cost of living in today's world.

 

So they put in that 8 or 9 hour workday, just like their husbands.

 

But here's where it differs for most women. In your world, the poor beleaguered, tired, overworked husband should be able to come home, relax in his recliner, have his shoes brought to him and be left alone by everyone so he can decompress after that oh-so-brutal day he had.

 

But the woman isn't entitled to that. No sir. After the same brutal workday she had, she now starts her SECOND job. Running to daycare after work to pick up the kids while mentally calculating what's in the freezer to make for dinner or does she have to stop at the dreaded grocery store and pick something up before going home? Because NO ONE ELSE is going to do it if she doesn't.

 

So once she's home, she tends to the thousands of little chores that a woman has to tend to on a daily basis. Emptying the dishwasher. Cleaning the dishes left in the sink from the night before when her husband had ice cream and couldn't be bothered to soak the dirty dish which is now glued to the bottom of the sink. Throwing in a load of the never ending mountain of laundry she's always facing, pulling out the items to create yet another meal for a family of 5 like she's done thousands of times before, making the lunches for her kids to take to school the next day, picking up the spilled Frosted Flakes from that morning's breakfast, going over all her kids school papers and signing permission slips or homework assignments, breaking up the constant little fights amongst the kids as she peels potatoes, making sure her kids do their homework and don't go off in all directions causing chaos, running the vacuum quickly because the dog or cat got fur all over the couch, and the list just goes on and on and on and on and on.

 

Gosh and golly, I sure hope that she's not making too much noise and disturbing the peace for Prince Charming whose taking a well deserved nap out on the couch or in his recliner! That would never do.

 

After she's served up yet another evening meal, she gets to clean up the mess from dinner and mentally make sure not to forget to fold the clothes that are now crumpling in the dryer which stopped over an hour ago. She also has to make sure her kids get their baths and get ready for bed on time. And maybe when ALL these chores are done, if she's not completely exhausted, at 9:00 or 9:30, maybe she can use her last hour before bed to do her nails or get on that treadmill she's been meaning to hit but never has time to do, or read a chapter in a book she's been wanting to read.

 

But in Gloria's world, this woman is dropping the ball. Because poor deprived hubby, whose basically been sitting on his ass playing X-box or watching TV all night and surfing porn on his cell during commercials while his wife has been busting her ass, is feeling deprived. Poor hapless victim! Doesn't his wife APPRECIATE that he helped get the kids in the tub or that he took out the garbage while she was being selfish and cleaning the kitchen and folding those clothes? If his wife were any kind of a woman, she'd learn how to multi-task even better so that her chores don't take so much time! That way, as soon as the kids are in bed, she could turn into a sex kitten and show him HOW much she appreciates that he took out the garbage earlier that night or that he cut the lawn last Saturday because we all know only HIS efforts matter.

 

Jeez, no wonder he goes and has an affair. I don't blame him. These wives need to seriously learn how to be better and more efficient pack mules so they can serve their husbands much better.

 

I'll bring this up at the next secret Wive's Meeting. I'm sure they'll see the error of their ways.

 

This is another of those cultural anomalies. Where I'm from, this would not be the W's work, but the kids'. Depending on their ages, kids can take on pretty well all of these things *apart from sex* as chores. If they're so tiny their baths need supervising and their lunches making for school, there won't be any real homework to supervise; or if there are a horde of kids can't verging a range of ages, the older can supervise the younger in return for a slightly later bed time. See, this is what i meant in my earlier post about parents in some cultures being all about the kids, and not being focused on being adults (and partners, lovers, etc).

 

I raised kids as a single parent. No way did I do all, or even most, of the chores listed here. I supervised homework, I made food when the kids were too young, but since they were toddlers they had chores. A toddler can load a washing machine, or unload one into a laundry basket. A toddler can pick up things left lying around. A toddler can empty a lunch box, and select a piece of fruit, a cereal bar, a little cheese and a fruit juice to refill it. Older kids can do so much more. And if kids are all doing their chores, they're not bickering with each other requiring supervision.

 

"Childhood" is a Victorian invention. Children in other societies, including earlier Western socieities, earned their keep. There is no need for kids to be treated like little princes and princesses. Kids who are invested in the success of the household through sharing the responsibility for its wellbeing are proven to benefit more in many other ways, too - quite aside from being an asset rather than a drain on resources.

[wmacbride]

This is another of those cultural anomalies. Where I'm from, this would not be the W's work, but the kids'. Depending on their ages, kids can take on pretty well all of these things *apart from sex* as chores. If they're so tiny their baths need supervising and their lunches making for school, there won't be any real homework to supervise; or if there are a horde of kids can't verging a range of ages, the older can supervise the younger in return for a slightly later bed time. See, this is what i meant in my earlier post about parents in some cultures being all about the kids, and not being focused on being adults (and partners, lovers, etc).

 

I raised kids as a single parent. No way did I do all, or even most, of the chores listed here. I supervised homework, I made food when the kids were too young, but since they were toddlers they had chores. A toddler can load a washing machine, or unload one into a laundry basket. A toddler can pick up things left lying around. A toddler can empty a lunch box, and select a piece of fruit, a cereal bar, a little cheese and a fruit juice to refill it. Older kids can do so much more. And if kids are all doing their chores, they're not bickering with each other requiring supervision.

 

"Childhood" is a Victorian invention. Children in other societies, including earlier Western socieities, earned their keep. There is no need for kids to be treated like little princes and princesses. Kids who are invested in the success of the household through sharing the responsibility for its wellbeing are proven to benefit more in many other ways, too - quite aside from being an asset rather than a drain on resources.

 

 

Yes, kids can do a lot of chores, but given today's society, they have a lot more to do than what you seem to realize if they are going to go on to higher education.

 

I have kids in that age range right now, and they each put in several hours of homework a night, weekends included. They don't get home from school until after four, and by the time they eat, get their things ready for the next day and do their homework, they are busy until after eight and sometimes up until nine. They have to be up by seven to catch the bus or walk to school.

 

On weekends, they have volunteer activities, and my oldest works outside the home as well. It's not an issue of them being the centre of the universe, more that they need to have a firm foundation from which to launch. They can cook, do the laundry, clean, etc., but their schoolwork is far more important.

 

Ever looked at a university application lately? There's plenty of questions asked about a teen's activities, grades, etc., but precious few about whether or not they could do the laundry when they were two, whether or not they packed their own lunch when they were three, etc.

 

 

Many married parents are able to incorporate nurturing their relationship while still spending time with their kids. It's all a question of balance.

[wmacbride]

This is another of those cultural anomalies. Where I'm from, this would not be the W's work, but the kids'. Depending on their ages, kids can take on pretty well all of these things *apart from sex* as chores. If they're so tiny their baths need supervising and their lunches making for school, there won't be any real homework to supervise; or if there are a horde of kids can't verging a range of ages, the older can supervise the younger in return for a slightly later bed time. See, this is what i meant in my earlier post about parents in some cultures being all about the kids, and not being focused on being adults (and partners, lovers, etc).

 

I raised kids as a single parent. No way did I do all, or even most, of the chores listed here. I supervised homework, I made food when the kids were too young, but since they were toddlers they had chores. A toddler can load a washing machine, or unload one into a laundry basket. A toddler can pick up things left lying around. A toddler can empty a lunch box, and select a piece of fruit, a cereal bar, a little cheese and a fruit juice to refill it. Older kids can do so much more. And if kids are all doing their chores, they're not bickering with each other requiring supervision.

 

"Childhood" is a Victorian invention. Children in other societies, including earlier Western socieities, earned their keep. There is no need for kids to be treated like little princes and princesses. Kids who are invested in the success of the household through sharing the responsibility for its wellbeing are proven to benefit more in many other ways, too - quite aside from being an asset rather than a drain on resources.

 

I suggest you go back and study your history books a little bit more. This is a very skewed view. Yes, children did more household chores, but many also never went to school, never learned to read or write. Life expectancy was such tat many married in their early to middle teenage years, and twenty was considered middle age.

 

Even so, in an awful lot of cases,young children weren't viewed as mini adults. They had toys to play with and were given time for that every day. Evidence and artifacts, including these toys, have been found going back thousands of years.

 

btw, as I have mentioned before. It's interesting when people who have never experienced being married and raising children feel like they've got it all figured out on how it should be. I wonder what they base these opinions on.

Edited May 5, 2016 by wmacbride

[Liam1]

So is farming, but we adapt.

 

Which is the point. Humans are eminently adaptable, and most of our social institutions have been in flux for centuries. There is nothing inherently wrong with adaptation. Meanwhile, this sepia-toned view of 1950s-style marriages is false because they themselves were an adaptation from various earlier eras, stretching back into the mists of time. The bottom line is that if you think marriage is going to be bad for you, then just don't bother with it.

 

Actually Muse, farming is not an "antiquated" institution. It is a business that needs to and IS evolving. Land farms that pollute the earth and take up space, are evolving into vertical farms housed in skyscraper that grow food with hydroponically using recycled water and no polluting fungicides, solar fueled lighting, and pesticides, and take up a much smaller patch of land.

 

Perhaps that is what Marriage needs to do. It needs to evolve. It has not.

[cocorico]

btw, as I have mentioned before. It's interesting when people who have never experienced being married and raising children feel like they've got it all figured out on how it should be. I wonder what they base these opinions on.

 

I cannot comment on "people who have never experienced being married and raising children", as I have, but since this "afterthought" was posted in a response quoting my post, I will answer for myself:

 

I post from my own experience, having raised happy, successful kids who became happy, successful adults, and having step-parented other kids who are now also well-adjusted, functional young adults, and as a very happily married person.

[cocorico]

Yes, kids can do a lot of chores, but given today's society, they have a lot more to do than what you seem to realize if they are going to go on to higher education.

 

I have kids in that age range right now, and they each put in several hours of homework a night, weekends included. They don't get home from school until after four, and by the time they eat, get their things ready for the next day and do their homework, they are busy until after eight and sometimes up until nine. They have to be up by seven to catch the bus or walk to school.

 

On weekends, they have volunteer activities, and my oldest works outside the home as well. It's not an issue of them being the centre of the universe, more that they need to have a firm foundation from which to launch. They can cook, do the laundry, clean, etc., but their schoolwork is far more important.

 

Ever looked at a university application lately? There's plenty of questions asked about a teen's activities, grades, etc., but precious few about whether or not they could do the laundry when they were two, whether or not they packed their own lunch when they were three, etc.

 

 

Many married parents are able to incorporate nurturing their relationship while still spending time with their kids. It's all a question of balance.

 

All of my kids and stepkids have gone on to university, universities that are globally acknowledged as being among the best. I have also worked most of my adult life in higher education. I know what's involved. It's not all about winning Nobel prizes in primary school and having mashed full of Olympic gold medals. It's about giving evidence of being a well-rounded person with good values and the right aptitude to make a success of higher education. There is plenty of time for chores in all that.

[wmacbride]

I cannot comment on "people who have never experienced being married and raising children", as I have, but since this "afterthought" was posted in a response quoting my post, I will answer for myself:

 

I post from my own experience, having raised happy, successful kids who became happy, successful adults, and having step-parented other kids who are now also well-adjusted, functional young adults, and as a very happily married person.

 

I see.

 

This sounds rather odd, as you indicated that you were a single parent with your own children, and your step children were older teens when you got married to their father. These are the facts as you have presented them.

 

If you were a single parent, then either you were not married when you became a mother, so have no experience raising small children while being married. The alternative is that you do, and it was not a success in terms of your marriage, as you divorced when your children were small.

 

In the second case, the children were almost adults by the time you became a step parents, so I fail to see how this could lead to much of an understanding of being married and parenting small children. By the age you step children were when you married, , most children are already well established, and you were likely more of a friend than a parent. I''m not saying that's a bad thing, but rather being a step parent to nearly grown children is not the same as being a married parent ( or step parent) to very young children, or even adolescents or young teens.

 

To each their own, I guess.

[AMarriedMan]

I'm reading all these threads where sex lacks and/or stops in marriages. Also, others where women want men to talk about their feeeeelings all the time, but when she puts her job, kids, etc over spending time with him, oh, he needs to get over it already.

 

Didn't we have one thread where the average tine for sex is like 5 - 7 minutes? Ok, why can't you simply do that for your husband?

 

Why is it so hard to make time for your man? When you were dating, you moved heaven and earth to make yourself available and cute for him. So, somehow that isn't a priority anymore?

 

I don't know why men even bother to get married anymore if the utter contempt for him is what he'll be signing up for...a prison sentence if you ask me.

 

A very large portion of men in developed countries are quietly deciding not to marry. In the developed world, Japan is probably the worst country for a man to get married. A man is expected to work himself to death for the benefit of the wife who gets to decide what is done with the money. In the USA, I think the year 2015 was the first one in recorded history when a minority of the adult population was married.

[wmacbride]

All of my kids and stepkids have gone on to university, universities that are globally acknowledged as being among the best. I have also worked most of my adult life in higher education. I know what's involved. It's not all about winning Nobel prizes in primary school and having mashed full of Olympic gold medals. It's about giving evidence of being a well-rounded person with good values and the right aptitude to make a success of higher education. There is plenty of time for chores in all that.

 

 

I suppose it must be an affectation of these inferior North American universities that they ask questions about activities outside of school, grades, and participation in clubs and events.

 

I have helped many young people fill out their applications. Each and every one of them asked questions about these things, and great weight is given to them.

 

At any rate, the point is that there are different styles of raising children and parenting while married. Each parent has to find out what works best for them.

[cocorico]

I see.

 

This sounds rather odd, as you indicated that you were a single parent with your own children, and your step children were older teens when you got married to their father. These are the facts as you have presented them.

 

If you were a single parent, then either you were not married when you became a mother, so have no experience raising small children while being married. The alternative is that you do, and it was not a success in terms of your marriage, as you divorced when your children were small.

 

In the second case, the children were almost adults by the time you became a step parents, so I fail to see how this could lead to much of an understanding of being married and parenting small children. By the age you step children were when you married, , most children are already well established, and you were likely more of a friend than a parent. I''m not saying that's a bad thing, but rather being a step parent to nearly grown children is not the same as being a married parent ( or step parent) to very young children, or even adolescents or young teens.

 

To each their own, I guess.

 

1) I have been married more than once.

2) I have step-parented more than once.

3) I have experience of parenting small children within a marriage, and outside of one.

4) I have experience of parenting older children within a marriage, and outside of one.

[cocorico]

 

I suppose it must be an affectation of these inferior North American universities that they ask questions about activities outside of school, grades, and participation in clubs and events.

 

I have helped many young people fill out their applications. Each and every one of them asked questions about these things, and great weight is given to them.

 

At any rate, the point is that there are different styles of raising children and parenting while married. Each parent has to find out what works best for them.

 

Different values, is all. In the countries I've worked in universities and sent kids to study there, questions which privilege kids from wealthy backgrounds over kids from poorer backgrounds who would not have access to the range of extra murals you describe, would be disallowed on the grounds of equity. Instead, kids are asked to provide evidence of aptitudes, attributes and competencies, whoever these were developed. It could be having developed leadership from captaining the first team in Sailing at an expensive private school, or it could be having developed leadership from looking after younger siblings in an extended family in a disadvantaged neighbourhood. Both are considered valid.