high_jinx

I've been reflecting a lot lately about how antiquated our relationship structures are when it comes to courtship and commitment. in the general scheme of human history, 400 years isn't a very long time. however, it was only that long ago that the average lifespan of a human was 35-40. if you think about that, it meant that people who got married, even young, were only commiting to 15-20 years with their career's and spouses.

Now we live to be octagenarians.

it only makes sense that we switch both purpose and people multiple times over that much more a span.

I respect and cherish the power of ancestry and family, but aren't we being somewhat stifled by our timeless traditions and relationship structures? along with creating all kinds of emotional trauma and guilt complexes when we don't go the distance with one soulmate, which is more the rule than the exception?

__________________
-my phobia drowned while i was gettin down.

ColonelSpecial

I think our institutions have changed as our country has. Marriages when this country started were more likely to be chosen with heavy family input to ensure the family's continued success. Marriage was meant for child rearing mainly, to continue the lineage. We have changed that almost 180 degrees to be love matches first, with or without children.

Courting has also changed. We no longer court in the traditional sense. Courting was meant to get to know a person you were pretty sure you were going to marry. Family was again heavily involved. Today, people date with family influence and without. It is no longer required. People live together either before marriage or without marriage entirely.

Divorce is more common now than before. I think this is for a couple of reasons. People are living longer and are still married for the same 15-20 as in past years but now they have another 30 to live. They are choosing to live their lives without the person they originally married. Many people stayed in marriages before for financial reasons. Woman were traditionally not able to work outside of the home, own property, own credit. Once these opened up to women, more were able to leave the person they were married to. There are more options today.

Lastly there is gay marriage. While it hasn't been fully legalized in most states, gay couples are allowed many of the freedoms once denied. This is the largest improvement from decades past.

I feel today has the most options for relationships. One can be in a monogamous relationship with a partner, polyamorous (I hope this is the right word), same sex, different sex, live together, live apart, married, common law marriage, divorced, the list goes on. Not all of these choices have the same standing legally but they are all options to be had.

__________________
"Mommy, the presidents are squishing me!"

"Using the pull out method of contraceptive is like saying I won't use a seat belt, I'll just jump out of the car before it hits that tree."

Sara

Acetylene

The statement that average lifespans were only to 30 or so is actually an illusion of math.

When coming up with an aervage, as we all know, you add all the numbers and then divide by the number of entries.

Medieval and ancient lifespans are wildly distorted by the huge rate of infant and child mortality, not to mention the numbers of young (18-25) men who couldn't get married and thus went off to war.

Men who survived childhood and had enough wealth to marry would generally live to at least 60, and usually longer unless something happened to them like an accident or plague.

Thus, marriage is really only about 10 years more commitment than it used to be, and the 10 years in question are happening after retirement, when most marriages will either have succeeded or failed - few people divorce after the age of 60.

The biggest difference that has taken place in the past 200 years is, EVERYONE gets married now. That never used to happen. It's possible that not everyone SHOULD get married; many may be more suited to work, war, monkhood, etc. as used to be the case.

__________________
There's no justice. There's just us.

Amaras

Always question our institutions, only way to know if they are worthwhile.

__________________
Propaganda is to a democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state.
-Noam Chomsky
Love is a verb, not a noun.
-My Mom
The function of genius is to furnish cretins with ideas twenty years later.
-Louis Aragon, "La Porte-plume," Traite du style, 1928

digme

I feel like our society is too biased towards marriage. People seem to seek it out with little thought as to why, and we are steered that way from early on. Those who aren't married are questioned endlessly on when they will "settle down" or "find a good man/woman".

I don't think there should be any legal definition of marriage. I feel like we have setup a legal structure that discriminates against those who are not married. Let people choose live their life with who they choose, or with no one if they choose.

I say this as someone who is happily married.

Anormalguy

Along this line of thinking...way too many people go into marriage with the thought 'If it doesn't work out, I'll just get a divorce.' If that's how someone thinks about marriage, they shouldn't get married.

__________________
In a society where the individual is not free to pursue the truth...there is neither progress, stability nor security.--Edward R. Murrow

Zeraph

I would agree that far too many people getting married shouldn't be. Marriage has become something of a joke.

Willravel

"Till death do us part" is antiquated. Maybe just work in "I promise to love you to the best of my ability".

Church

Maybe its just me, but I just look at it as more time to spend with the girl that I love during my lifetime

__________________
Through counter-intelligence, it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble makers, and neutralize them.

KirStang

I seriously laughed. I think this holds very true in today's society.

Dexter Morgan

I don't think anything should be changed for the sake of creating some mass shift or alteration of priority. Marriage always should have been a proposition defined by those two (or more) who enter into it. It's when people think of it as some collective condition that you get things like Christian fundies who oppose gay marriage because they believe it undermines the value of their own marriages.

It has absolutely no effect on me whether or not the couple next door's marriage works out, or if the gay couple on the other side decide to marry each other. I've never believed marriage to have any moral or ethical value outside of how one person acts towards his or her spouse - and even then, those morals are self-defined by the parties therein. That's why no one can say that someone's "open marriage" is fraudulent or unsuccessful. If two people can love each other yet sleep with other people, then their marriage - by their own definition - is very much successful. And actually, by even SOCIETY'S definition of "success" (both people are happy and the marriage is still intact), it's also successful.

People need to stop worrying about the divorce rate, essentially. Is my hair going to fall out, or is my marriage going to spontaneously crumble, just because 50% of couples end up divorced? No. It's none of mine or anyone else's business. The divorce rate is often dwelled on to create this ever-present sense of fear that civilization as we know it is somehow in peril if we don't, I don't know, live more virtuously or change our values to something the "moral majority" approves of.

In short, who cares? Fuck who you want, marry who you want. You get one turn; make it a good one.

Plan9

Hahah... how self-serving!

You'd think people with shorter lifespans would be the selfish assholes.

Pfft. I gotta ruminate on this one.

__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."

PearlSonja9

Dexter Morgan

And? Who in this life should we be predominately concerned with serving if not ourselves? I don't mean at the expense of others; but when something literally has NO impact on you at all, why should you truly care? That's PRECISELY the reason we get bogus laws influenced by fundamentalist idiots, because they think the tiniest things that human beings do in private will somehow create some giant butterfly effect of immorality, and suddenly they'll be in Hell with the "eeeevil sodomites!"

People need to worry LESS about what other people do. Marriage in all its forms means absolutely nothing to me aside from how it directly involves me, in my OWN marriage. I'm going to have enough on my plate once I marry my fiance; my own marriage will take enough work that I don't have TIME to worry about what anyone else is doing.

So perhaps its self-serving; I just don't see why we have any obligation to be anything other than exactly that.

anti fishstick

i have thought a lot about marriage. i have a lot of anxieties towards it and i'm not sure if marriage is right for me.

yes, i think it's time to rethink our institutions. when i go into a relationship, i still somehow think of this long term potential with a partner, but my conflicting views with marriage almost set relationships up for failure by my inability to trust. i don't even know if i believe in monogamy but i want a lifepartner?

there are infinitely more choices now than ever before.. and not just with relationship structures. women can choose to work, stay at home, work from home, etc. they have more leverage with personal choices thanks to the feminist movement. there was a point in the 80s when there was a backlash to feminism and people blamed feminism for everything 'wrong' with marriage! they thought it was a women's fault for wanting to work, or have more choices that they couldn't handle these choices and were unhappy with themselves and ruining the family. in short: get back in the kitchen, bitches!

i see choices, in general, for men and women alike happening currently. yes, it may complicate life, and yes, maybe we don't have it all figured out yet, but that's the point of growing... challenging.. questioning status quo. life is moving faster than 50-60 years ago. i'm not sure if we've all caught up with it, but it's at least an interesting ride. with more choices, there might be more chances to make mistakes, divorce, be unhappy, fail.. but is it worth it? I think so. I think this undercurrent is already starting to change institutions. you can't learn without falling and making mistakes. we are evolving.

__________________
And the day came when the risk to remain tight in a bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom.
~Anais Nin