Thoughts on this one?

[esoter1c]

Originally Posted by kir mokum

alright. here's the first google hit for "history of marriage in western civilization"

BLAHBLAHBLAHBLABBITYFUCKINGBLABBITYBLAHB LAH

[kir mokum]

i'm pretty sure that no matter what i say or what my sources are they're going to be deemed wrong by the mighty collective intellect of FNK. especially since i'm apparently a lonely, bitter, impoverished, morally outraged, chauvinistic, biased, liberal arts grad who can't get a date and generally doesn't do well in the women dept. and is destined to die alone and unhappy. how can a person like that ever say something relevant?

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by kir mokum

i'm pretty sure that no matter what i say or what my sources are they're going to be deemed wrong by the mighty collective intellect of FNK. especially since i'm apparently a lonely, bitter, impoverished, morally outraged, chauvinistic, biased, liberal arts grad who can't get a date and generally doesn't do well in the women dept. and is destined to die alone and unhappy. how can a person like that ever say something relevant?

By assuming that everybody on FNK is wrong, lonely, bitter, impoverished, morally outraged, chauvinistic, biased, liberal arts grads who can't get dates and generally don't do well in the women dept. and are destined to die alone and unhappy.

duh.

[kir mokum]

balls!

[Revolver]

Originally Posted by kir mokum

generally doesn't do well in the women dept. and is destined to die alone and unhappy.

that cracks me up everytime!

basically the first thing im going to say over our first shot of whiskey lol!

[kir mokum]

it better come before "hello".

[ebbomega]

If you look at today's super-wealthy though in the world there's still a lot of the infidelity and detachment between love and marriage that you've seen throughout history. That doesn't mean that the concept of marriage itself isn't rooted in love. The politics of what marriage is supposed to be about is a lot different than what the words being said and the rites being performed are actually about. I'd venture to guess that you'd agree that most organized religions eventually dissociate themselves from what their word is preaching and miss the point entirely. Those are the same people that today are shouting that marriage is about a man and a woman (and no variations) as opposed to being about love.

That being said, I agree with your assertion that a little bit more sanity started picking up the idea around about Jane Austen's time. But that's not where love began in marriage.

[kir mokum]

i think you should read the whole of the first article. if you want to argue where love began in marriage you'll need to define love and to what extent it plays a role in marriage. in several periods it was frowned upon to love your wife the way we think of love. through the history of western civilization marriage has been about acquisition of wealth and power. i don't think what was originally intended really makes a difference, and very difficult to pin down as well as it is such an old tradition. i think what it actually was and how it was viewed after that is much more poignant (actions speak louder than words, as they say). it may very well have been the original intent of the tradition but what does that prove? that my wording was technically incorrect? it doesn't change the long long history of marriage being a tradition for the accumulation of wealth, power, social status, and the subjugation of women. for periods in history marriage was viewed as being secular so the value of the church argument is a bit tenuous. i would guess that it didn't even originate in the church.

intent generally means very little to me. especially in the realm of sex and love.

if you want to discuss the failures of organized and revealed religions and their consistent ability to be hypocritical then you have a long night ahead of you.

so, like i said, i see no inherent benefit to getting married (other than citizenship reasons) and i don't understand why thinking people do it. as far as the modern reason of "an outward expression of your commitment" i think saying you'll stay together forever, being faithful, and committed holds little weight compared to actually staying together forever (or even just for an extended period of time), being faithful, and committed. breaking up isn't inherently a failure either. i would guess as often as not it's for the betterment of both parties and definitely better for one of the 2. i think having a long, healthy, relationship is kind of a win/win situation.

are you guys relatively satisfied that my position has merit now?

[junglequeen]

As someone actually in the middle of an unplanned pregnancy Id like to make it clear how extremely overwhelming and emotionally exhausting it is. I have never ever felt as vulnerable as I do now. Its not easy to be pregnant or to be on the verge of becoming a parent. Its scary and stressful and your whole life seems to spin out of control. I totally understand why people want to get married before they have their child - its how we think things are supposed to go. Its our way of trying to set our lives back into balance before we bring a vulnerable new person into the world. Although I refuse to shot gun it, my previously commitment-phobic backpacker boyfriend talks about marriage frequently and not because of family pressure or religious values. The reality of becoming a Daddy has changed his priorities and now a stable family system is whats most important to him.

I suppose what Im saying is until you are in this situation you shouldn't really judge what others are doing. People change and step up when they are faced with parenthood. A baby is just as big of a commitment as a marriage and like it or not, that person you made that baby with is going to be part of your life forever. Whether you get married, split up or give it a shot as boyfriend and girlfriend your lives are entangled. All new parents deserve respect and support, regardless of the decisions they make about their relationships.