Growing up, I knew nothing else but that marriage was a consequence and ultimate consummation of love. To suggest anything else would illicit fear and disgust. I've since learned that in many cultures, and all throughout history, marriage was more an agreement between families than individuals. I have no real life acquaintance with arranged marriage, but I wonder, is it really so inferior to marriage for so called love? Is making a long term commitment based on status, money and child rearing actually more sensible than basing it on intense but short lived emotion?
I really don't mind what the basis of marriage is, as long as the people engaging in it had the freedom to decline. Most of the time this is the real problem with arranged marriages. You don't really have a choice.
I'm not sure why marriage is even still a state institution. We have pretty great contractual law that could cover it, and you wouldn't have all this pointless bickering over the sanctity of marriage or whatever.
It shouldn't be up to the state to decide either way.
On May 01 2015 03:29 Millitron wrote: I'm not sure why marriage is even still a state institution. We have pretty great contractual law that could cover it, and you wouldn't have all this pointless bickering over the sanctity of marriage or whatever.
It shouldn't be up to the state to decide either way.
a bit off topic but I agree...
@OP Revisit this when you understand what "so called love" is :D
On May 01 2015 02:55 Glowsphere wrote: Is making a long term commitment based on status, money and child rearing actually more sensible than basing it on intense but short lived emotion?
Hahaha! What is this? If it is only intense but short lived emotion, why would you get married at all?!! I would think romance should be stronger if the two people don't really feel they need marriage to feel so strongly loved by each other, but that they shouldn't marry if it's not strong enough, so the only circumstances under which it would be sensible to marry for romance would be if they love each other enough to not need it in the slightest! (so it'd be a pointless "icing on the cake" sort of thing for couples with more money than they need).
Based on that, arranged marriages might be the only marriages that seem to have real sense behind them, but given I prefer people to get together for romance, I'm against that too. :Þ
Question: What did the people who voted for "other" mean and what did the OP intend this to (be able to) mean? What sort of other practical concerns are there? Religious tradition, where the couple may love each other but marry to please their more strongly religious parents? For status in old times (and I guess potentially still now)?
As some one who makes a living as a wedding photographer. I don't really care why people do it as long as they are still spending insane amounts of money on one day hah.
On a slightly different note, in the US, is there any point for two individuals who both work and have health benefits to get married? The tax penalties are a pain in the butt.
couple salty dudes here from first world counties afraid of women. unfortunately about a third of the women in marriages on the planet can be legally raped by their husbands. typically the more arranged ones.
marriage is kinda dated but throwing a gigantic party to celebrate that you are promissing to spend the rest of your life with someone sounds like a fun idea.
On May 01 2015 03:50 soul55555 wrote: Marriage is overrated it's better to be single. 50% of Marriages fail and your end up stuck paying child support and alimony.
Yeah, it's better to have kids without getting married and then have single parents raising said kids without you having to get your hands dirty, right? I mean, hating on the concept of child support is pretty... childish, as popular as it might be nowadays.
On May 01 2015 03:50 soul55555 wrote: Marriage is overrated it's better to be single. 50% of Marriages fail and your end up stuck paying child support and alimony.
Yeah, it's better to have kids without getting married and then have single parents raising said kids without you having to get your hands dirty, right? I mean, hating on the concept of child support is pretty... childish, as popular as it might be nowadays.
What is so childish about my statement care to explain?
On May 01 2015 03:50 soul55555 wrote: Marriage is overrated it's better to be single. 50% of Marriages fail and your end up stuck paying child support and alimony.
Because seriously, who cares about the future of a kid you conceived yourself right?
I could never imagine myself trusting a female enough to actually want to marry her. Every girl I've met comes off as being insecure, or jealous, or domineering and she inevitably thinks that she should be the center of my world and that she should be first above all else all the time. I could be with one girl and not cheat or take advantage of the situation but I still need to be and feel free to make choices and spend my time the way I want to and in a relationship that freedom is limited beyond my ability to feel unrestricted and comfortable.
It seems ridiculous to me. I don't think I could ever be married and because of this I don't think I could ever want kids, either. I feel like I'd constantly be having to explain myself and justify things to someone with a closed mind and judgmental attitude. That's too much stress for me. I tell myself that I am open to the idea of marriage and that I just haven't found the right woman yet, but the truth is, that if she's out there, she's going to have to be one super cool chick that doesn't take things too seriously and has sex like a porn star (I have found these things, but not all of them together).
I hope I explained that well enough.The dating and marriage paradigm as I see it now looks like a sham. If you are going to marry someone, though, it should be simply because you love each other.
On May 01 2015 05:21 Inertiaddict wrote: I could never imagine myself trusting a female enough to actually want to marry her. Every girl I've met comes off as being insecure, or jealous, or domineering and she inevitably thinks that she should be the center of my world and that she should be first above all else all the time. I could be with one girl and not cheat or take advantage of the situation but I still need to be and feel free to make choices and spend my time the way I want to and in a relationship that freedom is limited beyond my ability to feel unrestricted and comfortable.
It seems ridiculous to me. I don't think I could ever be married and because of this I don't think I could ever want kids, either. I feel like I'd constantly be having to explain myself and justify things to someone with a closed mind and judgmental attitude. That's too much stress for me. I tell myself that I am open to the idea of marriage and that I just haven't found the right woman yet, but the truth is, that if she's out there, she's going to have to be one super cool chick that doesn't take things too seriously and has sex like a porn star (I have found these things, but not all of them together).
I hope I explained that well enough.The dating and marriage paradigm as I see it now looks like a sham. If you are going to marry someone, though, it should be simply because you love each other.
This post just screams "I am 14-19ish years old and have no clue what I am talking about, but because I am a teenager I think I know everything".
Doesn't really matter. People who want longer commitments will find someone who feels the same and people who bounce around will bounce around. The only thing that should stop is cultural pressure for marriage as something defined in a very narrow and specific way and as something you must do or you are weird.
EPT
