|
On May 02 2015 04:51 Djzapz wrote:
I personally don't see the point of marriage, and I think it's sad that doing it for financial reasons is a thing. Getting married for financial reasons should be possible to do with any other person at the civil level, since we're just talking about tax cuts and whatnot. And if any of those cuts have anything to do with children, then it should be child-based. It has nothing to do with some BS notion of a "spiritual" union.
I don't remember who made a joke about it, it may have been Doug Stanhope who said something to the effect that marriage is an institution that makes no sense. In this bit, he's talking to his imaginary girlfriend "Look I've been thinking for a while, we've got something great going, we've been going out for a while, it has been amazing, so why not get the government involved in our love?".
If you love someone and you intend to be united with them, know that marriage is not what you have with your partner, it's what you and your partner are declaring to the State. And the notion that you are married spiritually to someone (or whatever) is only in your head, and is symbolized by an expensive event. That's not to say it's meaningless, because these bullshit concepts have some weight in our minds, but it's still bullshit.
Yet none of this is as bad as arranged marriages which were done for practical reasons. As much as I hate marriages, I respect people's right to declare their love in a useless way that costs money. However, for obvious reasons, I can't respect the union of two people who may not love each other. At this point using marriages as currency (and by extension, using people as currency) is not acceptable.
So no marriage is not for love. Love is perfectly capable of surviving outside of marriages. In fact, it seems to be better without it. Marriage is for worthless tradition and government purposes like taxes. If you think that your present love cannot be fully expressed without government intervention, then I'm sorry :X. Oh and that leaves religious reasons which I haven't discussed because that shit's up to you.
That joke is a pretty poor analysis of marriage. The government doesn't get "involved" in marriage; the government simply recognizes your legal union when you declare it.
Can love survive without marriage? Absolutely, and plenty of people do that. However, just because you say that "marriage is not for love" doesn't make it true. All that does is scream "hipster".
If you can't see how legally unifying yourself to another person can be seen as an expression of love, then you have some thinking to do, because it's pretty basic and it's been a thing for a really long time.
|
On May 02 2015 03:49 Glowsphere wrote:
Thanks for the insiders view of arranged marriage. I'm glad at least you weren't forced into something that obviously wasn't for you. It makes me think of what the first reply said, that the important thing is people have the option to decline. Personally I kind of wish my family came from a culture that arranged marriages, because I am one of those people that don't want to deal with the dating culture. It seems foolhardy to me, like the blind leading the blind, with people often ending up decades later in a mid life crises and full of regrets. It seems more sensible to me to have two families join together for the purpose of rearing children, rather than have two individuals (with no parenting experience) making a go on their own.
No problem. It's just one of those concepts that is very easy to misunderstand regardless of your experience with it. As for your last sentence, especially in the modern arranged marriages, you're also making the assumption they even want to have children, though I can tell you that if someone doesn't want kids, very few, if any such arrangements would work. At least in South or southeast Asia, anyhow. I can't speak for China.
And agreed with Stratos on his last post, I can see why people are opposed to it, but there's a reason it's still there.
|
On May 02 2015 06:57 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 04:51 Djzapz wrote:
I personally don't see the point of marriage, and I think it's sad that doing it for financial reasons is a thing. Getting married for financial reasons should be possible to do with any other person at the civil level, since we're just talking about tax cuts and whatnot. And if any of those cuts have anything to do with children, then it should be child-based. It has nothing to do with some BS notion of a "spiritual" union.
I don't remember who made a joke about it, it may have been Doug Stanhope who said something to the effect that marriage is an institution that makes no sense. In this bit, he's talking to his imaginary girlfriend "Look I've been thinking for a while, we've got something great going, we've been going out for a while, it has been amazing, so why not get the government involved in our love?".
If you love someone and you intend to be united with them, know that marriage is not what you have with your partner, it's what you and your partner are declaring to the State. And the notion that you are married spiritually to someone (or whatever) is only in your head, and is symbolized by an expensive event. That's not to say it's meaningless, because these bullshit concepts have some weight in our minds, but it's still bullshit.
Yet none of this is as bad as arranged marriages which were done for practical reasons. As much as I hate marriages, I respect people's right to declare their love in a useless way that costs money. However, for obvious reasons, I can't respect the union of two people who may not love each other. At this point using marriages as currency (and by extension, using people as currency) is not acceptable.
So no marriage is not for love. Love is perfectly capable of surviving outside of marriages. In fact, it seems to be better without it. Marriage is for worthless tradition and government purposes like taxes. If you think that your present love cannot be fully expressed without government intervention, then I'm sorry :X. Oh and that leaves religious reasons which I haven't discussed because that shit's up to you. That joke is a pretty poor analysis of marriage. The government doesn't get "involved" in marriage; the government simply recognizes your legal union when you declare it. Can love survive without marriage? Absolutely, and plenty of people do that. However, just because you say that "marriage is not for love" doesn't make it true. All that does is scream "hipster". If you can't see how legally unifying yourself to another person can be seen as an expression of love, then you have some thinking to do, because it's pretty basic and it's been a thing for a really long time.
First, that joke's poor analysis of marriage obviously. It was to preface my next points. Criticizing a joke on its merit as an "analysis" of something is a waste of everybody's time. It brings something up, which is not indicative of the entire topic that we're discussing, but marriage these days very much is a process which involves government. Thus the joke is not entirely pointless.
Second, I don't think you understood what I said because I'm not saying that marriage is not for love, I'm merely saying that I think it's a tradition with massive flaws. As for your suggestion that I might be a hipster, you're ridiculous, what even, I would never even think of trying to pass that off as an argument on the internet. If you're under the impression that my reasons for not being too fond of marriages are unique to me, you're mistaken.
Third, I do see how legally "unifying" yourself with another person can be seen as an expression of love, it's just not one that convinces me for multiple reasons. For one, it's only an expression of love because it's seen as a risk and an investment. There may be other reasons, like the perception that marriage is a declaration of love, but having been in love myself, I can safely say that the most loved I've personally felt was not when she brought up marriage... It means nothing to me. With a marriage proposal, showing the other person that you love them by essentially gambling on success, while being fully aware that a large number of marriages fail, many of those end up in legal nightmares, and other marriages involve two miserable people trying to make it last. It shows confidence, which isn't necessarily bad, but it's not my thing, not in that context.
I think that it's pertinent enough to mention that marriage has lots to do with government. I did mention legal hell. As for the idea that marriage has been a thing for a really long time, as if that was some sort of argument, I think you should go back to OP and see what marriage was for the longest of time.
Marriages for love are a fairly recent thing. Marriages costing tens of thousands of dollars outside of super wealthy families are a fairly recent thing. Hell, the modern State and practical weddings for tax reasons are also a fairly recent things, whereas marriage used to be family things and religious reasons. Your assertion that I have "some thinking to do" because marriage has been around for a really long time shows that you in fact have some thinking to do.
And you're perfectly free to disagree with me, I recognize many reasons for marriage. Practical reasons for government and financial affairs. Religious and traditional reasons. I also understand the social pressure and the social value that goes around marriage, namely the idea that if you really love someone you'll gamble that it'll be eternal so you should do it. But stripping the notion of marriage naked, it's a worthless institution. If I wanted to formally declare my love to someone, to me it doesn't matter if it's called marriage or turbo-binding-contract-of-doom. If it means something to me, then it's great. It so happens that I don't necessarily care about this concept under the banner of "marriage", a notion with the connotation of religion (which I don't adhere to) and forced marriages (see OP). And if you care to dig into this hipster's head, I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to getting married myself even though I consider it a worthless institution on the human level. I'd get married if my girlfriend wanted to and I thought I was good for the long run, and I would give to said marriage whatever symbolic value I felt was meaningful for myself.
I don't know if I'm being clear, but to summarize, marriage by itself is an empty shell. You make it meaningful with your beliefs and who you are.
I honestly don't think that my views are that weird or uncommon, I just fleshed them out in a way that may seem unconventional because marriages are so normal and matter-of-fact. And perhaps you think I'm a hipster because I have this hippie-ish outlook. Be free man!!! Yeah, that's me  . And it's not because I'm bitter, or against long term relationships, quite the opposite, really. It's just that I come from parents who were never married and still go on dates, I have friends who won't get married because they don't see the point and they're perhaps the happiest people I know. I just think that love speaks for itself, and it can be declared over and over, formally or informally, so long as it's genuine. Outside of the religious and traditional justification for marriages I think that to some extent, the importance (some) people give to marriage stems from their fear of change, as if getting married would protect their relationship from failure, even today. I mean, it would make sense, seeing how originally marriages were more about a man's ownership of a woman, or some such (depending on culture and era). Wouldn't want bae to cheat!
|
On May 02 2015 09:21 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 06:57 Stratos_speAr wrote:On May 02 2015 04:51 Djzapz wrote:
I personally don't see the point of marriage, and I think it's sad that doing it for financial reasons is a thing. Getting married for financial reasons should be possible to do with any other person at the civil level, since we're just talking about tax cuts and whatnot. And if any of those cuts have anything to do with children, then it should be child-based. It has nothing to do with some BS notion of a "spiritual" union.
I don't remember who made a joke about it, it may have been Doug Stanhope who said something to the effect that marriage is an institution that makes no sense. In this bit, he's talking to his imaginary girlfriend "Look I've been thinking for a while, we've got something great going, we've been going out for a while, it has been amazing, so why not get the government involved in our love?".
If you love someone and you intend to be united with them, know that marriage is not what you have with your partner, it's what you and your partner are declaring to the State. And the notion that you are married spiritually to someone (or whatever) is only in your head, and is symbolized by an expensive event. That's not to say it's meaningless, because these bullshit concepts have some weight in our minds, but it's still bullshit.
Yet none of this is as bad as arranged marriages which were done for practical reasons. As much as I hate marriages, I respect people's right to declare their love in a useless way that costs money. However, for obvious reasons, I can't respect the union of two people who may not love each other. At this point using marriages as currency (and by extension, using people as currency) is not acceptable.
So no marriage is not for love. Love is perfectly capable of surviving outside of marriages. In fact, it seems to be better without it. Marriage is for worthless tradition and government purposes like taxes. If you think that your present love cannot be fully expressed without government intervention, then I'm sorry :X. Oh and that leaves religious reasons which I haven't discussed because that shit's up to you. That joke is a pretty poor analysis of marriage. The government doesn't get "involved" in marriage; the government simply recognizes your legal union when you declare it. Can love survive without marriage? Absolutely, and plenty of people do that. However, just because you say that "marriage is not for love" doesn't make it true. All that does is scream "hipster". If you can't see how legally unifying yourself to another person can be seen as an expression of love, then you have some thinking to do, because it's pretty basic and it's been a thing for a really long time. First, that joke's poor analysis of marriage obviously. It was to preface my next points. Criticizing a joke on its merit as an "analysis" of something is a waste of everybody's time. It brings something up, which is not indicative of the entire topic that we're discussing, but marriage these days very much is a process which involves government. Thus the joke is not entirely pointless. Second, I don't think you understood what I said because I'm not saying that marriage is not for love, I'm merely saying that I think it's a tradition with massive flaws. As for your suggestion that I might be a hipster, you're ridiculous, what even, I would never even think of trying to pass that off as an argument on the internet. If you're under the impression that my reasons for not being too fond of marriages are unique to me, you're mistaken. Third, I do see how legally "unifying" yourself with another person can be seen as an expression of love, it's just not one that convinces me for multiple reasons. For one, it's only an expression of love because it's seen as a risk and an investment. There may be other reasons, like the perception that marriage is a declaration of love, but having been in love myself, I can safely say that the most loved I've personally felt was not when she brought up marriage... It means nothing to me. With a marriage proposal, showing the other person that you love them by essentially gambling on success, while being fully aware that a large number of marriages fail, many of those end up in legal nightmares, and other marriages involve two miserable people trying to make it last. It shows confidence, which isn't necessarily bad, but it's not my thing, not in that context. I think that it's pertinent enough to mention that marriage has lots to do with government. I did mention legal hell. As for the idea that marriage has been a thing for a really long time, as if that was some sort of argument, I think you should go back to OP and see what marriage was for the longest of time. Marriages for love are a fairly recent thing. Marriages costing tens of thousands of dollars outside of super wealthy families are a fairly recent thing. Hell, the modern State and practical weddings for tax reasons are also a fairly recent things, whereas marriage used to be family things and religious reasons. Your assertion that I have "some thinking to do" because marriage has been around for a really long time shows that you in fact have some thinking to do. And you're perfectly free to disagree with me, I recognize many reasons for marriage. Practical reasons for government and financial affairs. Religious and traditional reasons. I also understand the social pressure and the social value that goes around marriage, namely the idea that if you really love someone you'll gamble that it'll be eternal so you should do it. But stripping the notion of marriage naked, it's a worthless institution. If I wanted to formally declare my love to someone, to me it doesn't matter if it's called marriage or turbo-binding-contract-of-doom. If it means something to me, then it's great. It so happens that I don't necessarily care about this concept under the banner of "marriage", a notion with the connotation of religion (which I don't adhere to) and forced marriages (see OP). And if you care to dig into this hipster's head, I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to getting married myself even though I consider it a worthless institution on the human level. I'd get married if my girlfriend wanted to and I thought I was good for the long run, and I would give to said marriage whatever symbolic value I felt was meaningful for myself. I don't know if I'm being clear, but to summarize, marriage by itself is an empty shell. You make it meaningful with your beliefs and who you are. I honestly don't think that my views are that weird or uncommon, I just fleshed them out in a way that may seem unconventional because marriages are so normal and matter-of-fact. And perhaps you think I'm a hipster because I have this hippie-ish outlook. Be free man!!! Yeah, that's me . And it's not because I'm bitter, or against long term relationships, quite the opposite, really. It's just that I come from parents who were never married and still go on dates, I have friends who won't get married because they don't see the point and they're perhaps the happiest people I know. I just think that love speaks for itself, and it can be declared over and over, formally or informally, so long as it's genuine. Outside of the religious and traditional justification for marriages I think that to some extent, the importance (some) people give to marriage stems from their fear of change, as if getting married would protect their relationship from failure, even today. I mean, it would make sense, seeing how originally marriages were more about a man's ownership of a woman, or some such (depending on culture and era). Wouldn't want bae to cheat!
What you posted here is much more clear. In your first post, you literally said, "marriage isn't about love", and did so in a critical tone, so it was confusing what you were trying to convey. I fully agree that marriage doesn't have much worth in-and-of-itself, but it is given the worth that you put into it.
With all of that said, I do believe that there is a tangible difference between words and actions; professing your love with words is one thing, but actually stepping up to the plate and legally binding yourself to another individual is another. It's easy to throw out the "I love you's" and the "we'll be together forever's", as they are just words, but legally tying your societal well-being to another individual takes a certain level of commitment (or foolishness) that tends to be on a whole different level.
|
On May 02 2015 09:54 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 09:21 Djzapz wrote:On May 02 2015 06:57 Stratos_speAr wrote:On May 02 2015 04:51 Djzapz wrote:
I personally don't see the point of marriage, and I think it's sad that doing it for financial reasons is a thing. Getting married for financial reasons should be possible to do with any other person at the civil level, since we're just talking about tax cuts and whatnot. And if any of those cuts have anything to do with children, then it should be child-based. It has nothing to do with some BS notion of a "spiritual" union.
I don't remember who made a joke about it, it may have been Doug Stanhope who said something to the effect that marriage is an institution that makes no sense. In this bit, he's talking to his imaginary girlfriend "Look I've been thinking for a while, we've got something great going, we've been going out for a while, it has been amazing, so why not get the government involved in our love?".
If you love someone and you intend to be united with them, know that marriage is not what you have with your partner, it's what you and your partner are declaring to the State. And the notion that you are married spiritually to someone (or whatever) is only in your head, and is symbolized by an expensive event. That's not to say it's meaningless, because these bullshit concepts have some weight in our minds, but it's still bullshit.
Yet none of this is as bad as arranged marriages which were done for practical reasons. As much as I hate marriages, I respect people's right to declare their love in a useless way that costs money. However, for obvious reasons, I can't respect the union of two people who may not love each other. At this point using marriages as currency (and by extension, using people as currency) is not acceptable.
So no marriage is not for love. Love is perfectly capable of surviving outside of marriages. In fact, it seems to be better without it. Marriage is for worthless tradition and government purposes like taxes. If you think that your present love cannot be fully expressed without government intervention, then I'm sorry :X. Oh and that leaves religious reasons which I haven't discussed because that shit's up to you. That joke is a pretty poor analysis of marriage. The government doesn't get "involved" in marriage; the government simply recognizes your legal union when you declare it. Can love survive without marriage? Absolutely, and plenty of people do that. However, just because you say that "marriage is not for love" doesn't make it true. All that does is scream "hipster". If you can't see how legally unifying yourself to another person can be seen as an expression of love, then you have some thinking to do, because it's pretty basic and it's been a thing for a really long time. First, that joke's poor analysis of marriage obviously. It was to preface my next points. Criticizing a joke on its merit as an "analysis" of something is a waste of everybody's time. It brings something up, which is not indicative of the entire topic that we're discussing, but marriage these days very much is a process which involves government. Thus the joke is not entirely pointless. Second, I don't think you understood what I said because I'm not saying that marriage is not for love, I'm merely saying that I think it's a tradition with massive flaws. As for your suggestion that I might be a hipster, you're ridiculous, what even, I would never even think of trying to pass that off as an argument on the internet. If you're under the impression that my reasons for not being too fond of marriages are unique to me, you're mistaken. Third, I do see how legally "unifying" yourself with another person can be seen as an expression of love, it's just not one that convinces me for multiple reasons. For one, it's only an expression of love because it's seen as a risk and an investment. There may be other reasons, like the perception that marriage is a declaration of love, but having been in love myself, I can safely say that the most loved I've personally felt was not when she brought up marriage... It means nothing to me. With a marriage proposal, showing the other person that you love them by essentially gambling on success, while being fully aware that a large number of marriages fail, many of those end up in legal nightmares, and other marriages involve two miserable people trying to make it last. It shows confidence, which isn't necessarily bad, but it's not my thing, not in that context. I think that it's pertinent enough to mention that marriage has lots to do with government. I did mention legal hell. As for the idea that marriage has been a thing for a really long time, as if that was some sort of argument, I think you should go back to OP and see what marriage was for the longest of time. Marriages for love are a fairly recent thing. Marriages costing tens of thousands of dollars outside of super wealthy families are a fairly recent thing. Hell, the modern State and practical weddings for tax reasons are also a fairly recent things, whereas marriage used to be family things and religious reasons. Your assertion that I have "some thinking to do" because marriage has been around for a really long time shows that you in fact have some thinking to do. And you're perfectly free to disagree with me, I recognize many reasons for marriage. Practical reasons for government and financial affairs. Religious and traditional reasons. I also understand the social pressure and the social value that goes around marriage, namely the idea that if you really love someone you'll gamble that it'll be eternal so you should do it. But stripping the notion of marriage naked, it's a worthless institution. If I wanted to formally declare my love to someone, to me it doesn't matter if it's called marriage or turbo-binding-contract-of-doom. If it means something to me, then it's great. It so happens that I don't necessarily care about this concept under the banner of "marriage", a notion with the connotation of religion (which I don't adhere to) and forced marriages (see OP). And if you care to dig into this hipster's head, I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to getting married myself even though I consider it a worthless institution on the human level. I'd get married if my girlfriend wanted to and I thought I was good for the long run, and I would give to said marriage whatever symbolic value I felt was meaningful for myself. I don't know if I'm being clear, but to summarize, marriage by itself is an empty shell. You make it meaningful with your beliefs and who you are. I honestly don't think that my views are that weird or uncommon, I just fleshed them out in a way that may seem unconventional because marriages are so normal and matter-of-fact. And perhaps you think I'm a hipster because I have this hippie-ish outlook. Be free man!!! Yeah, that's me . And it's not because I'm bitter, or against long term relationships, quite the opposite, really. It's just that I come from parents who were never married and still go on dates, I have friends who won't get married because they don't see the point and they're perhaps the happiest people I know. I just think that love speaks for itself, and it can be declared over and over, formally or informally, so long as it's genuine. Outside of the religious and traditional justification for marriages I think that to some extent, the importance (some) people give to marriage stems from their fear of change, as if getting married would protect their relationship from failure, even today. I mean, it would make sense, seeing how originally marriages were more about a man's ownership of a woman, or some such (depending on culture and era). Wouldn't want bae to cheat! What you posted here is much more clear. In your first post, you literally said, "marriage isn't about love", and did so in a critical tone, so it was confusing what you were trying to convey. I fully agree that marriage doesn't have much worth in-and-of-itself, but it is given the worth that you put into it. With all of that said, I do believe that there is a tangible difference between words and actions; professing your love with words is one thing, but actually stepping up to the plate and legally binding yourself to another individual is another. It's easy to throw out the "I love you's" and the "we'll be together forever's", as they are just words, but legally tying your societal well-being to another individual takes a certain level of commitment (or foolishness) that tends to be on a whole different level.
In that case I apologize for my calculated passive-aggressive remarks.
|
Some quotes on marriages:
+ Show Spoiler +By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy; if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher. - Socrates
Marriage is a mistake every man should make. - Jessel
I have learned that only two things are necessary to keep one's wife happy. First, let her think she's having her own way. And second, let her have it. - Johnson
Men marry women with the hope they will never change. Women marry men with the hope they will change. Invariably they are both disappointed. - Einstein
My husband and I have never considered divorce… murder sometimes, but never divorce. - Joyce Brothers
Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who wants to live in an institution? - Groucho Marx
Love: A temporary insanity curable by marriage. - Bierce
In my house I’m the boss, my wife is just the decision maker. - Woody Allen
Before you marry a person, you should first make them use a computer with slow Internet to see who they really are. - Will Ferrell
There's only one way to have a happy marriage and as soon as I learn what it is I'll get married again. - Clint Eastwood
|
On May 02 2015 19:02 helpman169 wrote:Some quotes on marriages: + Show Spoiler +By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy; if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher. - Socrates
Marriage is a mistake every man should make. - Jessel
I have learned that only two things are necessary to keep one's wife happy. First, let her think she's having her own way. And second, let her have it. - Johnson
Men marry women with the hope they will never change. Women marry men with the hope they will change. Invariably they are both disappointed. - Einstein
My husband and I have never considered divorce… murder sometimes, but never divorce. - Joyce Brothers
Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who wants to live in an institution? - Groucho Marx
Love: A temporary insanity curable by marriage. - Bierce
In my house I’m the boss, my wife is just the decision maker. - Woody Allen
Before you marry a person, you should first make them use a computer with slow Internet to see who they really are. - Will Ferrell
There's only one way to have a happy marriage and as soon as I learn what it is I'll get married again. - Clint Eastwood
Before you marry a person, you should first make them use a computer with slow Internet to see who they really are. - Will Ferrell
Man, I love that one. When I have a slow connection or I'm lagging for whatever reason, my inner demons come out and it's not a pretty thing to see. Or to hear.
|
On May 02 2015 02:51 Half the Sky wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2015 02:55 Glowsphere wrote:
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? Show nested quote +On May 01 2015 03:57 soul55555 wrote:
I bet a lot of the TL'ers who are married are spring chickens. How long have you guys been married for? Oh my, this topic hits way too close to home for me. Too close, almost for comfort. I've been married for a bit more than four years (not arranged, we met in graduate school), but I also come from a very conservative culture where even when I lived in the Western world, I still had the deal with the pressure of possibly having an arranged marriage. From my personal experience, it was a nightmare in every sense of the word (especially being female). But at the same time, I realise that is not the way others who were subject to arranged marriages have dealt with it. How smoothly an arranged marriage goes down ultimately comes down to the relationship between the children and the parents (the de facto matchmakers). There are also regional variances to this. If the child is on the same track with the parents as to what they want out of life, etc. then the vast majority of the times things are actually going to be fine. There are people who legitimately don't want to deal with the dating world and the dating culture (especially in today's internet age of all these crazy dating apps that in reality can make more complicated). The parents are actually seen as a filter and in that sense, that actually CAN be a good thing. Unfortunately (as was the case in my life), my parents (particularly my mother) has a very different idea of what she wanted in a spouse for me (let's just say it wasn't as open-minded as my views) compared to myself. That's when things go south really quickly. End of the day, it's a competition between the "knowing what is best for yourself" mentality and "the parents know better for their child because they have raised the child" mentality. And it becomes more complicated the older one is. Personally I don't see one as "inferior" to the other, provided that the child had consent and there was mutual consent involved, as is the case with a love marriage. And I've seen poor choices made in marriages of both types.I have no hard statistics, but I would bet that arranged marriages have lower rates of divorce only because of the cultures and the pressures that come with those cultures. And not because of the marriages or how that marriage came to light.
I am like basically on the other side of that XD
I, my parents, and someone's parents think their kids could make a great couple and I agree. So I listened to those parents and moved too fast- she is not amused, understandably.
I must simply be myself though- her parents don't approve for nothing. She makes the ultimate decision though, and I am actually thankful for that (thereby stating my agreement with HtS)
|
On May 02 2015 19:16 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 19:02 helpman169 wrote:Some quotes on marriages: + Show Spoiler +By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy; if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher. - Socrates
Marriage is a mistake every man should make. - Jessel
I have learned that only two things are necessary to keep one's wife happy. First, let her think she's having her own way. And second, let her have it. - Johnson
Men marry women with the hope they will never change. Women marry men with the hope they will change. Invariably they are both disappointed. - Einstein
My husband and I have never considered divorce… murder sometimes, but never divorce. - Joyce Brothers
Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who wants to live in an institution? - Groucho Marx
Love: A temporary insanity curable by marriage. - Bierce
In my house I’m the boss, my wife is just the decision maker. - Woody Allen
Before you marry a person, you should first make them use a computer with slow Internet to see who they really are. - Will Ferrell
There's only one way to have a happy marriage and as soon as I learn what it is I'll get married again. - Clint Eastwood Show nested quote +Before you marry a person, you should first make them use a computer with slow Internet to see who they really are. - Will Ferrell Man, I love that one. When I have a slow connection or I'm lagging for whatever reason, my inner demons come out and it's not a pretty thing to see. Or to hear.
CHUPAZIIIIIIII!!! HIJOLE PUTO I CALL TIME WARNER
WHY AM I PAYING TOO MUCH I SWITCH TO Verizon
(Switches to local cheap ISP that offers gigabit Internet)
Slam
Is always
Happy
:D
|
Japan11362 Posts
On May 02 2015 19:16 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2015 19:02 helpman169 wrote:Some quotes on marriages: + Show Spoiler +By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy; if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher. - Socrates
Marriage is a mistake every man should make. - Jessel
I have learned that only two things are necessary to keep one's wife happy. First, let her think she's having her own way. And second, let her have it. - Johnson
Men marry women with the hope they will never change. Women marry men with the hope they will change. Invariably they are both disappointed. - Einstein
My husband and I have never considered divorce… murder sometimes, but never divorce. - Joyce Brothers
Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who wants to live in an institution? - Groucho Marx
Love: A temporary insanity curable by marriage. - Bierce
In my house I’m the boss, my wife is just the decision maker. - Woody Allen
Before you marry a person, you should first make them use a computer with slow Internet to see who they really are. - Will Ferrell
There's only one way to have a happy marriage and as soon as I learn what it is I'll get married again. - Clint Eastwood Show nested quote +Before you marry a person, you should first make them use a computer with slow Internet to see who they really are. - Will Ferrell Man, I love that one. When I have a slow connection or I'm lagging for whatever reason, my inner demons come out and it's not a pretty thing to see. Or to hear.
Slow net connection. Oh how I know you so much. Sucks to meet you regularly.
LOL indeed.
|
I study in financial and risk management. No way I'm gonna sign such a lousy contract :p
In more seriousness, my parents were never married (while being together until my father died) and I'm currently happy in a longterm relationship for 7 years. I do not believe you need "proofs of love" and I see more cons than pros so my skeptic mind set just don't see the point (for me). Other people are free to do as they wish (with consent) even though I question the rationality behind it.
On a more practical note I could see marriage being a good thing if one party has to sacrifice a lot for the relationship. Like stay at home parents. In that case I could see it being an insurance against the break-up with benefits to compensate for the sacrifice once the couple exists no longer. But it may be my background talking here :p
|
"Love" is a vague thing. Marriage is real.
Aaand, love is the thing which is sold to you by society and aggressive marketing (valentine's day, romance movies, blue pill guys, girls reading stupid magazines). Love is just an affection, which tends to fade away by the time.
I highly advise (to guys mostly) educate yourself on marriage, dont listen to your mom, aunt, school teacher. Talk to real guys, read forums and etc. Afaik in western world divorce fucks up you really hard, especially guys (since they are most earners). Your wife can cheat on you and you can't do anything about it. There is no punishment for adultery. She keeps babies, you pay alimony (for wife) and child custody. Plus she takes half of your assets. Eventhough marriage failed because of her. If you don't or can't pay, you get jailed.
Think hard, think hard man, before putting that wedding ring.
its strong NO when it comes to marriage by love. Arrangement? meh. Marriage is only good when both parties benefit from it in real way. Like social benefits, discounts, access to some establishments. Other than that its a burden.
|
On May 04 2015 14:10 saddaromma wrote:
"Love" is a vague thing. Marriage is real.
Aaand, love is the thing which is sold to you by society and aggressive marketing (valentine's day, romance movies, blue pill guys, girls reading stupid magazines). Love is just an affection, which tends to fade away by the time.
I highly advise (to guys mostly) educate yourself on marriage, dont listen to your mom, aunt, school teacher. Talk to real guys, read forums and etc. Afaik in western world divorce fucks up you really hard, especially guys (since they are most earners). Your wife can cheat on you and you can't do anything about it. There is no punishment for adultery. She keeps babies, you pay alimony (for wife) and child custody. Plus she takes half of your assets. Eventhough marriage failed because of her. If you don't or can't pay, you get jailed.
Think hard, think hard man, before putting that wedding ring.
its strong NO when it comes to marriage by love. Arrangement? meh. Marriage is only good when both parties benefit from it in real way. Like social benefits, discounts, access to some establishments. Other than that its a burden.
Imo you are greatly exaggerating the burden of the male and bias in favor of females when it comes to divorce. Also the concept of love and marriage were around way before this "aggressive marketing" that you are referring to. Such a complex notion that has different meaning cross culturally can't be boiled down and dismissed so easily as some sham that is sold to the gullible masses.
|
On May 04 2015 14:19 Slaughter wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2015 14:10 saddaromma wrote:
"Love" is a vague thing. Marriage is real.
Aaand, love is the thing which is sold to you by society and aggressive marketing (valentine's day, romance movies, blue pill guys, girls reading stupid magazines). Love is just an affection, which tends to fade away by the time.
I highly advise (to guys mostly) educate yourself on marriage, dont listen to your mom, aunt, school teacher. Talk to real guys, read forums and etc. Afaik in western world divorce fucks up you really hard, especially guys (since they are most earners). Your wife can cheat on you and you can't do anything about it. There is no punishment for adultery. She keeps babies, you pay alimony (for wife) and child custody. Plus she takes half of your assets. Eventhough marriage failed because of her. If you don't or can't pay, you get jailed.
Think hard, think hard man, before putting that wedding ring.
its strong NO when it comes to marriage by love. Arrangement? meh. Marriage is only good when both parties benefit from it in real way. Like social benefits, discounts, access to some establishments. Other than that its a burden.
Imo you are greatly exaggerating the burden of the male and bias in favor of females when it comes to divorce. Also the concept of love and marriage were around way before this "aggressive marketing" that you are referring to. Such a complex notion that has different meaning cross culturally can't be boiled down and dismissed so easily as some sham that is sold to the gullible masses.
Oh please, I don't have anything against "concept of love", I just don't like its being forced on us. And I hope, you don't really draw "love and glory was a thing back then" conclusion from fairy tales. People were much simpler in old days. Wife is a child factory and husband is farmer/warrior, and everyone minds their own business. Families made unions by arranging marriages. They never tell about old couples loving each other in stories. Its always young people falling in love, hence 'the affection'.
I'm not really exaggerating on divorces. 95% divorces children end up being with mother. All mother needs, is not to be an alcoholic and not on drugs, its 100% guarantee she gets children.
And this is my experience talking, not some shit I read in forums. I'm married 6 years already. Eventhough my marriage is doing fine, which I don't attribute to signing the paper and saying "I do". Its just we had a luck with my wife that we are soulmates and we could easily live together without marrying. However I have brother, friends and colleagues who have/have been married. And some of them are in deep shit. Which I'm not gonna dwelve into, since its too much story and way out of this topic.
|
On May 04 2015 15:04 saddaromma wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2015 14:19 Slaughter wrote:On May 04 2015 14:10 saddaromma wrote:
"Love" is a vague thing. Marriage is real.
Aaand, love is the thing which is sold to you by society and aggressive marketing (valentine's day, romance movies, blue pill guys, girls reading stupid magazines). Love is just an affection, which tends to fade away by the time.
I highly advise (to guys mostly) educate yourself on marriage, dont listen to your mom, aunt, school teacher. Talk to real guys, read forums and etc. Afaik in western world divorce fucks up you really hard, especially guys (since they are most earners). Your wife can cheat on you and you can't do anything about it. There is no punishment for adultery. She keeps babies, you pay alimony (for wife) and child custody. Plus she takes half of your assets. Eventhough marriage failed because of her. If you don't or can't pay, you get jailed.
Think hard, think hard man, before putting that wedding ring.
its strong NO when it comes to marriage by love. Arrangement? meh. Marriage is only good when both parties benefit from it in real way. Like social benefits, discounts, access to some establishments. Other than that its a burden.
Imo you are greatly exaggerating the burden of the male and bias in favor of females when it comes to divorce. Also the concept of love and marriage were around way before this "aggressive marketing" that you are referring to. Such a complex notion that has different meaning cross culturally can't be boiled down and dismissed so easily as some sham that is sold to the gullible masses. Oh please, I don't have anything against "concept of love", I just don't like its being forced on us. And I hope, you don't really draw "love and glory was a thing back then" conclusion from fairy tales. People were much simpler in old days. Wife is a child factory and husband is farmer/warrior, and everyone minds their own business. Families made unions by arranging marriages. They never tell about old couples loving each other in stories. Its always young people falling in love, hence 'the affection'. I'm not really exaggerating on divorces. 95% divorces children end up being with mother. All mother needs, is not to be an alcoholic and not on drugs, its 100% guarantee she gets children. And this is my experience talking, not some shit I read in forums. I'm married 6 years already. Eventhough my marriage is doing fine, which I don't attribute to signing the paper and saying "I do". Its just we had a luck with my wife that we are soulmates and we could easily live together without marrying. However I have brother, friends and colleagues who have/have been married. And some of them are in deep shit. Which I'm not gonna dwelve into, since its too much story and way out of this topic.
There are plenty of love tales stretching all the way back to the classical era. Couples growing old together is not something that was invented by some 20th century American marketing department.
Diminishing women's roles to "child factory" is incredibly demeaning, and historically incorrect. The statement "everyone minded their own business" is incorrect as well, considering there was zero privacy in the villages of old (privacy is actually a relatively new phenomenon). Everyone knew what everyone else was doing, and social pressure was enormous since doing something taboo (such as divorcing your spouse) could well result in you being shunned by the only social circle you had.
The reason marriage became an institution is because it promoted social stability, and especially in older societies, prevented inbreeding since you usually married someone of another clan or village. This would also mean that the kin ties between those clans and villages got intertwined, which again, promoted social stability. If anything, the current ridiculously elevated divorce rate is showing what happens if the idea of marriage loses its significance: the poverty rate as well as the risk of falling into poverty among single parent families is staggering: raising a child on a single person's salary is a heavy financial burden that few people can afford.
Sure, love can exist without marriage, but the idea of marriage is in se to dissuade couples from breaking up: you're married now, you have children, you better stick together because divorcing is going to be a legal and social hell. The state wants couples with children to stay together, which is why there are various cohabitation arrangements as well (here in Belgium, legal cohabitation is practically the same as being married). Single parent families are usually a burden on the state since more often than not those people are on some kind of benefit regime.
|
Single and late 20s atm, in terms of viewpoint.
What I've learned, from my outside perspective, is that marriage/'true' love is about a decision to commit to it, rather than just fleeting feelings. Emotions are an important side of the coin, but the rational 'logic' side generally needs to be involved as well for there to be long term success. I don't believe that emotions and logic are exclusive, but rather opposite sides of the same coin. They are interconnected and must both be utilized and strengthened for either one of them to obtain the best results. That's starting to stray into my personal musings on typology, though.
It doesn't seem to matter if (the road to) a marriage starts due to 'emotion' (love) or 'logic' (arranged), either one can come before the other. In an arranged marriage, it's fairly obvious that the emotional side would be second to arrive - but there's plenty of stories of arranged marriages where the people involved did come to love each other. In any case, both parties would still need to actually commit to it, or it'll have just as many problems as those that are only founded on the emotional side and then crash and burn later when the flames of passion fade, due to an inadequate foundation.
History has already proven that both methods can be successful. It has also proven that both methods can fail quite spectacularly. It does take two, however. If one person is trying to stick it out and the other party has no interest in making it easy to do so, that's just a one-sided bundle of stress waiting to explode.
Society seems to lately be doing a rather shit job at teaching the coming generations on how to maintain long term commitments, such as marriage. Much more of a focus on instant/personal selfishness. Divorce rates have skyrocketed in the last several decades, though I imagine that a fair amount of the divorce rate probably comes from there being far less stigma attached to being divorced. Large portions of humanity have been shitheads since the dawn of time, it's just that there was just so much social pressure that a lot of spouses simply put up with the bullshit in the past. Wonder what type of catalyst will be needed before we finally fix the underlying cause(s) and figure out how to be better people as a species.
|
On May 05 2015 18:42 Vortok wrote:
Large portions of humanity have been shitheads since the dawn of time, it's just that there was just so much social pressure that a lot of spouses simply put up with the bullshit in the past. Wonder what type of catalyst will be needed before we finally fix the underlying cause(s) and figure out how to be better people as a species.
The culture shift has happened and there is no going back to the old ways of less personal freedom and more social pressure. It's not like marriage is the holy grail of human society and we need to somehow "fix" society and bring it back.
Human culture is under constant evolution and the individuals can do nothing on their own to change the dynamics of a culture. That is because everything is interconnected, the individual motivation, the innate biological human behaviors, the infrastructure, the societal organisation, the laws and the government , the gender dynamics, the working environments, the social psychology, etc. Fixing one piece of the puzzle will change the dynamics of all other pieces.
|
Im 22 and ive been married for 3 1/2 years now. Having said that i view it as nothing but a piece of paper that reduces my taxes and gives me other handy benefits.
At the end of the day, as long as people are given the choice to decide what they want who gives a fuck? Why does it matter if its arranged or not.
I basically married out of circumstance, my wife grew up in a culture where marriage was everything, her family were sceptical of me because i was a white boi and her visa was expiring and she was looking at shitty options such as a work visa for a cunt boss for the next 3 years. Did i "want" to get married at that time? No, but the woman was and is the love of my life and getting married made things easier on many different levels. (because fuck yeah +£300 a month just from that crappy bit of paper <3 taxes.)
I dont think being married means anything at all (ignoring religious beliefs but i am not religious). Sure it represents a commitment to one another but if your relationship is so unstable that you need a piece of paper to tell you that you guys are happy & faithful then your relationship is bollocks. Other than legitimizing your relationship in the eyes of your god i dont see the big deal.
|
i'd like to get married for ~love someday
if somebody will ever love me and if ever i'd find the love on how i understand love
from what i've seen though marriage seems to be a terrible idea .. it's like both parties are ALWAYS trying to convince themselves that they are happy with the other person .. from my parents to other married people i know same fucking case but that mess i want it
|
What do you even mean by "love"? It's a word for many different emotions and urges. What people feel in the first weeks of a relationship is most likely not a good basis for founding a family. And founding a family is the most important reason for marrying (for me). A strong bond with a partner is very beneficial imo, call it love if you want.
If it were up to me tax cuts for married couples without children would be axed asap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
