What is marriage for?

[Aleksey]

Hi there!

 

In the podcast 'Paid to Not Masturbate - Sunday Call In Show December 15th, 2013' Stefan said that such thing as a contract is needed when there is no trust between parties. And if there is trust in people's relationship, contract is not necessary.

 

I totally agree with that. Indeed, I do not have a contract with my English teacher, for example. I know him very well, I want to study English and therefore I do not miss the lessons and pay for them on time. He also knows me, loves teaching and shows up at work every day. The contract is redundant.

 

This led me to think about marriage, since it is a social contract where two people promise to be together, love each other, etc. Let's assume that we live in a stateless atheistic society. Would we still have marriage?

 

Obviously, romantic relationships are the strongest and most important relationships in our life. If the less important relationship between a student and a teacher does not need a contract, why would a couple need it?

 

What would change when I get married? I will be able to call my girlfriend my wife, she will have my last name and… that's probably it. Is the purpose of marriage to only change names and make the family tree easier to follow?

 

What do you think? Am I missing something? I'd appreciate your thoughts.

 

[Psychophant]

In the podcast 'Paid to Not Masturbate - Sunday Call In Show December 15th, 2013' Stefan said that such thing as a contract is needed when there is no trust between parties. And if there is trust in people's relationship, contract is not necessary.

 

 

I agree, why would you make a contract if you trust that person, since you had any time necessary to make an informed decission and in the world we live in only in extremely rare cases only the man has to bear the major risks the contract entails. Imagine you enter in a business relationship with someone who can terminate the contract at will and get most of your assets on top of it. A weekly BDSM session is cheaper.

[PGP]

Fair point. My initial reaction is that a marriage is also about vows. When you say the words in a social forum, you better mean them. In sickness AND in health etc. Also a social recognition within families and communities that the vow has been made and that it is a value to the community and will be supported in terms of reminding the married of their vows etc. It's not in a vacuum, it needs to be fed and supported and valued as a social good. Just my opinion.

[Aleksey]

Fair point. My initial reaction is that a marriage is also about vows. When you say the words in a social forum, you better mean them. In sickness AND in health etc. Also a social recognition within families and communities that the vow has been made and that it is a value to the community and will be supported in terms of reminding the married of their vows etc. It's not in a vacuum, it needs to be fed and supported and valued as a social good. Just my opinion.

I guess that makes sense. Thanks for your reply.

 

But again, doesn't it sound like a contract? Vows are terms of a contract, and community, i.e family and friends are third parties who make sure that the terms are obeyed.

 

I had a girlfriend that I loved and she loved me back (well, at least she said so). I knew I would do anything for her and I assumed she would do anything for me, too. I never needed for her to say, that she will be helping me when I'm sick or something. That was implied, I guess. And I myself never said anything like this. In fact, that'd be as ridiculous to say as 'I will never hit you'. Who would want to hit the most important person in his life?

 

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is, do you really need vows, when you love each other?

 

And, talking about community, does my family or my friends need to wait till we get married to be able to say that there's something wrong with the relationship? I mean, assuming that community cares about the relationship, wouldn't they intervene and help regardless of the status?

[PGP]

Yes, all valid points. But, to me, marriage (in terms of vows) is primarily about children. When the vows are made and children follow, it is the vow and all the social support etc that binds through the hard times and the inevitable challenges, maintaining the marriage through the rearing of the child. The child is at the mercy of the world it comes into and the vows etc are centred around ensuring the child has the most healthy and stable upbringing as Stefan illustrates through the stats of this matter. 

You could equally say that for you and a gf it is not necessary but across whole populations, IMO it serves a useful function in this regard. 

As regards intervention by family, friends etc thats a fair point but in general the vows would suggest (ideally of course) that the couple know each other and themselves enough to commit publicly. In terms of the integrity of the individuals in the couple, it is a formal commitment to an entire life together based on shared values. Undertaking the vows, in a way necessitates the individuals to reach a point ~(in terms of self-knowledge and connection) where they can categorically commit.

I'm not saying it is absolutely necessary for everyone. In fact, in alot of cases I know of couples who never got married stayed together and raised fantastic kids approximate to what a good marriage would do, but in general I class it as a useful institution.

[MysterionMuffles]

That's a damn good question. My summer school teacher was also against State marriage so when we asked him why he did it, he said it was to symbolize the promise to unite with his wife for the rest of his life. To show everybody in both of their social circles that he wants to celebrate the day he achieved certainty in being with her, and I think social approval to some degree can really keep you on your heels. To have spent all that time and money having his friends and family, and her friends and family witness them express their vows and make their verbal contracts to each other, it binds them to an implicit clause of integrity to stay faithful to each other.

 

Great question!

Though I'd imagine that in a Free Society it would be less costly, especially when it comes to ring buying so the money you could've spent on expensive diamonds could better be used for an even more grandiose reception.

 

If I had my way, they would use diamonds for human heat powered electricity.

[Psychophant]

Also a social recognition within families and communities that the vow has been made and that it is a value to the community and will be supported in terms of reminding the married of their vows etc. It's not in a vacuum, it needs to be fed and supported and valued as a social good.

 

There is no community you are involuntary part of. If it is not in a vacuum doesn`t mean anything in terms of legitimacy.

 

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is, do you really need vows, when you love each other?

 

 

That`s right, if a vow is just a form of signing a contract, it has no meaning beyond it. I am not opposing people who are into BDSM in the same way I am not opposing people who are conservative, as long as they are not advocating the gynocentric model which "throws men under the bus."

[shirgall]

Marriage is a socially-constructed and reinforced price-fixing scheme to reframe a simple contractual agreement with ceremony, social pressure, and merchandising (and even franchising when it comes to who can actual officiate over such an event). At least it is based on (that is, exploits) instinctual feeling to child-rearing.

[WasatchMan]

A lot of great answers here.  To me a way to sum it up is, marriage is a public commitment to monogamy for the sake of a long term relationship, children, and a family.  IMO marriage is not as much about removing the need to trust someone, since that is still needed, but more about communicating and agreeing to a long term commitment. Communicating these things may seem like a little thing in life, but little things are big things.  Also, I don't think a legal contract is necessarily required for a marriage, however it may be prudent given the long term commitment req'd to raise children if that is your goal.

[dsayers]

Obviously, romantic relationships are the strongest and most important relationships in our life.

 

I would argue that the parent-child relationship is the most important one. Hitler's father beat him into a coma regularly, his mother chose that man to be his father, and how many human beings ended up murdered as a result? Abuse by a significant other has never had this extent of damage. Even if it had, that abuse was only possible because the victim was primed for victimhood by his parents.

 

I agree that the purpose of marriage is to publicly commit to garner support for the raising of children. In a free society, where peaceful interaction is the norm, would such a thing be necessary? I really don't think so. A buddy of mine who is a very rational thinker got married despite them having no intentions of having children. We recently started talking about this and he sees value in making such a public commitment also for the sake of garnering support just for their relationship.

 

I'm ambivalent. Even in the context of support for the raising of children, it seems like the more prepared somebody is for such a commitment, the less they'd need a ritual to declare it.

[Lingum]

Don't forget that marriage also functions as a personal parade day for women. Most of the guys I've heard that are adamant about marriage being unnecessary, eventually ends up getting married. I suspect they do this simply because the women want marriage as a status symbol, and are also terrified of social shaming as a result of not being married. They may say otherwise, but I'm more inclined to believe they were pressured into it by their girlfriends. In my experience, women tend to short circuit on this issue. They accept the logic, but refuse to entertain the notion that they're not going to marry one day.

 

I think the guys that openly express this view, but get married regardless, are missing the big picture altogether. The discussion on whether marriage is necessary should illuminate what values your partner has. If she feels she needs a contract for her future financial security, what does that say about her commitments? If she wants to burn through your savings for a day of ceremonious self-worship, how will this play out in your mutual finances in the future? It's interesting to note that guys like this completely abandon their "values" for the convenience of women.

 

Personally, I would consider it a giant warning if my girlfriend (hypothetical) wanted to get married.

[hannahbanana]

IMO, I don't think that marriage is that important or necessary, but I still think it would be nice to get married. For me, I would see it as a huge expression of love, commitment and pride for my partner, one of the biggest messages that you will be with this person for the rest of you life, even if others may want to think otherwise. I don't want to get married to my partner because I would "finally" feel secure in the relationship; I would want to get married because I'd be basically saying to them "I am willing to become an integral part of your life, for the rest of my life (taking on the same last name, etc.)." Imagine how wonderful that would feel for the person I'd be getting married to!

 

Again, I don't think it's necessary, and may even become outdated in the future. And that's fine with me. But I'd personally want to take as many opportunities to express love and respect for my partner as I can.

[QueechoFeecho]

Prospective spouses should follow the usual rules of rational discussion, meaning defining what it means ahead if time. Seems wise for all [intended-to-be] long term relationships.

[tasmlab]

I recently officiated (more like emceed) an atheist wedding.  We spent some time on this, and the vow/declaration isn't just between the two getting married, but an inclusion of the entire family/friend circle. Sort of "We're really serious about our relationship, think it will be sustaining, and would like your acknowledgement and support."  We even had some repeated vows that the audience had to repeat and agree to.  We later had them all sign a document.

 

In a stateless society, I believe it would still have the functional value it has now in organizing probate, assigning inheritances, custody of children decisions, etc.