For this week's assignment, then discuss one of the following topics:
1) People in traditional communities in countries where the state is either weak or absent depend on relatives to help meet the basic challenges of survival.
In such societies, would it be risky to choose marriage partners exclusively based on romantic love? Can you imagine other factors playing a role if the long-term survival of your community might be at stake?
2) Many people in North America and Europe choose to have children outside of marriage. Considering some of the major functions of marriage, do you think there is a relationship between the type of society an individual belongs to and the choice to forgo the traditional benefits of marriage? Under what cultural conditions might the choice to remain unmarried present serious challenges?
To answer these questions, then you will want to take into account the Haviland chapter titled: "Sex, Marriage, and Family."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
First comes Love, then comes...More Love?
Ah, and here we are at the "M" word. The first part of the question is, "do I think that there is some relation between one's society and the choice to forgo the traditional benefits of marriage?" The answer is yes, I do think so. For the most part, I believe that marriage is nothing more than a government-based way to be recognized. Sure, the union is marketed as one recognized by God, but reallly, what does God have to do with it? One can't help but feel happy when he is with the romantic "yin" to his "yang." And, this contentment comes whether God or the government is in their picture or not. So, I guess the REAL question is "how comfortable do you feel sharing your bed with your partner AND your God/government?" The answer depends on how strong you feel your relationship actually is in their absence.
As a gay man, I like that the government is not in my bedroom. What can they offer me by the word "marriage" besides a tax break? They can't offer me love. They can't offer me the happiness that I feel when I have a life to share with a husband/wife/partner.
I recognize that it's easy to say such a thing when I've never had a "marriage" in the legal sense. And, yes I am sometimes painfully aware that there are serious challenges that can occur when I don't have the back-up that the M-word can impart (such as automatic next of kin in a will, or no questions being asked about who's in charge of my kids when I'm not there.) "Perks" such as these are the ones that unmarried people (such as I) forego when we decide to leave the government out of our romantic business.
I'm reminded of a lesbian couple who lives in Rhode Island, but got married in Massachusetts, who now CANNOT divorce because the state of Rhode Island will not recognize their marriage as a marriage in the first place. This romantic pergatory could have been prevented if they had kept the government out of their bedroom in the first place.
What's the use of this? My feeling is, if it feels good to YOU, then do it, and don't try to force your personal views on anyone else. That goes for love and marriage; marriage and divorce; gay and straight.
Post a Comment