Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Marriage a most unnatural state of affairs?

164 replies

MiniTheMinx · 06/07/2012 22:03

The monogamous family seems to me to uphold patriarchy better than any other institution. Men have for thousands of years sought to control women's reproduction as a means of controlling wealth. The most obvious way in which they have done this is through marriage.

Having read quite a lot and of course experiencing first hand the joys and the lows of monogamy, with all the emotional fall out, the sense of ownership but also support, the security but also the boredom! (at times) I question just how natural monogamy is.

Women are brought up to believe in fairy tale endings, white weddings and happy retirements, men, meanwhile we are told are naturally less inclined towards faithfulness. Their behaviour proof of biology, our faithfulness and commitment is likewise biologically driven.

I don't believe biology drives our desire for monogamous relationships and think this a materialist social construct which can be accounted for by the study of our material and economic history.

www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2011/04/feminism_and_re_1

www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1884/origin-family/ch02d.htm

jezebel.com/5339211/is-non+monogamy-a-feminist-relationship-choice

I am interested in hearing what others of you think, is marriage and monogamy an unnatural state of affairs?

OP posts:
Himalaya · 06/07/2012 23:14

I think the hunt for "natural" or our original state is a dead end.

monsterchild · 06/07/2012 23:14

I don't know that it's unnatural, but certainly there's not a lot of basis in biology, as we are a sexually dimorphic species. I think communities are what are natural, with women at the middle, but men equally important to the group survival.

Marriage evolved as a way to consolidate land/power, mainly I think, by taking the power that women have and giving it to men. Men, of course have their own power, but if you don't allow women to hold power, you've got to have a man there to wield it.

I do think that the current situation isn't going to be fixed by just abolishing marriage. Now children also have rights (as they should) and marriage (or divorce, rather) ensures that children are not left out, especially by the next man.

the problem with sexually dimorphic groups is that you'll see a lot of child killing by the new male(s) to get rid of kids who aren't theirs. This still goes on, of course, but marriage does have the ability to protect those kids whose fathers are no longer there, by empowering them, and giving them something for protection.

Sorry, didn't mean to get so long, but there's more to it than just the Patriarchy holding us down, and it's too easy to throw out the baby with the bathwater sometimes!

Alameda · 06/07/2012 23:14

if it was natural surely it would probably happen much more easily? you wouldn't have to work at it, would be like breathing or shagging or having a wee. It all seems so angsty.

who mates with only one person, for life? it must be pretty rare. Most people play the field before they settle down and then lots of them will go on to split up and pair off with someone else once or twice before they just get too old to bother and are happy to settle for anything

EclecticShock · 06/07/2012 23:12

I think religion has played a large role. Many are very patriarchial IMO and I don't even like that term.

MiniTheMinx · 06/07/2012 23:09

Anthropologists are discovering new finds all the time, some of which leads them to believe that historically many tribes followed the matralineal line, women and men did not pair bond for life and women although having quite defined roles were equal to men. So I question whether it is nature or social factors like religion, wealth accumulation, land and property ownership that have brought about an institution which on the face of it, might seem natural. Over time, it is possible that we perceive it to be natural, even if it isn't.

OP posts:
EclecticShock · 06/07/2012 23:08

I think marriage can be a trap but then having children requires an enormous level of commitment as having 2 parents who are equally supportive is better than one. However there are obviously many scenarios where having one parent is preferable. All in all I think of people entered into it with their eye wide open it might be easier.

EclecticShock · 06/07/2012 23:05

I haven't read it yet. I think it might be entertaining and escapist but I do hate how "love" literature always focuses on romance and the one... It's not realistic, IMO.

Alameda · 06/07/2012 23:04

marriage just seems such a horrible horrible thing, I don't know why I did it? Or why I still haven't got round to getting divorced almost two decades after separation, or why I very nearly thought it might be a good idea to do it again with someone even less suitable recently but yes, it seems unnatural. Am terrified of my children ever getting married, it seems such a trap, but obviously would have to try not to be if they ever did.

I can see the appeal of sex on tap and some company sometimes but any relationship like that so quickly feels cloying and scary. They start off all normal and nice but then want to know where you are every three minutes.

There might be something wrong with me though? I know probably about three out of fifty or so married or co-habiting couples where the relationship looks good and everyone is happy, the rest scare me to death.

EclecticShock · 06/07/2012 23:03

I don't believe in marriage unless it protects both partners equally. I believe in monogamy while bringing up children. I don't believe in happy ever after and all this romantic fairytale stuff. It takes work, not about "the one"...

MiniTheMinx · 06/07/2012 23:01

Have you read Fifty Shades? Thanks for the link. I haven't read it, I think I might actually enjoy it although I think the guardian article is probably correct, in saying that it isn't the sex that is the problem, it's the power relations between the two characters. I would have to ask really whether that is typical of all sub/dom relationships, I suspect that there is sometimes a difference between nature and demeanor.

OP posts:
Viviennemary · 06/07/2012 22:54

I believe in marriage. A lot of animals and birds even do live in monogomous relationships. With each partner having their own job and responsibilities. There's been a few interesting nature programmes on this very topic. Not that I'm saying that's why we should. But it's a thought. So it's not some human invention to promote wealth or an unnatural state of affairs.

FunnysInLaJardin · 06/07/2012 22:53

wow, this sounds like an interesting topic. Honestly, I am feminist, but really. I may start my own thread.

EclecticShock · 06/07/2012 22:50

Fwiw, I think it's unnatural now that we live so long but I think it can work, if you have similar expectations.

EclecticShock · 06/07/2012 22:49

fifty shades keeps women in their place

This article is interesting. I'm not married but I am in a committed monogamous relationship. I see no need for marriage as I am self dependent.

Swipe left for the next trending thread