Can we have an intelligent debate about what 'marriage' means?

[sparkybabe]

It is no secret that my marriage is breaking up, but in the process I have been reviewing what I feel about marriage. I have been married for 17 years, and have 3 dc. When I got maried, I realise now that I was looking for someone who had a) good job b) good genes intelectually and c) someone I liked. Love did not really come into it, I suppose I knew I didn't love him, but I liked him, we had lots in common and as I said he was a good provider.
Anyway, thinking about marriage - its 'man-made, ie made by MAN! Why then is it so Man-unfriendly?
WHat do men want - sex, lots of it, with different women. It's in their make-up to spread their seed throughout the gene pool. Why do they sign up to be with ONE woman for life? It's not logical, but we are indoctrinated (men too) to think of 'adulterers' as criminal.

Women need someone who can bring home the food, provide shelter and safety, and impregnate them. The mariage vows actually benefit women far more than they do men. So why?
Basic human needs are
Warmth
Food
Water
Sex.
Why is ok to share 3 of these 4 with others, but not the 4th?
I am not religious in any way, so pleaase don't come on here saying well Christ wanted us to be monogamous and to come between a man and his wife is wrong. That is too easy. Why is it wrong? Why are we sooo indoctrinated as to feel that sex with other men/women is wrong? Why is it we feel murderous rage against the OW/OM? Would we be happier in so-called 'open' marriages? Why do we get so possessive about our spouses?

Intelligent debate please? I am interested.

Sparky, you might like to read:
Against Love by Laura Kipnis - I think you would like it

i can say some rude sweary words now , snigger?

Oh, go on, it'll make us all feel better

i can;t now, you;re all looking at me

It's an intelligent debate, you can be our Will Self.

oh no, that is far too much to live up to.. i am more a jilly cooper or marian keyes level..

anyhoo, am orf to bed.. will expect to see lots more intelligent debate and / or sweariness in the morning

Regardless of religeon, there are benefits to both the man and the woman of marriage. It is a deal - I won't fuck around if you don't either. The reason it hurts if your partner has sex with someone else, or an intimate non sexual relationship, is that you worry that they could start loving them more than you and then leave you. Being in a long term monogamous relationship gives you the benefit of feeling secure that you have someone who is there for you who will love you.

You can relax and not have to keep chasing around looking for someone to love you. This is a benefit to both the man and the woman. If you are still enjoying 'chasing around' and trying out different partners then don't get married yet! When you want to relax a bit and feel secure that you have someone to love you, having a long term monogamous relationship can provide this for you.

Then if you have children it is good for you to feel secure that your partner is staying with you because then you know you have help in looking after your children. This is probably more of benefit to the woman. For the man, if his parnter is not sleeping around he can feel he knows that all the children are his and he isn't putting his efforts into raising someone else's.

It is also good for the children to feel they aren't going to lose one of their parents which they could do if one of them sleeps with someone else and ends up wanting them more and leaving.

So I see it as being all about love and security and of benefit to both sexes. You do a deal, of having a monogamous relationship, so that you can feel secure that you have someone to love you who is less likely to leave.

This is why I got married and I can't see that it has anything to do with religeon. I don't have a religeon. I don't feel it is immoral to fuck someone else from a religeous point of view, only in the fact that I don't like the thought of DH feeling hurt if he found out and that it would threaten the marriage and if I lost the marriage I would lose the security.

And is it really such a bad thing that we have been conditioned by religeon? I'm not religeous but can see that it provides a useful framework on which to base a civilised society. Our laws are based on the commandments but without them wouldn't we be going round killing and hurting each other and taking each other's stuff? We would live in a world where we felt in danger all the time. There are bad things about religeon and taking religeon too far but there are also advantages don't you think?

i think marriage is complicated, we all want the happy life, forever happy , and some partners have open marriages, i could not have my hubby have sex with another woman and know about it, but since finding out he may have had an affair, i wonder if knowing who they are with hurts less than being lied to etc,some couples swing, which again each to their own and they say it makes their marriage closer, animals share partners so how are humans different, i think its nice thinking your partner has only ever been with you once together, and after yrs together you think marriage made in heavan, i think if you can talk and be honest and upfront its easier and you dont end up feeling hurt like i do sometimes,i think now it must take a really special couple where niether one has ever crossed the line, but does it mean they dont love you or just got bored and fancied some excitement or just to see if they can pull again after a long time.

Can I just point out that plenty of people actually raise stepchildren and do not feel they are "wasting resources" by doing this. They make just as wonderful parents as the biological ones do. Mumsnet. Drives. Me. Mad.

Why should people feel they are 'uncool' or something if they feel hurt that their partner cheated just because some people think it is 'cool' to be polygamous and that is the modern thing. It hurts because it makes people feel that they aren't enough for their partner and not good enough full stop, and the fear that they might lose them to the other person if they decide they love them more hurts. They might lose them altogether or they might lose them partially in that the cheating one might give less emotionally because they are giving some to the other person and aren't so focussed on the original one.

Salla, it is a different thing if you get with someone who already has children and help them to raise them because you love them all as a package, different from if a man is with a woman who sleeps around and he can't be sure whether all her children are his. He is then raising other people's kids unknowingly rather than by choice. This is the scenario I was talking about, not trying to insult anyone who has chosen to take on their partners children.

Personally, I don't see any reason why sex can't be shared with other people outside of a marriage, just like the other basic needs suggested by the OP.

For me, sex is basically body parts. This may sounds crude but if DH wants to stick it in someone else, he can. So can I. We don't have an "open" relationship as such, but we are very open and honest about our sexual needs and I am totally open to a threesome, etc, should the opportunity ever arise. We are both very comfortable with each other, more so than either of us have ever been with anyone else, and so we can be totally honest about what we want.

My "marriage" is the emotional and personal bond, personified in our 7 week old son, that me and DH share. We are absolute soul mates and that is what I consider to be the precious element. I am very protective of that bond and would probably feel more threatened by DH having a very close female friend than by him sleeping with someone (although neither situation has arisen yet to test that theory!). Honesty is absolutely key to all of this - if DH was to lie to me about any of this stuff, I think it would pretty much kill the whole lot as I would consider our special bond to be corrupted.

Religious conditioning has nothing to do with the choices that me and DH have made in our lives. I was raised Catholic and had a Catholic wedding, yet I embrace sexual relationships outside of my marriage. DH is atheist through and through and actively rejects religion, and yet he has chosen to embrace monogamy. Suggesting that we are "animals" does not do any credit to our evolution, if nothing else. We have evolved intelligence and feeling that lifts us above all other animals and it is the force behind everything that we do. "Marriage" as an institution may be a social construct designed for mercenary purposes, but there is something about basic pair-bonding that seems to attract all different kinds of people on a deeper level.

Agree with Squitten: pairbonding is (or at least can be) about more than monogamy: I have met many devoted longterm couples on the swinging scene who frequently have sex with other people but do not feel that it affects the bond between them. The point is that different people want and need different things: the tragedy is this cult of compulsory monogamy, the idea that monogamous relationships are inherently superior to open relationships, or celibacy, or casual sex with a variety of partners. This is what makes people who are not suited to monogamous pairbonding attempt to engage in it and make themselves and their partners miserable. The lucky ones are the ones who have actually thought about themselves and what they want and arranged their relationships accordingly.

"I've never really held with the idea that "all you need is a good fuck"

Nor do I. That is not what I wrote.

SolidGold, you post a lot about the 'rights' of people to have non-monogamous relationships, and I agree that there is nothing wrong with it if both of you have agreed, but you do give the impression that you think monogamy is bad and boring and old fashioned and that a person is inferior if monogamy is what they want. It's as though you think open relationships are 'fashionable'.

Some people want monogamy and there is nothing wrong with that and I'm not going to be made to feel that I am boring or something for wanting a monogamous relationship. I wasn't forced into it by society or religeon or other people's morals, I've decided it is what is emotionally healthiest for me personally. You seem to suggest that we only do it because we have been made to do it by society and that it is unnatural. I don't agree.

have skipped through this thread so sorry if repeating stuff. Sparkybabe, I am sorry but i think you have missed some crucial points, namely - 1) when people enter into marriage, they do so of their own will (hopefully). They make promises to their partners as part of the marriage contract. Nobody forces them to do this - if they don't want to make these promises then they just don't get married. Thus, if a spouse then breaks a promise made in this way, why is it unreasonable for the other partner to feel betrayed and upset? Religion doesn't come into this because, regardless of the historical context of marriage, we live in a society whereby it is acceptable not to be married, so people make a conscious choice to do so and to make those promises.
2) You have a very simplistic, and quite sad, view of what women and men need. Believe me, i need more than to be fed and impregnated - companionship and love do factor quite highly in my desires, thank you very much, and I get this through a fulfilling and meaningful relationship with my dh - and i know he gets a lot out of our relationship too - it's not all about the sex (although that is a very nice part of it).

We are not basic animals - we are a higher order with a much deeper mindset and intelligence (although this is hard to believe at times). Don't compare my mindset to that of a dog or any other animal because clearly it is different. Therefore my needs are different too.

That being said, there are many people who are very happy in open relationships etc. There is nothing wrong with that as long as it is what both partners want

Tracksuit, SG has strong opinions but if you look back thru' her posts the majority are identifying that 'different people want and need different things'. I think the only thing I would call her on is in saying that monogomy is not 'natural' when it actually happens and therefore by definition is natural for some, such as yourself.

Actually not sure why I am defending her as she will be along in a minute to reply to your post! ( It's not going to be pretty!!)

Haven't read all this properly - just a quick skim.

I can see why our society has evolved the way it has, why marriage is, in our current cultural setup, a good thing, and why adultery is therefore a bad thing.

But is our current cultural setup right for us at all? I would suggest not - depression rates are the highest they've ever been - even those who are not officially depressed are usually living a fairly see-saw existence - down in the dumps fairly frequently. It seems we all accept that this is simply part of human nature.

A brilliant book called the 'Continuum Concept' (that spelling may be completely wrong) talks about life in a tribe, where the humans are carefree and happy - all the time - its their natural state. The author mainly focusses on child rearing methods (her point is that the methods used make the people happier). I don't entirely agree with her here, but the basic gist I get out of it is...

Women spend time together in groups doing activities such as gardening/farming type stuff, cooking, feeding babies.

Men spend time in groups hunting. Children spend all their time together - the older ones looking after the younger ones, and the younger ones only turning to their mother or alternative woman in the group when they have a strong need for her.

Everyone happy. All roles clearly delineated. Everyone has their own role, their own 'busy' activity - less time for introspection/self analysis. Noone arguing over whose turn it is to cook/wash up/do the diy. A shared culture passing on child rearing skills - the older girls learn from watching their mothers and the other women in the group. Women aren't left to 'entertain' their children on their own all day every day.

So what does this have to do with marriage? Well I think the main problem with our society is the whole darn set up - men and women just aren't built to live together in twosomes, and children aren't built to live with just their parents for company and stimulation. Men, women, and children all function much better when spending time with their own group.

Which is why, in our society, men and women make each other so miserable, and why men are happiest out with each other down the pub, women are happiest chatting to each other, and children are at their best left to play with other children.

Of course there is no way we will ever attain this level of nirvana in our messed up society now. But, hey, at least we have great healthcare and don't die of random diseases like happy folk in tribes do.

Just to pick up on a question sparky asked earlier:

"Lulumama - not trying to upset you but why?Why is it a lie? Why is it betraying you? You are upset at DH breaking a vow to you to be faithful. This is a vow 2000years old, passed down from the Man. If there was no 'thou shall not commit adultery' would you still be upset? Or would you see it as basic human nature coming out?"

It's not just one lie, it's not just deceitful because it involves breaking a promise. Unless you're in an open relationship infidelity requires the straying partner to lie on an ongoing basis about where they are, what they're doing, what they're thinking and what they're feeling. Those lies erode trust and constitute a betrayal. This applies whether or not the couple are married.

"Which is why, in our society, men and women make each other so miserable, and why men are happiest out with each other down the pub, women are happiest chatting to each other, and children are at their best left to play with other children."

According to who? Which men, women and children? How is the continuum concept, which requires every person to take on strictly delineated gender and age roles whether or not they want to, guaranteed to make us happier?

Maybe being free to spend time in a group of your choosing is a pleasurable activity that enhances your life. So is eating chocolate. Doesn't mean you need to, or should, do it all the time.

Perhaps the freedom to make that choice is the most important element of individual happiness.

How is a life without analysis or understanding or change something to aspire to? Every decade there's a new 'happy, noble savage' theory. They can be appealing, but are often condescending and anthropologically dodgy.

We're not really a deeply stupid race. No system of living is perfect, but if there really was an alternative way of life that was so much better, that offered us more happiness without sacrificing all of our safety, don't you think we'd have tried it?

Tracksuit: I don;'t thing taht people who want monogamous relationships are boring. I just don't want them to have a relationship with me because I am not monogamous. There is a difference between consciously-chosen monogamy and people who drift into allegedly monogamous relationships without ever even discussing it with their partners and then find out that they have different ideas about what monogamy is and how much it matters.
I am advocating that people think and communicate, not that they all have open relationships or that they all have monogamous ones.

Not about religion or rules to me. But very much about the fact that to me sex is a highly emotional intimate act. And committing to a relationship even more so.

Marriage to me is not about a law, or being bound by a contract; it's about dh and me committing to supporting each other and working together in a way that we do not do with any other person. Knowing that there will always be somebody there who is on my side, who pulls together with me, even if we don't have to agree on every single little thing. And someone that I will make more effort with than I ever would with any casual friend.

When we make love, it's not just about the physical pleasure, it's a way of celebrating a love that we have shared for 25 years, any number of memories, some of them happy, some hard, but all of them enforcing the feeling that we two belong together.

I don't see how having a great number of men at my disposal could be as good as that.

And I don't think the kids would find it equally reassuring either.

It wouldn't matter if something happened so we couldn't have sex- we might be unhappy if that happened, but we still would feel married, because marriage is about those other things.

It may well be that there is equal happiness in the tribal society described by Tiffany. Doesn't invalidate other cultures, does it? For me, having my children's father close at hand and knowing that he is always there for them is such an enormous thing that I can't wish for things to be otherwise. And it gives us a chance to show them a really close adult relationship. Is that a bad thing?

I understand that people are bound to feel different about it if their marital experiences have been different.

As for comparing us with animals- isn't it just a question of which animal species you pick? Quite a few fish are pair-bonding and soem birds.

"What do men want - sex, lots of it, with different women."

I'd prefer a reasonable amount of sex with one woman I love, respect and desire, ta very muchly. I don't believe I am unique in that wish.