Do radical feminists believe in marriage for love?

[msrisotto]

I have the impression that 'they' don't. Am I right?
I know the history of marriage = bad for women, but I suppose a liberal part of me (I have radical beliefs too so am open for debate), and the fact that I am getting married soon, can easily reconcile marriage with equality in the here and now.

Does anyone think marriage changes things? I mean, in a negative way? I have been married twice, and in my experience things tend to get a bit more traditional (i.e. sexist) once the marriage/babies start happening....even when things are very equal before, once marriage and young children happen, the walls close in a little.

I don't think being married 'excludes' you from radical feminism msrisotto, it's not like you can be banished or excommunicated from feminism anyway :) Like I said, for me it's just a convenient legal shortcut which is relevant to some couples. All the other stuff that often goes along with it - name changing, rings, dressing up like a fairy princess , religious ceremonies etc - that isn't intrinsic to marriage, and you can do as much or as little of it as you choose, and as is compatible with your feminist beliefs!

If there's a logical reason why being married would make sense for you and your partner right now, it would be silly IMO to not do it just because of the historical problems.

I won't be changing my name, we'll both be wearing rings, i'll be Ms, no one will be giving me away, i won't be wearing a white dress etc etc - i'm happy with the ceremony.

I think babies do change things for a lot of people and a lot of that is enforced by society e.g. mat leave rather than parental leave and prejudice against mothers returning to work after a period looking after their kids and the undervaluation of childcare generally, rather than within a specific relationship.

I dont think babies change things I think the people i know who are in unequal relationships are SAHMS because its seen as their job to do everything in the home. If you have an out of home job then in my experience a couple shares things much more. It wouldnt be humanly possible to do everything in the house and look after the children if you are at work as you wouldnt have the time so it evens out.

This is why I hate all those "aren't the bumbling men useless" ads and chatting because it plays into the notion that men can't the trusted to do "women's work" well (bless 'em, poor darlings). As a feminist, I believe that men are just as capable of doing housework, childcare, remembering birthdays as women! It's weird because all the men I know hate being portrayed that way and feel it to be very sexist and are truly amazed when it is pointed out that these images actually prop up the patriarchy and their privileged position in it

LlydogenFawr agree completely. How do the men you know express their displeasure at being portrayed that way? DH (who actually does more housework than I do) does it by being contemptuous of men who "can't" do all the things you've mentioned. He considers that sort of attitude totally immature.

The difficulty is that he honestly doesn't understand the mentality of bumbling to get out of things so the idea that this is propping up the patriarchy doesn't really get through.

It depends, mostly they find it offensive that people consider men to be so useless (most of my male friends pull their weight in their relationships and those that don't are looked down on for not doing so). They think it's massively patronising but I hadn't made the imaginative leap into seeing how patriarchal it actually is. Most of them ( we were chatting about this at a party a couple of weeks ago) sort of took the point but mostly still found it offensive.

There's a line from Calvin and Hobbes that seems appropriate "Sometimes, if you do the job badly enough, you don't get asked to do it again" Do you think that that is what is going on?.

I don't think marriage is about love, marriage is basically a legal contract which can save you a lot of bother getting all the relevant documents drawn up separately. I think it makes a lot of sense for some couples, e.g. those where one partner is going to be a SAHP, but don't see the point of doing it just for 'love' if you don't need the particular legal rights/obligations it gives you.

Not always Ephiny. One of the reasons (aside from being madly in love with her) I asked DW to marry me was because we wanted to move abroad and I assumed it would be easier being married. But actually it meant that when DD was born there was extra paperwork we had to produce and extra forms to fill in because we were married - with both the Spanish and UK authorities - than if we had simply been cohabiting.

Twisty sums up the radical feminist position on marriage:

"Marriage is the ultimate expression of compliance with the culture of oppression. It is the bedrock of misogyny, the ideal upon which heteronormativity is based, the primary unit with which patriarchy replicates itself."

That's an interesting quote dittany (and in fact conforms to my anti-marriage views prior to meeting DW).

I wonder, how is the acceptance/legalisation of same-sex couples affecting this? Does the rejection of heteronormativity by allowing same-sex couples to also marry make marriage less objectionable from a feminist point of view? (again, it's slightly different for us being in Spain, where there is complete legal parity between heterosexual and homosexual couples)

only if you let them get away with it - radical feminists can marry for love although something like civil partnmership may be a more acceptable term to use. the rest is linguistics and bad manners , a love marriage should be about living in partnership for two symbiotic entities .

Congratulations msrisotto btw

Thankyou, MrRisotto is a lucky man :)

If you want an example, there's the thread that's sometimes above this one and sometimes below, titled "Mother / Wife roles". That woman loves her husband, but his non-participation in running the home is driving her crazy. It's not a marriage versus cohabiting issue, but you have to ask the question of what odds any woman has of having a happy marriage (or relationship). But averages and statistics don't deal with it--moving in together is a personal decision that everyone has to make for themselves.

MrIC,
not being funny but as a man you can't really put your experience of marriage next to a woman's.
All you have is a male POV, and seeing as men invented marriage to benefit them, it's hardly suprising that you are supporting it.

Now if you, as a man, were arguing against marriage, because of how horribly oppressive it is as an institution for women then I'd be able to take you seriously on the feminist section.
Until then you just sound like an ancient patriarch trying to defend an ancient patriarchal institution.

In Sexual Politics Kate Millet wrote extensively about how western romantic love, all the poetry, the everlasting promises that men made were little more than a small concession that made to women,
THe same mend did nothing to alter the horrible oppression that their wives were under. The same men (who professed to love their wives) did nothing to stop rape from being a husband's right.

No man who loved women (his own woman included) would have been able to live in such a disgustingly sexist society.

and yet men did actually believe they loved their wives!