enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Well, that commentary proves you are NOT a social historian
by differnetEllen

Using history as an excuse for marriage just doesn't cut it. The meaning of marriage has changed from culture to culture and time period to time period. Consider that in the Middle Ages, marriage was the virtual exclusive right of the wealthy. Poor people could cohabitate, but there was no special ceremony. They were lucky to stand on the porch of a church and declare that they were married. In rural areas, "divorce" sometimes included the "selling" of the wife. Among the wealthy, marriage was about political alliance. The primary reason for marriage at the beginning of our country's history, was wealth accumulation. Polygamy was a viable and supported form of marriage throughout the world in many cultures - this includes in some cultures were few women survived childhood for brothers to share a wife.

Marriage in western contemporary culture is about personal satisfaction. There are few economic reasons to stay together past the early childhood of the children, therefore, marriage has been trumped by personal satisfaction.

View complete thread