marriage - will people get married in a socialist commune?

[mentalbunny]

I was thinking about this earlier, why do humans have such a big thing about marriage? I don't understand all this, we get conditioned to believe we're going to meet the perfect person and fall in love with them and live happily ever after but what really happens? You get divorced after you have kids and the kids get fucked around and it's all shit really.

How do we get round this? Not like Brave New World I hope, but we need some kind of solution. Maybe if we live in big groups, a bit like herds(!) then everyone could look after the kids so they'd have loads of parents and therefore be a more well rounded being, and it wouldn't matter if the parents didn't stay together forever. However I can see flaws in this, but I'd like ot know your views on marriage.

[Som]

There will always be the long term bond feeling, I don't think it has to be engrained in and sort of 'official' marriage though.

Herds? Theyre called communes. Children should be raised collectively in the ideal, its a more natural way of doing things.

People will pair off, pairs will break, lives will run as usual.

[Beccie]

Marriage is corny, it reminds me too much of Hollywood. You meet your soul mate; you fall in love, get married, and have kids then live happily ever after. It does not happen like that....

[fightthepower]

Marriage has been around much longer than hollywood. Hmm... 50% of marriages in N. amerika end in divorce, while less than 10% of arranged marriages end in divorce. Interesting.

[Beccie]

Quote: from fightthepower on 1:42 am on Jan. 9, 2003
Marriage has been around much longer than hollywood. .

That might be true......but the Hollywood perception of realtionships still gives me the shits though......

[man in the red suit]

what's wrong with marriage in a socialist commune?

[Umoja]

I don't like the idea of Communes, and I'd never dissolve the basic family unit. It could lead to serious factionalism on a large level, with communes starting to think of themselves as "tribes". I'd still make sure marriage would be kept, and would make sure not to in anyway restrict it.

[Iepilei]

Destruction of the bourgeoise family is a must. Marriage or union must be for love, not for money.

[Umoja]

Yeah..... Alright, but how can you pass a law against that? If people aren't money obsessed it won't happen.

[Lardlad95]

Quote: from Iepilei on 3:25 am on Jan. 9, 2003
Destruction of the bourgeoise family is a must. Marriage or union must be for love, not for money.


Now correct me if I'm wrong...but most people get married because they love or they assume they love

the only time it's for money is if it's a family thats already rich

Damn everyweek it's a new thing; no individual parenting, no religion, no marrige

I'm sorry but this has got to be the most oppresive group on the face of the earth.

i'm expecting people to pop out with white hoods and swastikas anysecond now

[mentalbunny]

I wasn't saying we should get rid of marriage, it was just a suggestion.

I think the whole legal thing with marriage should possibly be abolished and people can have a religious wedding if they want, but I don't think I'd ever have one, even though my parents want me to.

[TheFriendlyBolshevik]

I would say in a commun a family would live toghter. married or not. then again i'm an atheist so marriage for religious reasons is pointless to me. the only other reason people would get married, asside from a statement of love, would be for tax purposes. since there would be no taxes (or money) in a commune the only reason to marry would be for love-should it exist.

[fightthepower]

That might be true......but the Hollywood perception of realtionships still gives me the shits though......
[/quote]

Same here. All the movies are the same... guy meets girl... they fall in love... he screws it up... they get back together... end of story.

This whole thing distorts what marriage is. You know how your brother/sister always pisses you off? Its because you are always around each other. The same would be true of marriage. Things wont always be perfect, but hollywood tells us that they will... resulting in one hell of a lot of divorce.

[redstar2000]

Speaking personally, I'm in favor of people associating and disassociating freely WITHOUT attention from the government and CERTAINLY with no interference from religious "authorities".

I think it would be a good thing to smash the mythology of "the ONE perfect person for YOU". Fact is, for any given individual, there are potentially thousands of people out there that one could have a GREAT relationship with...and, let's face it, no one is REALLY perfect anyway.

Under capitalism, we are supposed to look at potential lovers the way we look at new cars...comparison shopping and, of course, trading in on a new model when the old one starts to show its age. The "trophy wife" suggests what bourgeois marriage is really about.

What ought to be perfectly natural, association because of mutual attraction, becomes instead...well, just another free market, where brand name and image beat human quality every time.

We could really do just fine WITHOUT all that. :cool:

[Larissa]

Well, what can I say (that makes any sense to you people... please bear in mind I am kind of oldie - 40)

I got married twice. If I were to divorce my second husband, something that can just happen in the future or not happen at alll, I WOULDN'T marry for a third time.

I first got married when I was 21 and because my then boyfirend and father of my children asked me to, my parents wouldn't simply leave in peace if I didn't married the guy (as well as my parents in law). Now, I really wasSTUPID, because I didn't really want to get married and still I did so.
I was extremely happy because I was pregnant, but didn't find it necessary to marry my boyfriend, I was actually not mad about him.

As I mentioned before, I got married at the age of 21, my son (who is 18 today) was born when I was 22 and my daughter (she is 17) when I was 23. Finally, I divorced their father a year later when I was 24, because I realized I never loved him and didn't want to watse my life beside him.

I LOVE my kids, they are great and they are the best thing I ever had in life, and I'm proud of them. I raised them since babies, on my own, all by myself with no help from anyone. It was VERY hard, my children and I had very hard times. But they don't have any "psychological trauma". They have learnt the meaning of true values in life. and they know they don't need to get married to be happy or to have kids, or raise a family with true love.

When I was 36, I married again. But this time it was because of a very specific reason. Many of you may think it's something non-ethical, maybe. But my second husband (who I love ever since I met him) was a foreigner and needed to have legal immigration status in my country.

So, although I do love him besides marriage, we married for "practical" reasons. We don't need any marriage papers to love each other or live together. If I had chosen to live in his country, I also would have needed to get married to have legal status.

When you love someone, you just love someone UNCONDITIONALLY. No need to get married, no need even to live together with that person.

If you want to get married, the ok, go for it. There's nothing wrong with getting married, except when you have to divorce. Getting married is quick and simple, getting divorce is a mess and (in my country) takes about a year!

That's why, in my case, I wouldn't keep on collecting "legal" husbands. I rather not marry again.

Be happy!

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

WOW....stund

[mentalbunny]

Well, Larissa, I just wish everyone shared your opinion. I am astounded and thank you for sharing your experinces and opinions. I think you really do have the best answer for today's society but many people's intentions are not as pure, which saddens me.

[komsomol]

Quote: from Som on 10:41 pm on Jan. 8, 2003
Children should be raised collectively in the ideal, its a more natural way of doing things.


I like that, reminds me of tribespeople and gorrillas, it may seem shocking to some people though, although the abolishion of slavery did at one time too.

[Lardlad95]

Redstar...stop being so Goddamn negative

anyway....

No one forces anyone to get married unless it's arranged and most people in the US weren't in arranged marriges

so stop acting like the pope and his cronies are gonna jump you if you don't get married

[timbaly]

Quote: from fightthepower on 8:42 pm on Jan. 9, 2003
Hmm... 50% of marriages in N. amerika end in divorce, while less than 10% of arranged marriages end in divorce. Interesting.


I'm not surprised at all. Those people who get arranged marriages are usually weakminded. They do it because they except what their parents give them. They were probaly totally sheltered from reality as children and are the kind of people who take whats thrown at them without thinking about it. They do things because it's the will of their parents, and they can't even imagine disobeying them or thinking contrary to what they think. They do things for their parents and think about themselves last. These are usually kinds of people who are not critical and anylitical thinkers. They will believe most evrything you say. Except for religious things, they'll only believe in their religon without even thinking about it.

[Lardlad95]

Quote: from timbaly on 11:17 pm on Jan. 9, 2003

Quote: from fightthepower on 8:42 pm on Jan. 9, 2003
Hmm... 50% of marriages in N. amerika end in divorce, while less than 10% of arranged marriages end in divorce. Interesting.


I'm not surprised at all. Those people who get arranged marriages are usually weakminded. They do it because they except what their parents give them. They were probaly totally sheltered from reality as children and are the kind of people who take whats thrown at them without thinking about it. They do things because it's the will of their parents, and they can't even imagine disobeying them or thinking contrary to what they think. They do things for their parents and think about themselves last. These are usually kinds of people who are not critical and anylitical thinkers. They will believe most evrything you say. Except for religious things, they'll only believe in their religon without even thinking about it.

you makeamazing judgements of these people

butI wonder how many of them do you know

also if these people only serve the will of their parents ten what happens when their parents die?

Do these people just forget how to live?

[Iepilei]

HA, how naive.

People marry for wealth purposes contantly. It's dying down in modern times, but marrying to gain stability is as old as the monarchy.

[timbaly]

Lardlad I know 3 of these people fairly well and have met a few others. They were all neighbors of mine. I'm not saying that they live to serve their parents but many of them obey their parents wishes without thinking about their own feelings. They seem to be ready to do whatever it is their parents tell them to without thinking. They're ready to possibly live unhappily for the sake of their parents. They can live without their parents fine, it's not like they have mental illnesses. They're just ready to do whatever it is that they're asked to do by their parents. I realize the parents are only doing what they think is best and what they know, but i just think it's wrong. The two people usually seem to adapt to each other eventually be very happy, but I often wonder what their real thoughts are, if what they say isn't what they think.

[Lardlad95]

Quote: from timbaly on 12:18 am on Jan. 10, 2003
Lardlad I know 3 of these people fairly well and have met a few others. They were all neighbors of mine. I'm not saying that they live to serve their parents but many of them obey their parents wishes without thinking about their own feelings. They seem to be ready to do whatever it is their parents tell them to without thinking. They're ready to possibly live unhappily for the sake of their parents. They can live without their parents fine, it's not like they have mental illnesses. They're just ready to do whatever it is that they're asked to do by their parents. I realize the parents are only doing what they think is best and what they know, but i just think it's wrong. The two people usually seem to adapt to each other eventually be very happy, but I often wonder what their real thoughts are, if what they say isn't what they think.

aside from Hindus how many arranged marriges do you think go on in the world?

[Umoja]

I think people are naturally monogamous, personally. We generally find one person we like and settle down, and this isn't a horribly new practice. People have lived in family groups for ages. The only reason most religions actually say "sex outside marriage is a sin." or other things of that nature is because the creators of most religions, be it God, Shiva, or some power hungry dude, realized that diseases can easily be spread by intermingling with to many people, and this was obviously dangerous. This added to the fact that people were already a semi-monogamous acting species, and forms our accepted form of monogamoy.

[timbaly]

"aside from Hindus how many arranged marriges do you think go on in the world?" - Lardlad95

I really have no idea. However hindus aren't the only ones who have arranged marriages, the people who I know well who have arranged marriages are all Greek Orthodox. I also know that muslims sometimes have arranged marriages. In some islamic countries young girls at the age of 12 are married to men in their 20's and 30's. Of course these arranged marriages happen a lot more often outside of the US but I'm sure it happens a lot in many other places, especiallly traditional places. These are pretty much old world traditions that are disapppearing rapidly, which is a good thing.

[Lardlad95]

Quote: from timbaly on 2:59 am on Jan. 10, 2003
"aside from Hindus how many arranged marriges do you think go on in the world?" - Lardlad95

I really have no idea. However hindus aren't the only ones who have arranged marriages, the people who I know well who have arranged marriages are all Greek Orthodox. I also know that muslims sometimes have arranged marriages. In some islamic countries young girls at the age of 12 are married to men in their 20's and 30's. Of course these arranged marriages happen a lot more often outside of the US but I'm sure it happens a lot in many other places, especiallly traditional places. These are pretty much old world traditions that are disapppearing rapidly, which is a good thing.

If it's disipearing then what the hell is everyone complaining about

[redstar2000]

Umoja, your explanation of the origins of monogomy is belied by history.

First of all, ruling class males in all societies (including ours) have had multiple mates without concerning themselves with "disease". Sometimes, only one of them enjoyed the legal status of "wife" and only the children of that "wife" were legal heirs...but that did not inhibit the masculine taste for variety.

It seems to me that monogomy most likely originated in a desire common to many (most?) men to control female sexuality and reproduction. The evidence suggests that when women are free to do so, they enjoy a variety of sexual relationships just as much as men do...but then how can a man be "sure" that her child is really "his"?

In primitive hunter-gatherer societies (primitive communism), this was not a burning question. With the domestication of herd animals and the rise of nomadism...private property...it becomes significant. Men want to be "sure" that it is their "real" sons who inherit...thus female sexuality must be controlled.

Dragging in the gods, of course, helps and a monotheist supergod is even better for the purpose. But, as is always the case, the social reality came first and the gods are invoked afterwards to "justify" it.

As to what people are "naturally", that's a TOUGH one. My GUESS is that what is called serial monogomy would be the most comfortable for most people--a relationship with one person extending for a period of time, then voluntarily dissolved, followed by a new relationship with one person, and so on. But that's only a GUESS. And there WOULD be people who would want multiple relationships and there's nothing "wrong" with that.

Timbaly, I'm quite, well, SHOCKED, that you've actually met people who permitted marriages to be "arranged" for them...though I understand the custom is still fairly wide-spread in Japan. To allow someone else to arrange the most intimate details of one's personal life seems to me like...well, selling yourself into slavery.

It's a complicated world. Side by side with the most advanced human thinking and technology, we find these archiac survivals of pre-capitalist relations. It's like moving into a modern new apartment building and discovering that your neighbor's housepet is... a small dinosaur. :cool:

[Umoja]

Yeah, serial monogamouy, I'm to lazy to spell, would actually better describe modern western society, marriage is supposed to prevent this, and regardless no relationship, all inclusive, is ever 50/50, and I doubt that's ever possible.

[Conghaileach]

from timbaly:
I'm not surprised at all. Those people who get arranged marriages are usually weakminded. They do it because they except what their parents give them. They were probaly totally sheltered from reality as children and are the kind of people who take whats thrown at them without thinking about it. They do things because it's the will of their parents, and they can't even imagine disobeying them or thinking contrary to what they think. They do things for their parents and think about themselves last. These are usually kinds of people who are not critical and anylitical thinkers. They will believe most evrything you say. Except for religious things, they'll only believe in their religon without even thinking about it.

This is just as likely to be true in cultures where one chooses who they'll marry as in cultures with arranged marriages.

[timbaly]

"This is just as likely to be true in cultures where one chooses who they'll marry as in cultures with arranged marriages." - CiaranB

But not to the same extent. Most of them would deal with the unhappiness of arranged marriages instead of trying to make themselves happy, which is probaly a foreign concept to them. You should definelty think about your parents feelings but not because they're your parents, but because they're people. But how could you put the will of your parents over your feelings in a situation as potentionally permanent as this?

[Charred_Phoenix]

I'm not surprised at all. Those people who get arranged marriages are usually weakminded.


Gandhi had an arranged marriage.

I think in the type of society we should be aming for, marriages (religious or otherwise) would be allowed, but not compulsory. There are two reasons for this:

1. Making sure the child is yours is not just about inheritance and money-bonds, it's about knowing your DNA will continue to exist. (And don't say "everything is nurture" because we don't know enough about it to decide)

2. The idea of one person having multiple relationships and convincing each of their partners that they are the only one makes me feel a little more paranoid. :unsure: