Thread: What's the deal with marriage?

Results 1 to 20 of 29

  1. #1
    Join Date May 2012
    Location Florida, USA
    Posts 1,201
    Rep Power 24

    Default What's the deal with marriage?

    Alright so let me just start off by saying that I'm literally not advocating or condemning anything here, simply looking for questions to something that I, for some reason, had never bothered to think about, much less form opinions about.

    So it seems most people on here are against marriage. I'm just wondering what the prevailing reasons are for taking such a stance. Again, I currently have no stance of my own, so I'm not looking for this to turn into one of those classic revleft threads with a bunch of pointless fighting.

    Also, what are peoples thoughts about marrying someone not because you personally support marriage, but because you care about your significant other and they are saying that marriage would make them happy for whatever reason?

    Thanks.
    FKA Chomsssssssky, Skwisgaar, The Employer Destroyer, skybutton
  2. #2
    Join Date Jan 2012
    Location New York
    Posts 2,191
    Rep Power 44

    Default

    Alright so let me just start off by saying that I'm literally not advocating or condemning anything here, simply looking for questions to something that I, for some reason, had never bothered to think about, much less form opinions about.

    So it seems most people on here are against marriage. I'm just wondering what the prevailing reasons are for taking such a stance. Again, I currently have no stance of my own, so I'm not looking for this to turn into one of those classic revleft threads with a bunch of pointless fighting.

    Also, what are peoples thoughts about marrying someone not because you personally support marriage, but because you care about your significant other and they are saying that marriage would make them happy for whatever reason?

    Thanks.
    I was actually thinking about this same thing today. I'm against marriage, I see it as something oppressive and patriachal. The root of marriage comes down to the woman becoming the property of the man, and it still shares some of those traits today. The husband works and brings bread home while the wife raises the kids and does everything for the husband, that and something I notice about marriage and monogamous relationships is that something always seems to fuck up. I'm not feeling too well to elaborate or anything further, but I hope this kinda helps though I think its a shit post
  3. #3
    Join Date Jan 2013
    Posts 2,893
    Organisation
    The lol people
    Rep Power 51

    Default

    I mean, I'm just against marriage as a limiting bond. And if it isn't a limiting bond of some sort, then why have it?

    Meaning, marriage would have no other point than something symbolic, but it wouldn't really mean anything, you know?
    "I'm not interested in indulging whims from members of your faction."
    Seeing as this is seen as acceptable by an admin, from here on out when I have a disagreement with someone I will be asking them to reference this. If you want an explanation of my views, too bad.
  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to BIXX For This Useful Post:


  5. #4
    hysterical man-hater Supporter
    Forum Moderator
    Admin
    Join Date Dec 2009
    Location Wales
    Posts 2,743
    Organisation
    AFed, IWW
    Rep Power 128

    Default

    I reject the idea that a long term monogamous relationship should be considered the ideal. Marriage is as much an economic arrangement as a matter of love. On a personal level, I don't want to get married because it isn't for me, but on a political level I can't condone it. The benefits that come with being married in our current society should be available to people in all kinds of relationships, whether monogamous or polyamorous.

    (Sorry for the shit response, a little tipsy now.)
    "Her development, her freedom, her independence must come from and through herself. First, by asserting herself as a personality, and not as a sex commodity. Second, by refusing the right to anyone over her body; by refusing to bear children unless she wants them; by refusing to become a servant to God, the State, society, the husband, the family, etc. ... by freeing herself from the fear of public opinion and public condemnation. Only that, and not the ballot, will set woman free, will make her a force hitherto unknown in the world, a force for real love, for peace, for harmony; a force of divine fire, of life-giving; a creator of free men and women."
    ~ Emma Goldman

    Support RevLeft!
  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Quail For This Useful Post:


  7. #5
    Join Date May 2012
    Location Florida, USA
    Posts 1,201
    Rep Power 24

    Default

    (Sorry for the shit response, a little tipsy now.)
    Don't worry Quail, your drunk posts are better than my regular posts.

    Thanks everyone who has contributed so far, I can see what you all are getting at.
    FKA Chomsssssssky, Skwisgaar, The Employer Destroyer, skybutton
  8. #6
    Join Date Mar 2013
    Location The Great Wen
    Posts 218
    Organisation
    ICT (sympathiser)
    Rep Power 12

    Default

    So it seems most people on here are against marriage. I'm just wondering what the prevailing reasons are for taking such a stance.
    Marriage is a consequence of private property, i.e. the practice developed to secure the transfer of property between generations (inheritance). It also provides a unit for the socialisation of children in the absence of any communal mechanism. This is achieved by shackling the sexuality of the partners, especially the woman.

    Also, what are peoples thoughts about marrying someone not because you personally support marriage, but because you care about your significant other and they are saying that marriage would make them happy for whatever reason?
    That's a pretty stupid thing to do. Quite apart from what anyone thinks of it, marriage is a serious commitment. You have to commit to it yourself, not because you want to please another person. Otherwise it's all going to end in tears.
    The criticism of religion ends with the teaching that man is the highest essence for man – hence, with the categoric imperative to overthrow all relations in which man is a debased, enslaved, abandoned, despicable essence, relations which cannot be better described than by the cry of a Frenchman when it was planned to introduce a tax on dogs: Poor dogs! They want to treat you as human beings!
    - Karl Marx, Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right
  9. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Queen Mab For This Useful Post:


  10. #7
    Join Date Jun 2003
    Location Western North Cack
    Posts 2,502
    Organisation
    Lorena Bobbit Fan Club
    Rep Power 36

    Default

    I have complicated feelings on this subject. My political views and my personal views clash strongly on this. Politically, I am ideally opposed to marriage. I think it is an obsolete concept that is inherently oppressive. My personal views at one point fit with that, but as I grew up and started to see the complexities in my emotions and those complex emotions interwove with someone else's complex emotions I realized that there are emotional complexities that my political views about the subject don't quite cover. So now I find myself waiting for this guy I fell in love with about two years ago to purpose. Is it something I can understand on a rational level? No. Can I reconcile it with my own world outlook? No. Does that change that those are my personal feeling and emotions? Fuck no.
    Take it for what its worth, but while my political outlook is opposed to marriage, I recognize that there are emotional complexities that go into it that can't be accounted for simply though my political outlook. It is a much more complex subject than I can explain on a political or ideological level.
    I dreamt of a flower that was so beautiful that when it whithered away and died a tear left my eye. I saw our births, our lives and our deaths. I felt fire paint me with pain and I felt a kiss on my lips with a knife in my neck. Love to heartbreak to self-destruction to birth and to finally learning to frolic back into the same trap with a warm smile.

    O|O

    My blog: The Riot Slut Rage
  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bad Grrrl Agro For This Useful Post:


  12. #8
    Join Date Jan 2014
    Location USA
    Posts 714
    Rep Power 35

    Default

    On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution.

    The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital.
    https://www.marxists.org/archive/mar...festo/ch02.htm
    "We should not say that one man's hour is worth another man's hour, but rather that one man during an hour is worth just as much as another man during an hour. Time is everything, man is nothing: he is at the most time's carcass." Karl Marx
  13. The Following User Says Thank You to Redistribute the Rep For This Useful Post:


  14. #9
    Join Date May 2012
    Location Florida, USA
    Posts 1,201
    Rep Power 24

    Default

    Ok so to some things up, the main reasons people here are against marriage are:

    1) It stems from a sexist and bourgeois history.

    2) It is unfair that unmarried people can't enjoy the same privileges as married people (especially with people who are polyamorous and aren't even allowed to get married), and marriage perpetuates that.

    3) It reinforces the useless and socially constructed idea that long term, monogamous relationships are superior relationships, which can cause others who are polyamorous or not so much into long term monogamy to be looked down upon.

    4) Besides providing unfair economic privilege, it serves no actual purpose except for some vague and subjective symbolic one that is also socially constructed without any real utility.

    Am I pretty much on the mark here? If so, these sound like pretty good reasons to me, thanks everyone.
    FKA Chomsssssssky, Skwisgaar, The Employer Destroyer, skybutton
  15. #10
    Join Date Jun 2003
    Location Western North Cack
    Posts 2,502
    Organisation
    Lorena Bobbit Fan Club
    Rep Power 36

    Default

    There are many types of polyamory. There are married couples that are poly fidelis as well as other forms of poly.
    I dreamt of a flower that was so beautiful that when it whithered away and died a tear left my eye. I saw our births, our lives and our deaths. I felt fire paint me with pain and I felt a kiss on my lips with a knife in my neck. Love to heartbreak to self-destruction to birth and to finally learning to frolic back into the same trap with a warm smile.

    O|O

    My blog: The Riot Slut Rage
  16. #11
    Join Date Apr 2014
    Posts 2
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    The original source of western marriage was a pagan celebration of Mars and Venus / Ares and Aphrodite. It was a fertility ritual for new couples. Ares being the ultimate image and representative of Man. Aphrodite being the symbol of female beautiful. As early Christianity moved into Rome they adopted the ritual as their own.

    Nowadays its a government contract between couples for tax rights.
  17. #12
    Join Date May 2012
    Location Florida, USA
    Posts 1,201
    Rep Power 24

    Default

    There are many types of polyamory. There are married couples that are poly fidelis as well as other forms of poly.
    Yes but in the west "poly fidelis" isn't a legal thing so polyamorous people who'd like to get married whether male or female are SOL - the point here is that marriage gives unfair preference to monogamous people.
    FKA Chomsssssssky, Skwisgaar, The Employer Destroyer, skybutton
  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Skyhilist For This Useful Post:


  19. #13
    Join Date May 2008
    Location Everett, WA, USA
    Posts 2,467
    Organisation
    Communist Labor Party
    Rep Power 68

    Default

    Marriage will be an anachronism under communism, because it represents property relations that will have been abolished.
    "I have declared war on the rich who prosper on our poverty, the politicians who lie to us with smiling faces, and all the mindless, heartless robots who protect them and their property." - Assata Shakur
  20. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Danielle Ni Dhighe For This Useful Post:


  21. #14
    Join Date Jan 2008
    Posts 391
    Organisation
    Considering my Options
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    So it seems most people on here are against marriage. I'm just wondering what the prevailing reasons are for taking such a stance. Again, I currently have no stance of my own, so I'm not looking for this to turn into one of those classic revleft threads with a bunch of pointless fighting.
    I am against marriage because it is a restriction of sexual freedom. To exist within a 'marriage' requires you to repress your sexuality and this leads to neurosis. (e.g. the "nice" guy who is so completely hopeless he can't ask the girl out because he's too sexually repressed and is obsessed with doing everything 'right' rather than wanting to be happy and just have a f*ck).

    this is a position I've taken based on the fact I've had neurosis (depression, anxiety, etc) because I've repressed my sexuality, not because I've had sex. I'm a virgin, so I'm still exploring the subject.

    (i.e. I was the utterly hopeless 'nice guy' and want to change that).

    Also, what are peoples thoughts about marrying someone not because you personally support marriage, but because you care about your significant other and they are saying that marriage would make them happy for whatever reason?
    There is a difference between 'marriage' and 'monogamy'. The difference is that marriage is a compulsive monogamy in which a person is expected (due to the need to allocate private property) to be in a relationship till 'death' do us part, etc. These restrictions on sexual behavior cause neuroses because sexuality is not a biological function for procreation, by a psychological one based on satisfaction of the sexual instincts by pleasure.

    however, there is a difference between sleeping with everyone you meet (which is almost as neurotic as not sleeping with anyone or sleeping with only one person) and a healthy 'openness' to having sexual encounters with more than one partner. Sexual desire is spontaneous and doesn't 'fit in the box'. So if I had a partner who wanted me to get married, (whatever I might feel emotionally) I know that he/she will want to sleep with other people sometime in the future- so they are not simply denying my freedom, but denying theirs as well. it is often the case that when one partner gets involved with someone else- with a great deal of awkwardness the other partner will let them go out because they want them to be happy.

    There was a guy I knew who- had he been bisexual- I would have conceivably spent a lifetime with as he made me that happy. he had ADHD, so I knew that if he and I went out, there would be others and it was best just to accept it rather than risk losing him. he was the person who (as a friend) introduced me to the idea of 'open relationships'.

    Truth be told, I would have to sit down with my partner and talk it out and see if we can reach a healthy understanding; this is potentially a 'deal breaker' as I think in the long-run it will make BOTH of us unhappy- but I've never been in that situation before, so I can't be certain what I'd do. it really depends on the person. A firm 'ideological' position on this is going to be counter-productive to actually having a healthy relationship, as free love means that the emotions have to come first, not ideology or any fixed system of 'rules'.
  22. #15
    Join Date Feb 2006
    Location Turkey
    Posts 8,093
    Rep Power 127

    Default

    Marriage will be an anachronism under communism, because it represents property relations that will have been abolished.
    Despite this I think that it will continue for some time.

    I reject the idea that a long term monogamous relationship should be considered the ideal. Marriage is as much an economic arrangement as a matter of love. On a personal level, I don't want to get married because it isn't for me, but on a political level I can't condone it. The benefits that come with being married in our current society should be available to people in all kinds of relationships, whether monogamous or polyamorous.
    I imagine that it could change over time. but I think for most people a "long term monogamous relationship" is the ideal.

    Devrim
  23. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Devrim For This Useful Post:


  24. #16
    الاشتراكية هي المطرقة التي نست Supporter
    Admin
    Join Date Aug 2010
    Location Detroit, Michigan.
    Posts 8,258
    Rep Power 159

    Default

    Devrim is right, something so culturually embedded as monogamous relationships will be done away with over a long period of time, not through policies.
    [FONT="Courier New"] “We stand for organized terror - this should be frankly admitted. Terror is an absolute necessity during times of revolution. Our aim is to fight against the enemies of the Revolution and of the new order of life. ”
    Felix Dzerzhinsky
    [/FONT]

    لا شيء يمكن وقف محاكم التفتيش للثورة
  25. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Rafiq For This Useful Post:


  26. #17
    Join Date Mar 2012
    Location England, UK
    Posts 977
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    I am married, but I am generally against it in principle (think it's an arcane institution that serves no purpose but to prop up traditions, stroke egos and turn a break-up into a legal battle).
    However, my wife is a lover of all things traditional (christmas, easter, pancakes, blah) and has always seen herself marrying the person she loves and has kids with. I didn't / don't feel strongly enough about it to deny her so we went ahead with a simple, non-religious service with family, friends and a meal afterwards.
    Wouldn't miss it if it was gone, happy to be married because it's what she wanted.
  27. #18
    Join Date Sep 2013
    Posts 1,168
    Organisation
    First-World Lepidan Communist International (Fight Back!)
    Rep Power 0

    Default

    I'm a big fan of monogamy, and not such a big fan of marriage.
  28. The Following User Says Thank You to Five Year Plan For This Useful Post:


  29. #19
    Join Date Jun 2003
    Location Western North Cack
    Posts 2,502
    Organisation
    Lorena Bobbit Fan Club
    Rep Power 36

    Default

    Yes but in the west "poly fidelis" isn't a legal thing so polyamorous people who'd like to get married whether male or female are SOL - the point here is that marriage gives unfair preference to monogamous people.
    That doesn't necessarily imply that marriage is inherently bad per se.

    It's like if a light bulb is that painfully bright kind that hurts your eyes you don't take a baseball bat to the light fixtures (unless you're me, I'll take a baseball bat to anything I can smash) you replace it with a more gentle bulb so your eyes don't hurt but you still aren't in the dark unable to find the whiskey.
    I dreamt of a flower that was so beautiful that when it whithered away and died a tear left my eye. I saw our births, our lives and our deaths. I felt fire paint me with pain and I felt a kiss on my lips with a knife in my neck. Love to heartbreak to self-destruction to birth and to finally learning to frolic back into the same trap with a warm smile.

    O|O

    My blog: The Riot Slut Rage
  30. #20
    Join Date Feb 2014
    Posts 417
    Rep Power 8

    Default

    Bakunin, Revolutionary Catechism:

    X, N:

    "Abolition not of the natural family but of the legal family founded on law and property. Religious and civil marriage to be replaced by free marriage. Adult men and women have the right to unite and separate as they please, nor has society the right to hinder their union or to force them to maintain it. With the abolition of the right of inheritance and the education of children assured by society, all the legal reasons for the irrevocability of marriage will disappear. The union of a man and a woman must be free, for a free choice is the indispensable condition for moral sincerity. In marriage, man and woman must enjoy absolute liberty. Neither violence nor passion nor rights surrendered in the past can justify an invasion by one of the liberty of another, and every such invasion shall be considered a crime."

    https://www.marxists.org/reference/a.../catechism.htm
    pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will

    previously known as impossible
  31. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to bropasaran For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Same-Sex Marriage Does Threaten "Traditional" Marriage
    By Danielle Ni Dhighe in forum Anti-Discrimination
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 5th April 2013, 13:18
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 7th June 2011, 13:27
  3. Kentucky Church: Legalize Same-Sex Marriage or We Stop Licensing Marriage, Altogether
    By The Vegan Marxist in forum News & Ongoing Struggles
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 24th April 2011, 03:30
  4. Marriage
    By Richard Nixon in forum OI Learning
    Replies: 120
    Last Post: 4th December 2009, 09:37
  5. [anarkismo.net] Deal or no deal in Honduras
    By RSS News in forum Newswire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 5th November 2009, 13:00

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Tags for this Thread