Marriage

By Kathryn Klug

            Traditionally, marriage has been viewed as the union of one man and one woman “until death do them part.” However, in recent years, a shift has been occurring in people’s views of marriage. Some people would like to see marriage redefined as the union of two or, perhaps, more individuals of either sex to be ended at the discretion of either or any partner, for any reason, thus complicating things immeasurably. I believe that marriage should be defined as the legal union of one man and one woman and the majority[1] of Americans agree with me. Why should the basic definition of marriage be changed to accommodate the views of a minority?

            Marriage has been, for centuries, fulfilling some of men’s and women’s basic needs. Women like to know that they are loved and are safe from danger. They also want to nurture and love their own children. Traditionally, it would have been considered extremely wicked to have children outside of the bonds of marriage. Men desire to protect and care for their families. They want to have a family that they can call their own and marriage, traditionally, was the best way to get that, because living with a woman who was not your wife would have been a major scandal.

These traditional views were held for centuries and were a major focus during the Victorian period when marriage and family were very strict in their guidelines of propriety and morals. In the nineteen hundreds, people began to rebel against the restrictive bonds of Victorianism and during the nineteen twenties morals began to drastically decline. Divorce, which had been all but unheard of before, began to be considered an allowable procedure. However, people sobered up rather quickly during the great Depression when there was little time or extra money for legal battles and so forth. This temporary return to traditional views continued until nineteen-forty-five[2] when the country left its state of war and began to flourish economically without the restraints of war or depression. People also had time for their disputes which, one can imagine, had been forgotten during the turmoil of war. During the nineteen sixties it was less a problem of divorce than a problem of marriage- the number of marriages dropped to the lowest they had been since the nineteen-thirties[3]. The generation reaching adulthood at this time, known as the baby boomers, began its notorious rebellion against tradition and authority. During this time, abortion became a socially acceptable procedure along with a resurgence of the feminist movement which had been started around the turn of the century with the women’s suffrage movement. These two things tended to encourage the view that people should take care of themselves before anybody else. This selfishness led to soaring divorce rates and an increase in sexual deviancies as people, in misguided attempts to please themselves, tried to run from the safe harbors of tradition into more exciting and novel places. This basic view has continued until today as is attested to by the soaring rate of pregnancies outside of wedlock. [4]

Those who do decide to get married in the traditional manner are still the norm, though divorce rates are shockingly high. Why is this trend growing? What has caused it? Perhaps it has something to do with our old friends, the feminists, whose chant of equality with men, has removed many of the barriers that were instituted to protect women. Of course, not everything the feminists have done is wrong; for example, they proved that, though different, women do have the same mental capacities as their masculine counterparts, but they also began to deny some of the basic characteristics that define woman’s femininity and man’s masculinity. They began to perceive what had long been signs of respect by men for women as insults. They believed that the men thought that they were weak and could not do things for themselves, so they set out to prove them wrong, and they did. But in the process they did not gain any respect in men’s eyes as they had hoped, but instead they gained contempt. I think that men were thinking, “They have nothing to prove. What’s the big deal?”

The feminist movement also poured contempt on the man. In woman’s quest for equality, she degraded man’s image into a selfish, wife-beating jerk. Of course, there were many men like this, but there were also many who truly loved and honored their wives and just begged for the chance to show it. As the feminist movement grew, its characterization of men became a self-fulfilling prophecy. This surely led marriage partners to distrust each other. Women expected their husbands to act like the feminist propaganda said they would and men expected their wives to lash out at them because of some of the silliest things until the marriages ended in a divorce.

            Another thing to consider is the number of men and women living together without benefit of clergy. This used to be called “shacking up” and was seriously frowned upon. Recently, I heard someone say “Why shouldn't they? What's the difference between that and marriage?” When I heard that my first thought was “Goodness, what kind of morals does this person have?” Then I began thinking about it. For many, marriage is a wedding and a honeymoon on some beach somewhere and then they get to go home and "play house", as someone put it on the message board last week. This continues until one or the other of the young couple gets his or her feelings hurt by the other and things begin down spiraling from there. He says something, she takes offence, he does not understand why she would be angry, she is upset that he is not trying to understand, he decides to be nasty, she decides to go live with mom for a while, he begins to realize that what he said maybe was not the best thing to say, and may or may not apologize for it after cold shouldering her for a while. Eventually, unless they decide to make a concerted effort to make it work, the marriage will fail.

            What is different between that sort of marriage and a live in boyfriend and girlfriend setup? There is no expensive honeymoon for sure! It’s just playing house until one or the other gets tired of the game and decides to leave.

            I think that the modern trend of half hearted “I do’s” is appalling. If marriage ends in divorce or abuse, I want no part of it! What could be done to fix this problem? A return to the traditional views of marriage would be a start. If every young couple would take some time to think about whether or not their personalities and moral standards were compatible before even the possibility of marriage came up, they could avoid a lot of trouble, and asking for mom and dad’s advice would not be a bad idea either- they are not the ones blinded by emotions and hormones! After a couple decides to get married they need to set their priorities and make sure that they concur on all of the major points and agree to turn a blind eye to little things that in the long run do not make a lot of difference. They also need to understand that what they see is what they get. There is no changing or modifying the “product” once “bought.” There is not any exchanging either.

            The modern definition of marriage is a failure because it promotes divorce, which by definition, is the failure of the marriage. Young people need to be taught the traditional view of marriage. It is the only view that, through centuries of testing, has been proven to work.