For this week’s article, I wanted to touch upon a subject that’s been getting a lot of buzz on the DF blog as of late. But I figured if I’m gonna write a piece on why marriage is more trouble than it’s worth, then it would only be right for me to balance my tirade with a woman’s perspective. For this, I’ve enlisted the help of my colleague and fellow DF contributor Hannah Bontogon. The result is a two-part treatise that calls into question the perceived benefits of this age-old institution and challenges its usefulness for either sex. In keeping with the postmodern slant of the article, the guys are first up to bat. Here goes nothing…
Part I – Why Do Today What You Can Put Off Until Tomorrow?
By AlexsJenkins
“Up in the club, we just broke up
I'm doing my own little thing.
You decided to dip, but now you want to trip
’Cause another brother noticed me.
I'm up on him, he up on me
Don't pay him any attention
’Cause I cried my tears, for three good years
You can't be mad at me.”
Cause if you liked it then you should have put a ring on it.
If you liked it then you should have put a ring on it!”
For those of you who’ve been living under a rock for the past six months (or have just been busy trying to afford one), these are the words of R n’ B songstress, Beyonce in her most recent smash hit “Single Ladies (Put a Ring On It).” In my opinion, the song’s success can’t be explained only by its catchy beat and infectious melody. What I think propelled the song to the top of the charts was the fact that, with one phrase, it eloquently distils the fiercely conflicting interests of the two sexes when it comes to the institution of marriage.
If you happen to be in your late twenties or early thirties, chances are you know at least one couple in which the woman is overtly ready and willing to take the plunge, but the guy is trying to hold out as long as he can before bidding his final farewell to bachelorhood. There is no shortage of reasons why women, by and large, embrace marriage whereas men procrastinate on it like a prostate exam. And these reasons may vary from one couple to the next, but there are a few factors that generally apply across the board and can go a long way towards explaining the divide.
Perhaps the most obvious reason so many men are so reluctant to tie the knot is because they view marriage as the termination of their tenure in “the game”; a form of contractual castration if you will. Whether by societal conditioning or genetic predisposition or both, the vast majority of men have a strong desire to sleep with a many suitable women as their attractiveness and schedule will permit. Even those who’ve had much less prolific careers in this respect, will postpone marriage based on the off-chance that they may still be able to obtain that one last notch on their belt before throwing in the towel for good. Therefore, before a guy can propose, he must resign himself to the likelihood that the game is truly over.
This is also part of the reason that men have acquired a reputation for being afraid of commitment. However, in this case, I would argue, it’s not the commitment that worries us as much as the permanence - the idea that you’re about to enter into a life-long contract and you can never change your mind.
But this epidemic of recalcitrance among would-be grooms isn’t totally governed by such ignoble and self-indulgent motives. Pragmatism also plays a significant role. Apart from a few nominal tax breaks and reduced insurance premiums, there are absolutely no practical benefits to being married versus staying an unmarried couple (other than those we artificially concoct through social norms). However, the drawbacks are plain to see. Most importantly, as I said earlier and I think it bears repeating, unlike most common-law relationships, you can’t just get up and leave a marriage when you’re ready to go. The only places on earth where this should be seen as an acceptable policy are prison and daycare. And, needless to say, I have no desire to go to either one.
Furthermore, it’s often the case that any financial incentives for marriage are negated and then some by the exorbitant cost of the wedding. In the best case you fork out a few thousand dollars that could probably be better spent on more lucrative investments but is not enough to cripple ones savings. In the worst case, the job of wedding planner gets hijacked by an attention-craving parent intent on putting the family’s material wealth on display for all to see, and before you know it, a young couple just starting their careers is left tens of thousands of dollars in the red with nothing but angst-ridden memories to show for it.
The irony underlying this entire state of affairs is that, historically, marriage was seen as type of property transaction, where a woman’s family would betroth its daughter over to a suitor and he, in essence, would serve as her proprietor and guardian and in return, she would obey him and serve him much like a slave would a master. In fact, if one were to read the biblical edicts prescribing marriage protocol (e.g. Ephesians 5:22-24), one would be hard-pressed to distinguish them from the passages discussing slavery, or how children should love and honour their parents. And indeed most young brides at that time would have been considered children by today’s standards.
As to the question of whether this doctrine is the invention of the Abrahamic faiths or they simply inherited it from pre-existing cultural practices, I’ll leave that to the historians. But it remains an unfortunate truth that even in modern western societies, we have yet to fully shake this legacy in terms of the way in which we conceive of marriage and the roles of its two primary casualties. So given these circumstances, one would think that it would be the men who would be stampeding toward the alter. But the opposite is true. After a lifetime of being socialized to believe that our masculinity is measured by our ability to protect and provide for those around us, the idea of taking on an adult dependent - whether or not this description is accurate in practice – and being charged with ensuring that person’s well-being, can be extremely intimidating. Moreover, as a husband, not only are you obligated by your bride’s family to uphold this responsibility but, by the way, now the provincial government also has a stake in the success of your union. I think I speak for most men when I say, we don’t need that kind of pressure.
Many women, by contrast, view marriage as the ultimate validation of their womanhood. For some, they’ve looked forward to their wedding day since they were little girls and by the time they’ve reached college, they have the whole ceremony mapped out and have settled on everything from the location to the style of the dress. I suspect that it’s a perverse consequence of our patriarchy that so many women derive their self-worth from their ability to garner the affirmation of men. And what bigger affirmation could there be than to have a man take you as his wife?
Further complicating things, is the fact that women are constrained by biology. A woman has a finite window within which to find a husband if she is to avoid the stigma associated with being an unwed mother.
Now, don’t get me wrong, there are millions of women who don’t conform to this blueprint and have little regard for such draconian hang-ups. And there are just as many men, who are eager to lock down their girlfriends out of fear that she’ll be scooped up by some other guy. Also, some men genuinely want to fulfill the traditional role of the husband and can’t wait to walk their bride down the aisle. But most of the time, while the woman’s friends ebulliently shower her with praise and congratulations over her engagement, the man’s friends fall sombre as they quietly lament the loss of a buddy. Because, what most women see as a new beginning, men see as the beginning of the end.
Part II – Thanks, But No Thanks
By Hannah Bontogon
Adulthood has begun to creep up on us and I find it amusing the way people react to it differently particularly when it comes to the topic of marriage. When guys talk down on marriage or scoff at commitment, I think to myself, don’t worry no one wants to marry you anyway, and I wish more girls would agree with me. I’m not against marriage but rather disturbed by guys reaction to it and girls who are driven only by the thought of getting married to validate their existence.
Some guys make a point of being outwardly vocal about it and it’s a wonder, especially when their girlfriends are not only nicer but also more attractive and/or more successful than they are. Then there are guys who are unattached at the moment and it’s puzzling why they would be so vocal about it when clearly it’s not an issue for them. In the former cases, I silently will the girls to bailout just to shake things up and give guys what they want –freedom from commitment, or monogamy for that matter. Then we can see if they will put their money where their mouth is. Chances are they are just as needy of a woman to keep around and make them feel good about themselves (though some guys aren’t deserving).
Numerous times I have witnessed a guy going off on marriage and monogamy as soon as his very attractive and more successful girlfriend is out of earshot. I silently think if anything, it should be the guy trying to secure such an amazing woman. Sadly he is not faced with that threat. It is she who clings onto the possibility that some day her frog will turn into a prince and delude herself into thinking that he will actually make her happy once they tie the knot.
It is unfortunate that not many girls are on my side and most are still obsessed with this cookie cutter life in which locking down a good man is a large part of the formula and marriage is the ultimate goal achieved.
One of my roommates from university, who I also went to high school with, would pass herself off as a strong-independent-powerhouse-career-woman… until one of our old friends from high school got married. “I can’t believe Carmen is the first of us to get married,” she mused out loud trying to cover her envy. I stared at her perturbed; it hadn’t occurred to me that we had been enlisted in the unofficial race to the alter. From that point on I found it difficult to relate to her; my plans were quite different. Her mind was now programmed for the conventional stages of life: education, marriage, and family.
Girls still can’t wait to walk down the isle, like it’s the epitome of their existence. They proudly sport the big rock (that was probably dug up by a 10 year old boy from the Congo who was captured and bashed around by another 10 year old child soldier) like it’s a door prize they have just won. They hold their hand out and flash it when approached by other guys to show they are ‘spoken for’; meanwhile their boyfriends can get away with the whole nine yards if they wanted because what shackles do they adorn to show their commitment?
From the cheesy engagement pictures by the fake duck pond where they pretend to dreamily gaze into each others eye, to the frills and hoopla of the big day, to the endless chatter incorporating the topic of their engagement/wedding/honeymoon into every conversation long after the whole shebang is done because they can’t seem to get over the fact that their special day is over, it’s been done a million times. After all is said and done I wonder if the happily-ever-after couple asks “ok, what next?” and neither of them have a clue.
Though it’s true, women’s strong desire to be married is largely attributed to our socialization, it still seems to have worked out more in the guys favour than the women (although guys fail to see it this way). Ideally marriage is a two-way street; an equal partnership where both members are committed, pull their weight and contribute to the relationship. However in my professional experiences working with women both here at home and overseas, 80 percent of the time it is the woman carrying the weight of the marriage and propelling the man forward.
In Africa, women are the centre of the household and often the sole provider. It should be a privilege and honour for the man to take a wife, yet the way we have been socialized it has somehow fallen on the woman to be ever so grateful to the man who doesn’t nearly do half as much to enrich the relationship or support the household. He takes on several mistresses, possibly passes HIV onto her, all the while bragging about his lovely and efficient wife and reaping the benefits from the wealth procured by her blood and sweat working in the field.
Women I’ve worked with in impoverished living situations have also fallen prey to the delusion they are indebted to a man who will love and support her. They end up with a guy who treats them like crap, devalues her worth and runs her self-esteem into the gutter. The man gets to be a jerk and still gets a devoted woman he doesn’t deserve.
Revolutionary Road (Richard Yates, 1961) illustrates how women can be just as miserable as the man in a marriage. The restless male goes through the daily motions of the suburban family man, indifferent to the kids he produced, working at a menial unfulfilling job he despises. It’s almost a requirement he take a mistress to relieve his boredom. But the more intuitive woman, also fed up with the provincial life most women dream of, recognizes their discontent and offers an out for them both. She convinces him to travel the world to ignite some passion back into their dreary life but he is the weaker one and bails out on their plans.
Men often pin their unhappiness on the woman feeling they have been wrongfully entrapped. However it is the man who brings his shortcomings into the relationship, forcing the woman to step up and break them out of their rut. When he fails to pull his weight and chickens out at opportunities to break free it is the woman who pays. In the end it is the woman who is trapped in a life she doesn’t want, raising his kids she feels were mistakes and a role as supportive wife she is more than dispassionate about, she would rather drive herself to her own death.
Our problem is that we are reluctant to want more. We have hopes and dreams just as big as the next guy. We want to thrive in successful careers, be involved in the community, make a name for ourselves and discover the world, but often we allow it to get stifled or overridden by marriage. This is particularly the case when the guy is weak and doesn’t have much to offer in the marriage to begin with. Women are still afraid that wanting more will cost them the cookie cutter life they have mapped out for themselves. For far too long we’ve lived in a world where if a man wants more, his drive and ambitions are praised but when a girl desires more in life, she’s selfish and egocentric. After all we’ve been through, after years of oppression and humility because of our sex, doors have begun to open for us and yet we still hesitate to walk through.
Come on girls, surely we have evolved past our 7 years old selves when playing ‘house’ was a game. Let’s crack the cookie cutter mould and strive for something less ordinary.
i don't think 'marriage' is really the problem, but really a symptom of a very different problem.
most people, men AND women, don't have particularly lofty goals and dreams for themselves. for these people, a marriage/wedding is all they have. and that's not because they 'settled' for being married, but rather... what else are they gonna do? a 'successful marriage' is the only achievement they can muster... its no different then when you hear a guy talk endlessly about his boring job as if it was something of significance, or a woman going on and on about her mediocre kid as if he cured cancer... most people are dull... dull dull dull.
and that's not to say that interesting/successful/ambitious people don't get married, or want to get married... but they clearly look at the institution very differently than those people from elementary school you don't talk to on facebook.
I thought people get married because no one wants to be a single parent. Look at all the single moms doing the jobs of both father and mother. Now tell me you don't want to get married (assuming you want to start a family with kids).
It just makes so much more sense to start a family with one mom and one dad (or two moms or two dads).
And kids are cool. You can mold them into anything you want: doctors, writers, professional athletes etc.....If I had enough money, I'd find myself a wife and start a family right now.
I think my issue with marriage is the implicit permanence - which is ironic since that is absolutely not true anymore! But even if it's no longer practiced in that way, marriage is still supposed to be a forever-and-ever thing and I think it's a mistake given how flexible the modern lifestyle is...
However, I don't think the institution as it is defined now disproportionately benefits/hinders either sex. Women are clearly more likely to put up with shitty partners than men, but I think is an artifact of biology. If you only have until the age of 40 to have a kid before serious risks of genetic disorders set in, you are bound to feel rushed and eventually compromise on the sperm contributor. But how do you resolve something like that? Less of an issue if you don't want kids but most people do...
"The irony underlying this entire state of affairs is that, historically, marriage was seen as type of property transaction, where a woman’s family would betroth its daughter over to a suitor and he, in essence, would serve as her proprietor and guardian and in return, she would obey him and serve him much like a slave would a master. In fact, if one were to read the biblical edicts prescribing marriage protocol (e.g. Ephesians 5:22-24), one would be hard-pressed to distinguish them from the passages discussing slavery, or how children should love and honour their parents. And indeed most young brides at that time would have been considered children by today’s standards."
You're speaking history and you cite two verses of one source (the Christian bible) and you take the two verses out of context to justify your point. For anyone unfamiliar with that passage, I'll throw in the preceding verse and subsequent verse:
"Ephesians 5:21 Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Ephesians 5:22 Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord.
Ephesians 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.
Ephesians 5:24 As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands.
Ephesians 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her,
Ephesians 5:26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,
Ephesians 5:27 that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.
Ephesians 5:28 Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself."
So...yeah...that certainly sounds like a property transaction...or slavery...or a parent child relationship... But that's not to say that marriage didn't take on forms that looked like that. I'm just pointing out that your support for this point actually undermines it.
You see, Paul is actually making an analogy for the ideal in marriage here: just as Jesus gives his life for the church, a husband is called to do the same for his wife. The church is "subject" to the gift (i.e. sacrifice; love) that Jesus gives, so too the wife is called to be "subject" to receiving her husband's gift (i.e. sacrifice; love). In other words, "Husband - love your wife" and "Wife - let your husband love you".
So when most people cite those two verses that you just did, you ignore the weighty burden which men are called to carry in marriage. True, many men fear commitment, but not for commitment's sake or an idea of "an end". The real fear is of what that commitment entails - "love". Not the "pleasant-to-think-of" kind -- I mean the self-sacrificing, selfless, blood-letting, life-giving kind. And sadly, most men don't have the balls for that.
I've never planned my wedding, nor am I interested in a "cookie cutter" life. I certainly don't think my self-worth depends on being someone's wife. I do, however, want to get married eventually. But here's the thing: I don't want to get married to anyone who sees marriage as an end or as something I'm trying to trick him into. It's not that I don't understand where that view comes from, it's that if you hold it, our values are likely so far apart we wouldn't be able to relate to each other anyway. Marriage, to me, is the beginning and extension of a family. Whether you have children or not, you become family through promising to be true to each other in front of the important people in your lives. Family is one of those things, like daycare and jail, that you really shouldn't be able to leave. Sure, there are other ways people become family and there are other ways in which commitment is realized, but marriage is a conscious choice, and so, to me, more powerful than simply living together until commitment rises out of inertia. So, to the guys who rail against marriage and see it as nothing more than two individuals trapped together for eternity, I'm echoing Hannah in saying that's fine; I don't want to marry you either.