Marry Me!

JDawg said:
They can have both. They have always been able to have both.
Click to expand...

Not so. How can a woman support a child and be sexually available? Motherhood requires a lot of commitment and time/resource investment. Without contraception, that can run into double digits for children. For a woman to be free, she should be able to decide if and when she wants to have a child. Hence, the primary sign of a free society is women who opt out of marriage and childbirth
 
S.A.M. said:
Not so. How can a woman support a child and be sexually available?
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that there isn't more freedom for a childless woman, but that isn't to say that mothers are off the market. Have you never known a single mother that got married later? Have you never heard of a single mother dating a man not the father of the child? Come on. Of course you have. Are those women not sexually available? Of course they are. It's not impossible.

Motherhood requires a lot of commitment and time/resource investment. Without contraception, that can run into double digits for children. For a woman to be free, she should be able to decide if and when she wants to have a child. Hence, the primary sign of a free society is women who opt out of marriage and childbirth
Click to expand...

I understand that parenting a child takes a lot of time and effort, but not so much that you can't, as a single mother, date men. Even married mothers can and have had plenty of affairs outside of the marriage. I think Kinsey did a study on that...
 
JDawg said:
I'm not saying that there isn't more freedom for a childless woman, but that isn't to say that mothers are off the market. Have you never known a single mother that got married later? Have you never heard of a single mother dating a man not the father of the child? Come on. Of course you have. Are those women not sexually available? Of course they are. It's not impossible.



I understand that parenting a child takes a lot of time and effort, but not so much that you can't, as a single mother, date men. Even married mothers can and have had plenty of affairs outside of the marriage. I think Kinsey did a study on that...
Click to expand...

yes they can, and yes they do, and society should not frown on it so much!
 
I'd like to be married to 4 or 5 women. Preferably with some men thrown in to keep up with the honey-do's.
 
Mr. Hamtastic said:
I'd like to be married to 4 or 5 women. Preferably with some men thrown in to keep up with the honey-do's.
Click to expand...

I could not even imagine being married to more than one woman. Ugh. Women who live together tend to have their cycles come together...could you imagine 4 or 5 women on the rag at once? MY GOD SAVE ME!
 
JDawg said:
I'm not saying that there isn't more freedom for a childless woman, but that isn't to say that mothers are off the market. Have you never known a single mother that got married later? Have you never heard of a single mother dating a man not the father of the child? Come on. Of course you have. Are those women not sexually available? Of course they are. It's not impossible.
Click to expand...
You miss my point. Know any woman with say, 20 chilldren who got remarried? Or had the time and inclination to support her children and be sexually available? Choice does not mean having no children, it means being able to say when and how many.



I understand that parenting a child takes a lot of time and effort, but not so much that you can't, as a single mother, date men. Even married mothers can and have had plenty of affairs outside of the marriage. I think Kinsey did a study on that...
Click to expand...

Of course, they did, but would they acknowledge it?
 
Marriage as mental illness

JDawg said:

I could not even imagine being married to more than one woman. Ugh. Women who live together tend to have their cycles come together...could you imagine 4 or 5 women on the rag at once? MY GOD SAVE ME!
Click to expand...

Even setting menstrual cycles aside, my colloquial outlook on the thing is that, given the cultural history of men complaining about their wives, and the idea that not one married man of my generation who I know does anything but complain about their wife, I see polygamy as an indication of mental illness. Shit, if one wife makes a man so unhappy, why go get another? (And, to be fair, this sentiment also bleeds a good amount onto divorcees who get married a third time; I tend to sympathize with the poor bastards who didn't get it the first time and marry a second, but after that, no.)
 
S.A.M. said:
You miss my point. Know any woman with say, 20 chilldren who got remarried? Or had the time and inclination to support her children and be sexually available? Choice does not mean having no children, it means being able to say when and how many.
Click to expand...

Your original statement was that women have to choose between sexuality and childcare. I simply said they do not. Of course contraception plays a role...but what does that have to do with your statement? If I'm missing some larger point, please enlighten me.


Of course, they did, but would they acknowledge it?
Click to expand...

Plenty. How else would we know? Guessing?
 
JDawg said:
Your original statement was that women have to choose between sexuality and childcare. I simply said they do not. Of course contraception plays a role...but what does that have to do with your statement? If I'm missing some larger point, please enlighten me.
Click to expand...

Yup, a woman who has no choice in the matter of squirting out a kid every 10 months has very little choice. With marriage, she gets someone to pay the bills [or at least share in them] and a choice [although limited] to refuse sex where familiarity also plays a role. An unattached woman with several children from several fathers who is forced to support them all has no choice, especially if she has no say in the when and how many of conception. Marriage was probably a woman's idea.



Plenty. How else would we know? Guessing?
Click to expand...

Did these women come out publicly? At a hunch, I would say, it was the economically independent post-WWII women or women too old to give a damn who exposed themselves
 
S.A.M. said:
Yup, a woman who has no choice in the matter of squirting out a kid every 10 months has very little choice. With marriage, she gets someone to pay the bills [or at least share in them] and a choice [although limited] to refuse sex where familiarity also plays a role. An unattached woman with several children from several fathers who is forced to support them all has no choice, especially if she has no say in the when and how many of conception. Marriage was probably a woman's idea.
Click to expand...

Wow. That's ridiculous. First of all, men have to pay child support. Second, marriage has only recently been to the benefit of both parties. Historically, families arranged the marriage (still do in some places, including here in the US), and wives were often bought, with the unions being based on pedophilia in many cases.

And what woman has no choice in the matter? You act as if marriage is the only way a woman can choose if she's going to have a kid.

Did these women come out publicly? At a hunch, I would say, it was the economically independent post-WWII women or women too old to give a damn who exposed themselves
Click to expand...

Like I said, I think Kinsey did a study, in which he interviewed a bunch of married women in the 1950s. It may not have been Kinsey, I don't know off the top of my head. But the trend certainly was startling.
 
1. Okay, enumerate how marriage as a concept benefits men

2. Why was the Kinsey report "startling"?
 
I don't know why polygamy or homosexual marriage is illegal. I don't get why people care so much about other people's lives. I hate eating peas, but I don't go around trying to ban everyone in the state from eating them. I don't like them so I don't eat them, other people can eat them to their hearts' content. I don't see the difference.
 
S.A.M. said:
1. Okay, enumerate how marriage as a concept benefits men

2. Why was the Kinsey report "startling"?
Click to expand...

1. Well, in many societies, as I said, the woman wasn't really a woman, but a prepubescent girl. Also, many societies provided the man in the relationship to have the authority. He makes the decisions, and she follows. You still see this today in many places, where the man is considered the "head" of the household. In parts of this country, it is still technically legal for a man to beat his wife. In what law book (or even holy book, for that matter) is there a provision for a woman to beat her husband? Or for a woman to take charge of the household? It has happened in some societies, but in others, the male dominates the union.

2. Because I don't think people expected female infidelity to be as rampant as it apparently was.
 
JDawg said:
1. Well, in many societies, as I said, the woman wasn't really a woman, but a prepubescent girl. Also, many societies provided the man in the relationship to have the authority. He makes the decisions, and she follows. You still see this today in many places, where the man is considered the "head" of the household. In parts of this country, it is still technically legal for a man to beat his wife. In what law book (or even holy book, for that matter) is there a provision for a woman to beat her husband? Or for a woman to take charge of the household? It has happened in some societies, but in others, the male dominates the union.
Click to expand...

So lets see. A man marries a woman, provides for her and her children which he had no way of confirming a his, for life, and this was an advantage for him. In some societies, he did this for several women and their children, and this was an even bigger advantage for him. Ever wonder why he needed to provide for any of them at all? Why does a man need to care for any children? What would be the advantage to a male of being restricted from impregnating as many women as possible? What would be the advantage to the man of looking after children simply by assuming responsibility for their well being, along with the well being of the woman? What would be a disadvantage of this system for a woman who had no options in controlling who impregnated her and how often?
2. Because I don't think people expected female infidelity to be as rampant as it apparently was.
Click to expand...

Exactly. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top