• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

What if marriage was temporary?

JoeMorgue

Self Employed , Remittance Man
JoeMorgue
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
48,325
Location
Florida
http://qz.com/65658/what-if-marriage-were-temporary/

In Jonathan Swift’s 1726 classic Gulliver’s Travels, he describes a race of people, the Struldburgs, who are afflicted with the pesky inconvenience of immortality. If two Struldburgs are to marry each other, “of course” the marriage is dissolved, by courtesy of the kingdom, as soon as the younger partner hits 80, “for the law thinks it a reasonable indulgence, that those who are condemned…to a perpetual continuance in the world, should not have their misery doubled by the load of a wife.”

While some of Swift’s satirical propositions are agelessly absurd (the most obvious being “A Modest Proposal” and its bid for cannibalism), the idea of a marriage with an expiration date seems somehow prescient. With the divorce rate hovering between 40 and 50 percent, one could argue half of marriages are temporary, anyway. In a development that proves even more canny for Mr. Swift, a recent studyhas shown the “gray divorce” rate (the divorce rate among couples over 50) has doubled since 1990. With these facts in front of us, could we make the case the idea of a time-sensitive marriage has morphed from a bitter joke into a viable option for modern couples?
Click to expand...
 
I liked the part where the giant woman used Gulliver as a masturbation device
 
I'm not sure what problem this is trying to solve in modern Western society.

It's possible to live in a partnership without getting married. It's possible to get divorced comparatively easily and a temporary marriage will not address the most contentious points from a messy divorce, the split of assets and custody issues.
 
As The Don stated, marriage is a financial contract as much as it is a social one. Unless these temporary marriages have better rules as to how the breakup is handled (which would be a minor miracle) then all it would mean is that every marriage that reaches a certain age will face a divorce court. I'm sure the lawyers would celebrate but the rest of us would be rather frustrated.
 
Jane: And the Hensons got divorced.
Harvey: At their age? Why'd they wait so long?
Jane: They wanted to wait until the children were dead.
 
If I ever lose my mind and get married, I'm putting ordinals in the vows when we refer to spousal terms.
 
BenBurch said:
Sadly it seems like most of them ARE temporary no matter what was intended.

And I wonder if the idea of monogamy isn't the problem?
Click to expand...
I think that at the root of the sadness most of the time is the unrealistic ideal of marriage, the idea that two people can decide to spend the rest of their lives together and that they'll never have reasonable cause to change their minds.

If I was to get married I wouldn't permit the "''til death" section at all unless one of us was absolutely certain to be dead in, maybe, 2 years or less. Every other marriage promise seems reasonable (except for "obeying" but I think that's been dropped in all but the most traditional religious ceremonies) but I can't guarantee who I'll be in 2 years, let alone 5, 10, or all of them; and I would obviously have even less knowledge about my partner.

I think if that "lifetime commitment" was abandoned by society, it would be a good thing and it would attenuate a great deal of the pain that comes from the dissolution of a marriage. That said, I don't think automatic marriage termination is the way to do it; "married until further action is taken" seems sufficient. It's about the evolution of society, and that takes a long time.
 
My marriage was temporary. Still, I believed at the time that it would last, and I don't for a second rue the ten years that my ex and I gave each other. We did build a permanent friendship over that time, and realizing that the marriage was over did a lot toward us knowing that we were great friends. Terrible spouses, but great friends. Some things are actually much more important than "eternal vows".
 
It would be great. The idea that two people will stay together for ever and ever is quaint and statistically highly unrealistic. People change, and billions of miserable lives have been caused by cultural and religious honor and fear over the subject.

Lifelong marriage is up there with war and slavery in my book. It's archaic. Get rid of it. Monogamy is good enough.
 
BenBurch said:
Some people do stay together for the long term, however.
Click to expand...

Great, let them! It's the cultural insistence that everybody should get married and stay married until they die that I object to.
 
Married, monogamous and loving it for over 22 years now.
111684c4d75817e564.jpg


Finding the right partner is less than half of the problem. Being the right partner is the real trick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom