What exactly IS Traditional Marriage?

[HockeyMom]

One man and one woman? That's IT? I think they are leaving a LOT out. Just reading all the current headlines lately, I extrapolate that their (Administration, Fundies, etc.) complete definition of "Traditional" Marriages is:

One Man and One Woman Married, in a CHURCH, FOR LIFE,
with FOUR PLUS CHILDREN,
Mommy STAYS HOME,
and DADDY "brings home the bacon"

That demographic hasn't been the majority in decades. Logically, banning Gay Marriage is not going to bring back Leave it to Beaver, Father's Knows Best, etc., if those fictional media creations ever existed in real life. Straight couples have redefined marriage due to societal/economic factors.

Just my take on what they are REALLY talking about.

[Warpy]

1. Traditional marriage? Men are kings and women and children

are their property, to be mistreated and disposed of at will with no consequences. Men are entitled to the full time, unpaid labor of the woman, who acts as an unpaid domestic servant and courtesan and has no right to refuse the latter duty.

That's what they think they all want, anyway.

[Bjorn Against]

2. Well it seems for many people in the South pushing a ban on gay marriage..

Marrying your cousin is a traditional arrangement.

[unblock]

7. hey! don't be a regionist! they marry cousins in appalachia, too!

:rofl:

[billybob537]

3. Marriage is the top cause

of divorce.:evilgrin:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

4. Traditional marriage?

One man who works, a trophy wife who stays home barefoot and cooks, kids who are shipped off to prep/reform school once they get too old to be cute, dad's has multiple affairs while off on "business trips,"etc.

You know, traditional.

[madmark]

10. one semantic quibble, a trophy wife does not cook

(and is not barefoot except in bed), and usually not having many, if any, kids. A traditional housewife does those things, not a trophy wife. Getting a trophy wife tends not to make much sense. These trophies can be acquired without marrying them (ie. the affairs you referenced). A good housewife who excels at keeping a house and bearing and raising kids that a man can get along with is more valuable and unique (but not a total substitute for) trophies.

[babylonsister]

5. And what about them there people who are polygamists?

Because a man and woman (women) are involved, are their relationships okay?

[tridim]

6. Yep.. To "honor and obey" is the key phrase. nt

[Ian David]

8. The History of Marriage

This Modern World: A Brief History of Marriage in America



More:
http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=16523



The History of Marriage in America

As Americans, we have seen changes within the institution of civil marriage. Many of us have seen these changes in our lifetimes. The status of women within marriage has changed and continues to evolve to reflect the equality of spouses. The status of ending a marriage has changed with the Supreme Court's recognition that states have to honor each other's divorces. But eligibility to marry, particularly based on race, present the most recent and vivid example of change within marriage.

At one point, 40 states in this country forbade the marriage of a white person to a person of color. In other words, people could not marry a person of the "wrong" race. Marriages between whites and persons of color were decried as "immoral" and "unnatural". Overwhelming numbers of Americans agreed. A Virginia Judge upheld that State's ban on interracial marriages saying, in a language with the same rhetorical tone as used against gay people today:

"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."

Despite the public opposition to interracial marriage, in 1948, the California Supreme Court led the way in challenging racial discrimination in marriage and became the first state high court to declare unconstitutional a ban on interracial marriage. Perez v. Lippold, 32 Cal.2d 711 (1948). The Court pointed out that races don't marry each other, people do. Restricting who can marry whom based on that characteristic alone was therefore race discrimination. The court decision was controversial, courageous and correct: at that time, 38 states still forbade interracial marriage, and 6 did so by state constitutional provision.

More:
http://tinyurl.com/mz9sp




History of Marriage
From Sheri & Bob Stritof

Most ancient societies needed a secure environment for the perpetuation of the species,a system of rules to handle the granting of property rights, and the protection of bloodlines. The institution of marriage handled these needs. For instance, ancient Hebrew law required a man to become the husband of a deceased brother's widow.

Some varieties of marriage are
# polygamy
# polygyny
# polyandry
# endogamy
# exogamy
# common law marriage
# monogamy

Different periods of time and different cultures have very different histories when it comes to women. Ancient Egypt, in theory, gave women equal rights, but it wasn't always practiced. Medieval women faced dual responsibilities to religion and marriage.

Throughout history, and even today, families arranged marriages for couples. The people involved didn't and don't have much to say about the decision. Most couples didn't marry because they were in love but for economic liasons.

Some marriages were by proxy, some involved a dowry (bride's family giving money or presents to the groom or his family), some required a bride price (the groom or his family giving money or a present to the bride's family), few had any sort of courtship or dating, but most had traditions.

<snip>

The notion of marriage as a sacrament and not just a contract can be traced St. Paul who compared the relationship of a husband and wife to that of Christ and his church (Eph. v, 23-32).

More:
http://marriage.about.com/cs/generalhistory/a/marriagehistory.htm



What Is Marriage For?
by E J Graff
http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/imageDB.cgi?isbn=0807041351

Synopses & Reviews
Publisher Comments:
In the wake of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court"s historic Goodridge decision, a reissue of the bible of the same-sex marriage movement
Will same-sex couples destroy "traditional" marriage, soon to be followed by the collapse of all civilization? That charge has been leveled throughout history whenever the marriage rules change. But marriage, as E. J. Graff shows in this lively, fascinating tour through the history of marriage in the West, has always been a social battleground, its rules constantly shifting to fit each era and economy. The marriage debates have been especially tumultuous for the past hundred and fifty years--in ways that lead directly to today's debate over whether marriage could mean not just Boy + Girl = Babies, but also Girl + Girl = Love.
"Read this book if you want to understand the movement for same-sex marriage--and to counter those who argue against it." --Mary Bonauto, lead counsel in Goodridge v. Mass. Dept. of Public Health
"E. J. Graff"s What Is Marriage For? is the place to start reading for anyone thinking about the words "lesbian," "gay," and "marriage" in the same sentence. It"s engaging, it"s fun, and it puts the lie to those prophets of gloom and doom who think every push for greater equality--whether it be women"s suffrage, reproductive rights, or interracial marriage--signals the end of civilization."--Evan Wolfson, Freedom to Marry
"An enlightening romp through the history of marriage in western Europe and the U.S." --Cassandra West, Chicago Tribune
Book News Annotation:
After Graff and her partner held a ceremony celebrating their union, she became urgently determined to place what they had done in the context of modern western civilization. She looks at money, sex, babies, kin, order, and heart. Her account was published in 1999, and has been called up again to serve in the current debate about legal gay marriage in the US. Richard Goldstein has adapted his September 2003 Village Voice article "The Radical Case for Gay Marriage" as a foreword.
Annotation ©2004 Book News, Inc., Portland, OR (booknews.com)

More:
http://www.powells.com/biblio/1-0807041351-0

[Ringo84]

13. Thank You

I was going to mention that cartoon.
Ringo

[Sapere aude]

9. You left out the missionary position and the wifely duty.

Wife promices to love honor and obey, always there for sex and doesn't get to orgasm. Wham bam thank you mam.

[BlooInBloo]

11. Which tradition?

[madmark]

12. in the bad old days; pre-1600's, the commoners didn't even get

state recognized marriages, only aristocrats and royalty married, these marriages were arranged, and the purposes of these marriages were to create and maintain familial/political alliances. The Leave It to Beaver traditional nuclear family archtype has had a very short shelf life in the big scheme of things.

[DemforNagin]

14. Well,

Didn't "marriage" start off as a strictly religous entity? If so, what is the government doing dropping in to regulate it?

What about the whole "seperation of church and state" thing?

[madmark]

19. you'd have no argument from me for the state getting out of the

marriage business; but if its going to be there for some americans, it should be there for all of them.

[globalvillage]

15. Traditional marriage is great.

It must be, my ex-husband has had four of them.

[StellaBlue]

16. $0.02 - HELL.

n/t

[TahitiNut]

17. It ceased to exist with elimination of the dowry.

:silly:

[omega minimo]

18. Specific approved behavior and roles for two specific genders

maintains male dominance in society

"Straight couples have redefined marriage due to societal/economic factors."

In general, tradional behaviors and roles haven't changed much-- in fact the clock has been turned back on society's expectations of female roles and submissive behavior.

That's the real reason that the male dominators want to keep marriage and society status quo.

NOTE to all: This is intended as general comment and not specific. If this does not apply to you and the people you know, more power to ya :thumbsup: