> Thru time, marriage has had many purposes. But at the moment when women are querying whether or not we have a reason to marry at all now, gay people want to be included in the institution.
So we need to ask, what is marriage for?
Up till now it has been:
[history][https://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200505/marriage-history]
[sociology definitions][http://www.sociologyguide.com/marriage-family-kinship/]
[anthropology definitions][https://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/arts/anthropology/tutor/marriage/defining.html]
sharing property between spouses
children’s lineal trace and inheritance
protection of woman and children
man as social buffer between society and his wife and children.
man as financial buffer between society and his wife and children
sexual relationship and progeny- exclusivity, monogamy? poly?
power alliances
bonding -friendship, love
social, financial and legal acceptance of members
> With women now able to earn money, vote, have custody of their own children and hold property and social and legal roles, a lot of the past reasons to marry are no longer necessary. And with a fast paced, alienating culture, one might suggest that it is set up to fail. So wouldn’t we better served as a society to have limited contracts? Time or circumstances that the couple agree to, rather than for the couple’s life time. It would save a fortune at the back end if all they had to do was sign a form stating the terms were complete and both parties were satisfied. Then walk away.
Instead of this method:
[nullity of marriage][http://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/society/nullity-marriage.html] either the marriage is now considered to never have occurred or it is voided
grounds for divorce in Canada – three main grounds for divorce, which are cruelty, adultery, or being separated for one year.
grounds for divorce in USA – show a reason for the dissolution of the marriage by assigning fault to one of the parties (like adultery, sterility, abandonment, insanity, or imprisonment), every state now allows for “no fault” divorces (usually on the basis of “irreconcilable differences”).
> I’d love to discuss this 🙂
mspeachierocks 