The origins of marriage

Trump

Banned
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Messages
3,032
Reaction score
1,677
Article on the history of marriage. Article is summed up below:

.

Found it interesting that:

back then, marriage had little to do with love or with religion. Marriages primary purpose was to bind women to men, and thus guarantee that a mans children were truly his biological heirs. Through marriage, a woman became a mans property. In the betrothal ceremony of ancient Greece, a father would hand over his daughter with these words: I pledge my daughter for the purpose of producing legitimate offspring. Among the ancient Hebrews, men were free to take several wives; married Greeks and Romans were free to satisfy their sexual urges with concubines, prostitutes, and even teenage male lovers, while their wives were required to stay home and tend to the household. If wives failed to produce offspring, their husbands could give them back and marry someone else.

When did love enter the picture?


But the idea of romantic love, as a motivating force for marriage, only goes as far back as the Middle Ages. Naturally, many scholars believe the concept was invented by the French. Its model was the knight who felt intense love for someone elses wife, as in the case of Sir Lancelot and King Arthurs wife, Queen Guinevere. Twelfth-century advice literature told men to woo the object of their desire by praising her eyes, hair, and lips. In the 13th century, Richard de Fournival, physician to the king of France, wrote Advice on Love, in which he suggested that a woman cast her love flirtatious glances anything but a frank and open entreaty.

Did love change marriage?

It sure did. Marilyn Yalom, a Stanford historian and author of A History of the Wife, credits the concept of romantic love with giving women greater leverage in what had been a largely pragmatic transaction

The idea that marriage is a private relationship for the fulfillment of two individuals is really very new,
said historian Stephanie Coontz, author of The Way We Never Were: American Within the past 40 years, marriage has changed more than in the last 5,000.




Men can thank Sir Lancelot for making marriage about “one woman” and “love”, and Disney can thank Sir Lancelot for making them billions.
 

Speculator E

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
627
Reaction score
155
Don't believe everything you read online.
Just because some stranger on the net wrote it doesn't mean it's true.
Where are the sources the author cite? I didn't see any.
 

fanatic22

Senior Don Juan
Joined
Jan 7, 2018
Messages
420
Reaction score
332
Don't believe everything you read online.
Just because some stranger on the net wrote it doesn't mean it's true.
Where are the sources the author cite? I didn't see any.
They cited several books and it's a pretty reputable website, not some random blogpost lol
 

fanatic22

Senior Don Juan
Joined
Jan 7, 2018
Messages
420
Reaction score
332
Marriage in its current state follows naturally from women having rights. If it wasn't Sir Lancelot creating romantic love it would have been someone else. In a similar vein, the more economic independence women have, the more reluctant they are to settle down. That's why the poor continue to marry early and have 10 kids while a rich white girl will wake up one day as a 40 year old director at Google and realize she has about two weeks to find a husband before her eggs dry up.
 

ImTheDoubleGreatest!

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Messages
5,775
Reaction score
2,974
Age
25
Location
Right behind you
Bull****. Marriage did not make a woman “man’s property”. That’s feminist propaganda right there. It made life easier because the wife did easier housework while the husband worked more laborsome jobs that women were physically unable to do. They were still a much more protected class though, and were treated with more respect simply because they had a vagina between their legs lol.

They’re right about how romantic love wasn’t really a concept back then like how it is now. But it still did exist lol. It just wasn’t a priority because making your LIFE less hard than it already was more important than romantic love, esp since life sucked haha. The truth is though, they DID end up bonding with each other even if they were strangers to each other at first, and it was simply because they were with each other. If they spent a long time away from each other for whatever reason, they’d feel it when they got back.

I remember reading an English translation of this really old text from Arabia that was written in the late-600s/early-700s AD. This dude was away from his wife for several months on some trip, and when he was coming back, he didn’t go to his wife right away because he had a weird dream. Because of that, he went to this dream interpreter instead; he saw a dream about two goats fighting beside his wife while she was sleeping in her/their bed, and one goat broke the horn of the other and that goat stared bleeding, or some really weird **** like that. The dream interpreter said about his wife, she heard that her husband was coming back soon and was happy about it, and to ‘get ready’ for him, she took some scissors (or scissor equivalent for back then) and tried to shave/trim her **** lol, but cut herself around her pubic area.

The dude went to his wife, did the deed, and came back the next day to the dream interpreter and was like “umm, so you were actually right...”

Yeah so marriage wasn’t about love initially back then, but couples did come to love each other over time.

And while marriage was a way to ensure who the father of a child was, it was also a way of keeping MEN monogamous. Women by nature are monagamous because they can only get pregnant once every 9 months; they would need the best seed possible. But if they sleep around, they’d risk getting pregnant from a lower quality seed. Don’t believe any of that bull**** about how gangbangs were the mean way of reproducing because no dude would go ahead and father the child after seeing a ***** get shagged like that. Jealousy exists for a reason you ****tards, some bull**** articles talking about the shape of your head removes sperm is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard, and those ****s clearly don’t know anything about fetal development.

But yeah, that aside, lineage of the child was also tracked by the last name of the child. That’s why the wife always took her husband’s last name after—to denote lineage of the father. The mother is always known (because, well, she’s the one giving birth lol) but the father isn’t. The last names changed because it allowed people to determine who the father was. That’s also why last names often have the word ‘-son’ in it, like “Johnson” or “Jameson”. It’s basically saying ‘son of John’ or ‘son of James’. You don’t have that for daughters like ‘Johndaughter’ because it was assumed her name would change after getting married.
 

BackInTheGame78

Moderator
Joined
Sep 10, 2014
Messages
14,664
Reaction score
15,822
Why the hell would you want someone to be your property? Is that the only way you can get a woman to want to be with you OP?
 

Alvafe

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Messages
3,372
Reaction score
1,580
Age
41
by history, marriages was alwyas as a way to mantain, family name and power, making sure the kid was from his fatehr blood to maintain the family line, hence why the first born is the most important, because taking a virgin woman would garantee you was supose to be the father, and why? females was always a bad deal for the father, it would end his family line, hence why most powerfull mens had several woman, he need to main his family line.

all in all marriage was a always about a contract to keep familys in power, hence incest relation was common on royalty, they wanted to keep the family blood.

I wouldn't trust everything who was said by the op site, but some do fit, remember guys, everything is a lie, and most have some truth in it, hence why you need to read several sources, and then you start to notice a certain patern.

what we can get from marriage? like any contract on today its a bad deal for us, so you don't sign such contract, don't matter how much "pressure" you belive you have
 

Kotaix

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 29, 2019
Messages
2,285
Reaction score
2,885
Age
46
That site is full of propaganda articles and the article in question could only have been written by a spoiled modern person who doesn't remember the good old days when women lived to the ripe old age of dying in childbirth, and you were at risk of conception every time you busted a nut if you were lucky enough to survive smallpox.
 

Speculator E

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
627
Reaction score
155
That site is full of propaganda articles and the article in question could only have been written by a spoiled modern person who doesn't remember the good old days when women lived to the ripe old age of dying in childbirth, and you were at risk of conception every time you busted a nut if you were lucky enough to survive smallpox.
To be honest. The real problem with modern marriages today started when Government got involved with it and screw up the law.
In Sweden if you wanted to divorce you just pay something like $200 and it's quick.
Trying to debate how marriage started is not going to solve the problem
We already know what the problem is. And it's the marriage law that we have today.
 

Men frequently err by talking too much. They often monopolize conversations, droning on and on about topics that bore women to tears. They think they're impressing the women when, in reality, they're depressing the women.

Quote taken from The SoSuave Guide to Women and Dating, which you can read for FREE.

Top