Gao_Ho_Ban, I guess I got a little hyperbolic in my last post. But, way I read you is that you have this nostalgia for the good ole days when folks took their vows seriously, and lived with integrity and all was good. It wasn’t good - for women or children many times. I am with you on the - what happened to in sickness and in health, and good times and bad, etc. stuff. I think people should THINK more about what a vow is, and should not take them lightly. I think that the modern concept of marriage - that it’s going to be all romantic all of the time and everyone will live happily ever after - is a fairytale that many grow up believing, so when reality hits they wanna run. Those folks don’t know what real LOVE is - If your Christian female friend had loved herself more, maybe she wouldn’t have gotten fat? If her husband had loved her more, maybe he would have started talking to her about their/his problems before they got out of control, and then he “had” to just split.
[quote]Through most of Western civilization, according to “Marriage, A History: From Obedience to Intimacy, or How Love Conquered Marriage” by Stephanie Coontz, matrimony has been more a matter of money, power and sheer survival than of dainty emotions. It has only been little more than 200 years since people started marrying for love.
. . . . . .
1769 – The American colonies, basing their regulations on English common law, decree: “The very being and legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least is incorporated into that of her husband under whose wing and protection she performs everything.”
. . . … . .
1800 – Marriage for love, not for property or prestige, is gaining wider acceptance. But women are still completely subjected to male authority.
1874 – The South Carolina Supreme Court rules that men no longer may beat their wives.
1891 – England’s Parliament passes a law that men cannot imprison their wives (or deny them freedom of movement from the home).
1900 – By now, every state in America has passed legislation modeled after New York’s Married Women’s Property Act of 1848, granting married women some control over their property and earnings.
[/quote]
Not too long ago, our ancestors were participating in “marriages” like this one:
[quote][url=http://hotzone.yahoo.com/b/hotzone/blogs2986]“When I was three years old my father died, and after a year my mother married again, but her second husband didn’t want me,” says Gulsoma. “So my mother gave me away in a promise of marriage to our neighbor’s oldest son, who was thirty.”
“They had a ceremony in which I was placed on a horse [which is traditional in Afghanistan] and given to the man.”
Because she was still a child, the marriage was not expected to be sexually consummated. But within a year, Gulsoma learned that so much else would be required of her that she would become a virtual slave in the household.
At the age of five, she was forced to take care of not only her “husband” but also his parents and all 12 of their other children as well.
Though nearly the entire family participated in the abuse, her father-in-law, she says, was the cruelest.
"My father-in-law asked me to do everything
, but it’s absolutely not the most important part of marriage. The late Mrs. Reeves, and so many men and women like her who care for handicapped or elderly spouses, prove that unconditionally.
Nolza, even you must see that is a conspiracy theory from waaaay out in left field. I’m not doubting it happened (King Henry VIII, anyone?), but I am denying it happened with any significant frequency. If you have some figures on the subject, I’d love to see them.
).
