Marriage is a flawed institution. All the putative scholars of this age might have remained in their lowest form of primitive and subdued sedentary state, if not for the rich polemics and objective rants albeit in the guise of panegyric hitherto unexposed to. A growing niche of people with a paucity of virility are becoming increasingly nosy with these scholars. Most of us have taken the subject of marriage for granted hitherto and are now becoming inquisitive in regards to the rationale behind marriage. in this article, i would try to address the penchant of misgivings in regards to marriage.
Where do we start ? Obviously from the period of agriculture era. There is a growing amount of historical evidence sufficiently substantiating my point here. In the period of agricltural era men and women of any tribal community practiced polygamy, incest, sodomy among their community only. Concepts like maternity and paternity would find some ground only some generations later hitherto not found owing to the inveterate habit of women copulating with many virile men. procreation was a woman's task thereby alleviating men from all their responsibilities in the upbringing of their children. Polygamy obviously showed no signs of dissent until tribes confined to their own groups. Owing to the nature of agricultural era, tribal groups were settling down near the river banks, sea shores,areas of less hostility either by nature or by cruel animals. some groups were fortunately located in the areas of most fertile lands, copious availability of water which eventually led them into the incorrigible habit of storing food. the group's requirement of food began breaking even with the food that they saved and eventually they observed a pattern of growing surplus of food. Contrary to the most fortunate groups having surplus of food, other relatively less fortunate groups had bare minimum or were perhaps starving. this incompatibilty in the groups led them to trade the food of one group for weapons of another, food for weapons and lastly food for healthy women. women that were thus traded copulated with the men from the other groups with no inhibitions.
Women thus traded had children, but contrary to the father having power over the children of the women he had sexual intercourse with, maternal uncle from the woman's group made the call, he had power over his sister's children and the father for the time spent with the woman during the periods of pregnancy and lactation felt love towards the woman's children. technically father has power and love towards his children, but the idea "paternity" needed some convincing to do. Obviously, it was a burden for the man to take care of the woman's children, provide sustenance, invest his hard earned food for no reason, albeit he felt love towards the woman and her children owing to the time spent with them.As the generations passed by, men embraced individuality, they expressed displeasure in thier wives bedding other relatively incompatible men, they realised the power of manual labour that his children could add to his. this inherent mammalian attitude led men into doing their share of work in the upbringing of thier children in the form of providing sustenance to both mother and children, helping his wife in seeing through those painful periods of lactation. Naturally, the more the number of children a man had, the more capable he was in producing surplus of food, trading the food and eventually improving his standard and quaity of living. The relation between men and women of these tribal groups was very primitive, like birds. female bird had to sit on the eggs for months together both to breed and to protect them from predators. So, the onus was on the male bird to provide sustenance to the female bird during the breeding preiod.
Men embracing individuality coupled with the fear of venereal diseases led to the concept of a family. Not all the tribal groups were fortunate in the realm of building families. Men living in the coastal areas left their wives and children before leaving on long lasting voyages for trading. they least expected thier wifes to remain chaste and this trend was found even more in the licentious groups. As time passed by, primeval tribal groups transpired into big civilizations. As we have learnt from the most recent history, bigger the civilizations better are thier chances in surviving the constant confrontation from thier rivals. This never really allowed a chance to use contraceptives. also, men in these civilizations as opposed to those of the tribal groups acknowledged the chance to live perpetually down the generations, albeit not literally. men bequeathed thier property and their pride to thier sons down the generations and in the event succeding generations of rich precedors had a head start over others in thier own time. this economic and financial disparities coupled with different races instilled prejudices in men. though on one hand differences between people of the same civilzation got accentuated, the blood lines down the generations got wider and thicker. the relationship between men and women, which was a mere convenience hitherto transpired into a necessity for women. women from rich families got married to smart and charismatic men and were respected. many women coveted this respect in the eyes of the people around them.
this abstract relationship between man and woman -marriage- got further augmented by a civilization's need to grow biiger and richer. but the then civilzations had but one problem of motivating its people into blindly fighting their rivals putting their lives at stake. to motivate people, men created the most ignominious and disgusting idea -religion-, some wrote epics, some created myths, some sang songs, some began this idea of celebrating festivals in the name of this quasi existential idea 'god'.
we now move on to the nations of industrial era. as opposed to the agricultural era, people in the industrial era were relatively less stooped before nature with its rapier of uncertainity (floods, famines, forest fires). obviously, religion started loosing its ground. nations came up with another fallible but smart idea. they started training young people of the nation albeit in the guise of education (early 19th century) -they taught patriotism in schools-, but only the rich and noble people sent thier kids to schools and nations obviously wanted to invest in more children, train as many as possible. so, they made education compulsory and taught all the children of thier nation that theirs is the best nation.schools also taught religion, they conveniently mixed one ignominious idea (religion) with another dubious idea (patriotism) . nations needed soldiers (all the people in the nation), soldiers for combat, soldiers for science, soldiers for economics, soldiers for internal activities, soldiers who would not question the validity of a request that comes right from the top, all schools did was to foster this attitude in children.nations loved uniformity in thier soldiers, they were certainly and very understandably displeased with law breakers, they could not have trained all the students to become einsteins and darwins, so they resorted to the eaiest possible alternative. schools made all the students stupids, they taught students to stop thinking and follow what their religion says or what thier patriotic instinct says. give or take nations got their soldiers in the most refined form.
State taking over the control from a father in training his children had derivatives in other forms. women of well developed nations no longer needed men for their sustenance and protection as the women in pre-historic tribal groups did. women got more liberated, they began asking for equal rights and the place for marriage in a society started to show signs of fallibilty. also during wars (first world war-1914-18) women took an active part in serving their nations. after war, women got what they asked for-equal rights. in all the progressive nations, marriage is no longer considered a revolutionary innovation of civilizations that is now taken for granted, instead its seen as an institution that has its own pros and cons.
in many developed nations, state also provides food and shelter for the children who cant afford the education.Although the rapid decline of arranged marriages in developed countries cant be directly be ascribed to state's taking over the responsibilty of training children, sexual incompatibilty in men and women after getting marrioed owing to the paucity of experiences prior to getting married, religion smartly labeling sex as a taboo have complimented to the increae in divorce rates.
Where does this leave men, they cant have the passion in a married relation as the men in civilizations did, because women dont need them except of course for the sexual intercourse. i would certainly make an objective conjecture here, men would become more and more dispassionate, they would die young, birth rates would come down, women would embrace lesbianism, there will be male prostitutes, once in a while a women spends a night with a male prostitute, gets back to her life partner (female). What about the upbringing of the child? One of the partners takes care of the sustenance during the other's breeding time, they switch turns next time around and they live happily ever after ? or will they ? Obviously breeding is painful and incredibly uneconomical. These features of breeding would bring a decline in the number of births and finally mankind would perish ?? or will it ??
Comments