Thursday, November 20, 2003
(12:48 AM) | Adam Kotsko:
Marriage Again
In the circles in which I run, marriage is a relationship built on paranoia. Whereas previously in world history, marriage was more or less a relationship of ownership that ran in one direction -- the man owning the woman -- now it's a two-way ownership. No one likes a double standard, but I'm not sure this represents a genuine improvement. It contributes to a closing in and a narrowing of relationships. The couple collapses into itself as friendships with people of the opposite gender become automatic threats.
Friendships with an obvious erotic charge are viewed as especially dangerous, based on the fallacious assumption that all erotic feeling must end in intercourse (or at least some "foreplay"). Since marriage is the only valid location for intercourse, therefore the outside relationship is automatically a threat to the marriage. This assumption and the consequent arguments drawn from it go against common experience and logic -- after all, the vast majority of cross-sex relationships, even those containing mutual attraction, are not consumated, even when both people are single -- but the all-consuming marriage relationship will settle for nothing short of complete control.
"Faithfulness" becomes a contract between two people to satisfy all of each other's significant emotional and erotic needs, and if those needs are not met in the relationship, go without. At best, outside relationships are tolerated as an emergency measure that would constitute a "wake-up call" for the other partner.
Do we not remember that Jesus was not married? Do we forget his deep suspicion of the structures of marriage and the family? Do we not recall that Paul behaved and felt similarly? When Paul says that it's good for a man not to marry, he talks precisely about how the partners are consumed with pleasing each other, which closes them off to the more important concerns of God. Is it possible that a different model for relationships, perhaps even erotic relationships, is present in the ministries of Jesus and Paul, which our bias toward marriage keeps us from seeing?
As a side note, I found this cool page with logical fallacies on them. One of them that I hadn't heard of before was the Circumstantial Ad Hominem. Fascinating stuff.
UPDATE: Okay, now that it's not late at night anymore, here are a couple clarifications. Even though particular marriages might not "be like that," marriage as an institution is like that. Particular couples might be able to work against the institutional structure of marriage, but it's an up-hill battle, not only against gossip-oriented people on the outside, but against the attitudes they themselves unconsciously hold. We can see these attitudes in the possessiveness that happens even in dating relationships -- heterosexual "romantic" relationships are supposed to be permanent relationships of mutual possession. I know that even though I disparage others for having such attitudes or exhibiting such behaviors, I would act the same way given a chance. In fact, maybe I'm the only one who tends to be overly possessive of women and to be terribly jealous of any other man when I'm in a dating relationship, in which case I can only say: "This is a blog post, and if you don't want to see my neuroses on display, skip down to one of Robb's posts."
Serious reply to Anthony: My "circle" is one that highly values marriage as an institution. I confined my comments to that circle because I really don't know how things work in other circles.
