Marital musings
Marriage seems like a really hot topic these days.
First there was that PIDC Quarterfinals motion on legalizing polygamy, followed by the news the next day about the raid of a polygamist house somewhere in the U.S.
Then yesterday I saw The Other Boleyn Girl. The movie's a must-see, by the way. I'm not much of a history buff, much less a European history one, so I can't really say anything about it's historical accuracy. It was still interesting to watch Catherine of Aragon, Anne Boleyn and Mary Boleyn creating spaces for themselves within the outrightly patriarchal structures of Henry VIII's court. (I now know who Kristin Scott Thomas is. Pantira na 'to sa OSCARS: Romulus My Father to Eric Bana to Other Boleyn Girl to Kristin Scott Thomas to Horse Whisperer...)
Now I'm reading a book by Stephanie Coontz called Marriage, a History: How Love Conquered Marriage. It's an interesting read. The back of the book says:
At a moment when people are clamoring to protect "traditional" marriage, this explosive book...bluntly asks, "What tradition?"
The main argument is that pretty much every marital aberration under the sun has already been practiced in some culture at some point in time. The truly unique element of today's marriages (originating sometime in the late 17th century) is the idea that love is an important consideration in deciding to marry. In the past, marriage was considered too important a political and economic arrangement to be decided by something as irrational and fleeting as love. Today, since we place such a premium on love as a reason to marry, we might be gaining more personal fulfillment or satisfaction out of the institution, but it possibly comes at the cost of marital instability.
I've barely started, but it's been interesting so far. The little tidbits (like how one Japanese magazine allegedly said, "Young People, don't hate sex!") are pretty cool. The idea that love, rather than moral decadence, is the reason why the institution of marriage is on the rocks today is refreshing. Hmm.
First there was that PIDC Quarterfinals motion on legalizing polygamy, followed by the news the next day about the raid of a polygamist house somewhere in the U.S.
Then yesterday I saw The Other Boleyn Girl. The movie's a must-see, by the way. I'm not much of a history buff, much less a European history one, so I can't really say anything about it's historical accuracy. It was still interesting to watch Catherine of Aragon, Anne Boleyn and Mary Boleyn creating spaces for themselves within the outrightly patriarchal structures of Henry VIII's court. (I now know who Kristin Scott Thomas is. Pantira na 'to sa OSCARS: Romulus My Father to Eric Bana to Other Boleyn Girl to Kristin Scott Thomas to Horse Whisperer...)
Now I'm reading a book by Stephanie Coontz called Marriage, a History: How Love Conquered Marriage. It's an interesting read. The back of the book says:
At a moment when people are clamoring to protect "traditional" marriage, this explosive book...bluntly asks, "What tradition?"
The main argument is that pretty much every marital aberration under the sun has already been practiced in some culture at some point in time. The truly unique element of today's marriages (originating sometime in the late 17th century) is the idea that love is an important consideration in deciding to marry. In the past, marriage was considered too important a political and economic arrangement to be decided by something as irrational and fleeting as love. Today, since we place such a premium on love as a reason to marry, we might be gaining more personal fulfillment or satisfaction out of the institution, but it possibly comes at the cost of marital instability.
I've barely started, but it's been interesting so far. The little tidbits (like how one Japanese magazine allegedly said, "Young People, don't hate sex!") are pretty cool. The idea that love, rather than moral decadence, is the reason why the institution of marriage is on the rocks today is refreshing. Hmm.