Marriage, patriarchy and all that stuff
- This topic has 28 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 11 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
SussexSocialist wrote:….so why generally do we propose or suggest that marriage (for example) should be ditched because of the way it is run now?
I don't think we do. My impression of a socialist society is that 'WE' wont decide. If two people wish to marry and have a ceremony why should anyone wish to prevent it? Same goes for other forms of association. Getting rid of capitalism – to me anyway – is concerned with the economic structure of society. The creation of socialism is about the organisation of pruduction for use by a democratically organised majority. It is not concerned with prescribing how people live their lives.We can only draw attention to what has grown from the capitalist mode of production and argue that the more obnoxious elements are simply unecessary and will no longer be forced upon us when capitalism has been dumped
http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1910s/1910/no-76-december-1910/case-free-love-some-capitalist-hypocrisies-exposedDon't understand how this happened – This link to a relevant article in the Socialist Standard from 1910 came by e-mail in response to a post but I don't see it on the forum thread. It says what we've been saying, and more.Thanks to the one who posted it. No need to explain!
J Surman wrote:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1910s/1910/no-76-december-1910/case-free-love-some-capitalist-hypocrisies-exposedDon't understand how this happened – This link to a relevant article in the Socialist Standard from 1910 came by e-mail in response to a post but I don't see it on the forum thread. It says what we've been saying, and more.Thanks to the one who posted it. No need to explain!I posted it in the post that now says retracted. While there is a lot of good stuff in there which is still very relevant. When I re-read it I found some parts which I found objectionable. Stuff about "degenerate kids" and so on.
If you are of that opinion, Steve, then why did you get married?And isn't marriage a choice now, I don't remember the state or any other capitalist institution forcing anyone I know to get married now or in the past….?Perhaps I have mis-read something somewhere, but I don't understand your responses……
My responses have been what they are and in no way contradictory. There is indeed, a quite logical explanation, to being married, yet against marriage! It is just that is personal to my "wife" and myself. It is unnecessary to, indeed I am not going to, elucidate further.Suffice to say, those that know us personally, understand. Steve.
SusSoc thinks my reference to not being able to say what marriage will be like in socialism is a bit of a cliche, but I have found that members are quite happy to to say many bad attributes of human behaviour will disappear in socialism because the material conditions will have an effect upon them but are happy to project the good ones into socialism such as love unchanged, as if they will also not undergo the same influences and be transformed too.Also I think we are being very parochial in the debate, associating marriage with our own UK culture. So I will widen marriage.Arranged marriages are of course common in many other parts of the world and knowing some couples who were so married I recognise certain benefits for the individuals and am not into a blanket condemnation of their way. In most arranged marriages it is consensual and voluntary and a stronger bond is formed than some Western ones. But the partnership is also very much an economic alliance. Very much alike to the increasing marriages of convenience that occur with western men and asian women which again has good and bad elements.Forced marriages nevertheless happen in not just a few cases. Often with the state's endorsement, SusSoc.I also know how serious the issue of dowry is in a marriage agreement. For the poor it serves as another link in the chain of debt slavery being forged for the family of the bride.Again there are many cases of wife abuse and even murder caused from the non-appearance of a promised dowry.Dowry marriages are technically illegal by the state but like many laws imposed upon custom it is ignored and nor is it just Hindus but Muslims and Christians who still follow the practice.So as world socialists, yes, we must affirm categorically that the status and form of marriage will end.
SussexSocialist wrote:And isn't marriage a choice now, I don't remember the state or any other capitalist institution forcing anyone I know to get married now or in the past….?No one is forced by the state to work for a wage or salary.
Janet’s original post mentions a wider ceremomy of commitment – to neighbours and community. We do have those. To acquire citizenship to the UK applicants have to take an oath (or affirm)“ I, [name], swear by Almighty God [or “do solemnly, sincerely and truly affirm and declare”] that, on becoming a British citizen, I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs, and successors, according to law.” and then in addition to this they pledge “ I will give my loyalty to the United Kingdom and respect its rights and freedoms. I will uphold its democratic values. I will observe its laws faithfully and fulfil my duties and obligations as a British citizen.” This can be contrasted with the more liberal Kingdom of Norway where it is optional to even make the pledge “As a citizen of Norway I pledge loyalty to my country Norway and to the Norwegian society, and I support democracy and human rights and will respect the laws of the country.”In Australia it is the "Pledge of Commitment": – “From this time forward, under God, I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people, whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey”
alanjjohnstone wrote:Also i think we are being very parochial in the debate, associating marriage with our own UK culture. So i will widen marriage.Re 'being parochial' my view point on this is that we should endeavour to focus as widely as we can in each and every subject we discuss, remembering we are a tiny part of the global working class with myriad different cultures and norms.Taking a very broad world-wide view we have to recognise the R word factor too. Religion plays an enormous role in the institution of marriage. Polygamy, still practised widely, is another example of patriarchy – if the man can afford it he can have four (I think) wives and umpteen concubines. Egalitarian it is not.Without economic restraints or social pressures I can't imagine any kind of law being applied to marriage. If a couple did decide to separate after having committing to each other previously what would the divorce or separation document consist of?
SussexSocialist wrote:And isn't marriage a choice now, I don't remember the state or any other capitalist institution forcing anyone I know to get married now or in the past….?You're right in that it isn't or wasn't mandatory, however social pressures because of the way various institutions are/were organised have been a large part of the problem. No doubt attitudes have changed enormously in the last 50 years but the 'swinging sixties' weren't as free and easy as some may imagine. Access to housing, the contraception pill, a double room in a hotel, giving birth to and raising 'bastard' children, adopting or fostering children – so much easier for married couples. I would certainly see negative reasons like these for some to let go of their principles.
"Polygamy, still practised widely, is another example of patriarchy – if the man can afford it he can have four (I think) wives and umpteen concubines."4 I believe is only the Muslim limit. Other cultures in Africa , for instance impose no such limit.. depends on how many cows you have so to afford the marriage-gift.Nor should we forget about polyandry – women with multiple husbands. Still exists in some areas of the Himalayas and while I was living in South India I got told it happens in some rural communities there. Once again it is based on economic factors – scarcity of land so brothers take the same women as a wife to avoid dividing the land.Again one of the local custom for divorce in the woman's case is simply to place the husbands shoes outside the home…I suppose the same as here, by her packing his case and chucking his things out. Those informal means work when the community accepts them as acceptable practices. No need for lengthy legal proceedings and expensive lawyers. But once more it only was common when neither the woman or husband had much in the material sense to lose or fight for. Nowadays ita can be all about the who's name the house is in and shares of occupational pension rights.As an aside I have vague memories of white-sheet collections around the doors. When someone passed away to pay for the funeral costs friends went around the street holding out a sheet into which neighbours tossed in money.We have discussed marriage…will socialism change the way we see death and how we conduct our funeral rites…All these questions.Last funeral I went to was a Birmingham man cremated Indian style…a pit dug in his front garden, a pyre built and he is taken from his death bed and place in it then set alight…I left when his body fats began to sizzle…I'm told gases build up in the skull and the head sort of explodes…I had a morbid curiousity to see that, but desisted the temptation…. Nevertheless I found the ritual as dignified as going to a crematorium and definitely cheaper. I don't know if it helped his roses but every pet I had that died was buried in the garden with a rose-bush planted over it.How's that for off-topic !!
How is this for off-topic! Bobby Gleg wanted a Viking funeral. Placed in a boat, rowed out to sea, then archers setting alight to it. Never happened! What a fucking travesty for someone who gave so much of himself, to his fellow man. To me and so many others. Steve.
From matches to dispatches –We live in the 'dead centre' of the village, next to the graveyard. Whenever there's a funeral the lane is packed with every form of transport you can think of and all the men arrive on foot, 3-up on a moped, crammed minibuses, cars, vans, push bikes and a string of tractors, with and without trailers full of men. The corpse usually arrives on one of the trailers. 30 minutes later it's all over, back to work, get on with the day. A very simple affair but with huge community support for the family concerned.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.