Hello there,

I have an Institutional Analysis paper due in my Freedom and Social Control class. I thought it would be a drag until I realized i could write my paper on the institution of marriage.

I will start out with some history of marriage, how women used to be property, and you would marry them off for capitol/political gains. But i wanted the focus of the paper to be about marriage today.

I want to talk about it can be used to control people. For example: In the US it is a financial benefit, and gay people cannot marry (nor get civil unions), so this hinders them.

I am just brainstorming right now. Are there any other ways in which marriage is a social control?

FYI, it isn't always a big tax break if the two people make about the same money- look into that.

You also might want to look at what married people spend their money on as opposed to what single people do and see how marriage benefits certain sectors of the economy.

__________________
I think all women really want is to be proven wrong about men.

Writing papers in college sucks because all the professors in humanities and sociology type classes are paranoid liberals thinking the government has omnipotent powers and is trying to control everyones lives. Maybe you should write about how a stable marriage between a man and a woman can be extremely helpful for their children

__________________
math debater

yeah, like the money mongering of divorce attorneys.

__________________


a wise man isn't always saved by his wisdom. just like a stupid man does not always do stupid things.

why do people have to be married to give their children stability? can't you do that without the contract?

__________________


a wise man isn't always saved by his wisdom. just like a stupid man does not always do stupid things.

I don't know about them a being paranoid liberals, but I agree that marriage is beneficial to children (except in extreme cases). Also, married men live longer than single men. (I don't think the same is true for married women, though.)

Misombra - I think the reason children tend to do better in married reationships has more to do with having 2 caring adults in their life who are interested in the kid's best interests more than the actual marriage contract, in addition to economic advantages. (Single parents are often dividing their interests between their children and their love life.

__________________

In theory this sounds like it can work fine, but from my experiences in high school the kids who had married parents ended up in far less trouble, had much better grades, were more emotionally stable etc. I think if people are genuinely committed to their significant other they will get married, which leaves the people in more rocky / less committing relationships unmarried. I think marriage just confers some benefits for the kids that you can't get otherwise

__________________
math debater

Well all the writing instructors here are flaming liberals without a clue. Even though I like my writing instructor a lot and he's a really cool guy, he has some political ideas completely grounded in emotion. Lots of it has to do with illegal immigration and whatnot. But that's for a different thread

__________________
math debater

Of course lawyers are going to take your money whenever they can. It's completely up to whoever is hiring the lawyer to spend it as wisely as possible. You can't really blame the lawyers for trying to make money from the degrees they earned

__________________
math debater

i say marriage is useless. the two people being committed to that child is what matters. there are people who are not committed to their children and they are married. i know a kid who's parents were married and then divorced and she gets the same grades she got before.

__________________


a wise man isn't always saved by his wisdom. just like a stupid man does not always do stupid things.

There's only one thing that messes children up, and we all know what that is.

Never shake a baby.

__________________
Ha ha ha ha, he he he he, ho ho ho ho, ha ha haaa.

... and I thought my jokes were bad.

Yes actually.., and I have just the book for you.., it's about 90 pages long (so it's not that big of a read).., and under $5 I believe..,

Amazon.com: Marriage & How to Avoid It: The Truly...
Some other interesting reads you may find online:

Brinig, Margaret; Douglas W. Allen (2000). "These Boots Are Made for Walking: Why Most Divorce Filers are Women". American Law and Economics Review 2

Kuhn, Richard; John Guidubaldi (1997-10-23). "Child Custody Policies and Divorce Rates in the US". 11th Annual Conference of the Children's Rights Council. Retrieved on 2006-09-18

A good question to ask yourself.., as you explore society from let's just say 2,000 BC.., to today.., is "Why is there a NEED for marriage?"

There was a great special on the discovery channel about the evolution of humans.., and how we are actually the ONLY primates where the child shows significantly improved chances of survival when it has BOTH parents to take care of it..

However.., this is actually a recent development.., human children did not always require the care of both parents to survive in significantly better rates.. Until humans were actually more developed and less primative..

Marriage was a curse humans brought onto themselves.., it started by seeing women as property.., and be it with one wife.., or multiple wives.., marriage was a means of property ownership.., fast track ahead now.., as humans became a little more developed.., and women were actually seen as human.., and were respected.., marriage was less and less a means of acquiring property or ownership rights over a woman.., but more a transaction that took place between two families..

The marriage you are most familiar with.., is based on this scope of history.., where two families would get together and agree to put up their children.., and some property.., to ensure the survival of their name.., heirs.., etc.. Marriage was still.., a business transaction.. It was a "contract" or "wedlock".., where the contract was finalized and valid.., enforcable and had bestowed upon it the power of law from the moment the wedding ceremony would be complete..

There was nothing really romantic about marriage.., there was no "love" involved.., that was not a consideration.., only.. "family, status, finances".., and those considerations still persist even till this day.. So let's take a look at marriage in late European history..

Around the period of Women's Rights (not American history., European history).., marriage serves many purposes..

- Children outside wedlock were not legitimate children, under the law, they had the last claim to any estate
- Marriage was often a religious event, establishing future membership in the the church and maintaining religious control and power
- The wife has limited rights under the marriage (which means that the husband had limited obligations)
- The law how more control over the treatment of children and parental obligations
- Economic incentives where put into motion to motivate people not only to get married.., but to stay married (and that worked very well)

Best,

GrkScorp

__________________
If you can't stop the Wind, then you can't stop the Storm.

What the hell happened?

Today.., you can own property jointly.., take care of children.., be in love and be together.., all without marriage.., In today's modern world.., marriage is out-dated.., and serves only a religious or ceremonial function..

However.., young boys are still socially programmed to view marriage as romatic.., as the last and final step.., the highest step in displaying love and affection to your partner.., and young girls are programmed with the fantasy of seeking out this highest step in love..

But when you ignore the fantasy of marriage.., and look at the reality of marriage.., it's hard to find anything really "romantic" about it..

Tax:

Married Filing Jointly is the best filing status in the country.., it gets the most favorable rates.., the most favorable income ranges.., and double the amount of certain exemptions and deductions.., the entire concept of a couple.., two people.. filing together.., as one.., "jointly".., a single entity.., is perhaps the only romantic thing about getting married..

Law:

Though Congress has very strong incentives to keep to motivate people to continue the institution of marriage.., despite their greatest efforts.., the way the law is structured today makes marriage useless.. It affords no more rights to any two people than not being married..

- Property Ownership: May still own property jointly.., and to be even more specific.., may form a Partnership with agreed upon profit sharing ratios and partnership interests to allow for detailed ownership of assets.

- Insurance: Considering the costs of divorce.., the extra costs of insurance for two single people versus two married people is really not that big.., As for life insurance proceeds.., You form a Trust.., they go to the trust.., and they are then part of the estate.., and you make the beneficiary of that trust your partner.., problem solved..

- Rights: Go to each state's attorney general's website.., and download healthcare agency forms and such.., and allow for your partner to be your primary agent in such matters.., problem solved..

- Children: Guess what.., legally.., you are both the biological parents of these children.., and for as long as you are both together.., there is no problem.., now.., if you both choose to seperate.., you will have a custody battle anyway.., so marriage really doesn't solve anything.., legally.., for parents outside of wedlock.., the law still provides for the same children's right and legal obligations from the parents..

So.., then.., we may now consider the following hypothetical:

Guy meets girl.., they fall in love.., she plays hard to get.., guy stops calling her.., and meets other girl.., she's open and honest.., they start to like eachother.., they fall in love.., (see what I mean.., everyone is waiting to hear the word "marriage".., it's so programmed into you that when you see the story play out.., you're like.. "they get married").., anyway.., no.., they don't.., they're in love.., and they choose to move in with eachother.., and live together.., and they choose to have children.., and they choose to raise these children.., and put them through college.., and continue to live together.., until they grow old..

What's the problem with this picture? There are no "what if's".., that's the way it happens.., and i'd like you to ask yourself.., what is wrong with this picture? Hmm? What's that? Can't think of anything? Nothing? Well.., that's because there's nothing wrong.., this is probably the kind of life that very few married people actually live.. So then.., let's ask ourselves.., "Why is there a NEED for marriage?"

Best,

GrkScorp

__________________
If you can't stop the Wind, then you can't stop the Storm.

It0s funny how gays and lesbians strive to get married and heterosexuals don't. I think marriage is important because it shows and proves the real commitment of assiting each other with your spouse for the rest of your life.

MiSombra, it might be easy for you to think marriage is useless, but it might be because you are young. When you turn 70 (if you ever do, of course), you will be glad to know there would be someone there to help you get up from the bed or who will change your diapers if your arthritis doesn't let you do it yourself.

You see? Getting married means 'I want you to take care of me, because I will take care of you, because I love you and I know you love me'. Old-fashioned, but that's what it's for in the end.

__________________

Questions:

- But what about the children? Only married people can raise children, once they get married.., their brain develops into some alien higher-being form.., and is now advanced enough to take care of children properly..

Actually.., the choice to have children has nothing to do with marriage.., when two people are responsible enough.., and financially ready.., to have children.., they may choose to do so.., those are more important than marital status.., and have a more direct impact on the child's ability to survive and succeed in today's modern world than does marital status..

- But if you really love the other person.., you will want to marry them! Don't ask me why.., it's what you do! Everyone knows that! Haven't you learned anything as a kid?

If you really love the other person.., truly.., honestly.., love the other person.., so strongly.., that nothing could tear you apart.., would you ask them to sign a loan agreement for borrowing some money from you? You know.., just in case they don't pay it back? Or would you ask them to put down some security amount before they borrow your car? Or would you ask them to legally bind themselves and their property and future earnings as a guarantee in the event your relationship doesn't work? Is that your definition of love or romance? Is that what you consider trust & honesty? Obviously not.., so when you are asking for a marriage contract.., a legal obligation.., you are asking for the force of law to keep you together.., to be your guarantee.., because you don't have faith in the force of your love for eachother to keep you together in the long-run..

The Divorce Industry & Divorce Rates (explained):

When you read the sources posted up (not so much the book).., you will see a bias in the U.S. towards asset division and child custody..

In the U.S., courts favor women when it comes to child custody.., and usually.., since men are the higher earners.., they are to receive both alimony and child support.., aswell as 50% (or higher in some states) of all marrital assets.. The ex-wife can start a new life over again.., with her children.., and financial freedom.., while the ex-husband has to not only rebuild his own financial status after a huge hit.., but must pay for the life of his ex-wife.., and his children to which he does not have primary custody over in most cases.. This explains and accounts for the shocking disproportion in the percentage of divorces filed by women.., since they have costs so low.., that they might as well be considered benefits to divorce..

This has actually breeded what many social scientists call "The Divorce Industry".., where we not only see more women pushing for divorce.., but more women pushing for marriage.., they simply have a lot less to lose.., the majority of women come into a marriage with significantly less future earnings potential.., less assets.., and not much else to offer financially.., leaving the man working.., and the wife with a lot more leisure time.., better fit to take care of the children.., something attorneys and the courts will take to make a parents more fit to have primary custody..

From an economic point of view.., when a man and a woman are deliberating such a contract (marriage).., it is obvious why men are sceptical and why women are more than happy to get married yesterday.., women are pushing for a contract to which they don't have much to lose.., but much to gain if the contract falls apart.., and during the duration of the contract.., they can use this reality to their favor.., in economics.., we call this (threat value)..

To illustrate.., a man with $10,000,000 in net assets and annual income of $500,000 marries someone with nothing.., a model.., and let's give these people names.., Donald & Melania.., Donald sees that Melania is nagging.., sitting on the couch all day.., eating Ferro Roche' chocolates and Coke.., she doesn't quite look the same way now compared to when they met.., she's lost any sexual desire for him.., they're married now.., there's no need to have sex with him anymore.., he's living the life.., she has what she wants.., and Donald's needs are unsatisfied.., he makes a statement.. "I want a Divorce!".., Melania laughs and spills her drink over the white couch.., some of the chocolate falls off her mouth.., rolls off her rolls.., and onto the couch too..., because Donald lacks any threat value.., he can't make a valid threat.., his relative benefits & costs are inferior in relation to Melania's.., she has everything to gain and nothing to lose.., Donald has nothing to gain.., and everything to lose.., if anyone has any real threat value.., it's Melania..

So you find yourself in a marriage.., with ZERO economic incentives in place.., for both people to care about the needs and wants of the other person.., legally and economically.., one person will hold more control and power over the other.., and his or her needs and wants will be satisfied.., and the other person's will be unsatisfied to some degree or another.., not a romantic situation to think about.. Very tragic in fact.., and this is what is left of the institution of marriage..

Best,

GrkScorp

__________________
If you can't stop the Wind, then you can't stop the Storm.