Marriage for life or Contract Marriage / contest

_Pixabay

Hi, my dear friends!

Today I take part in the contest Marriage for Life or Contract Marriage? by @chant

But before I start, I want to say that this is my first post in the community Steem Cameroon and I want to welcome the admin and all participants and wish everyone well-being, love, and prosperity!

_{Wendel moretti}

When I saw this contest among the others, I immediately decided to take part in it. For many years I have been teaching Family Law at one of the universities in my country and I can say with confidence that no topic has aroused such interest among my students as the topic of marriage. This is completely logical because these young people at the same time were already old enough to think about starting a family and marriage. Although, of course, now the age of marriage has grown significantly and I want to say that this is rather a positive trend, because marriage at a too young age occurs mainly on the basis of strong emotions that do not allow young people to soberly assess either the situation nor the future partner.

_{Nghia Trinh}

But what is marriage?

The understanding of this phenomenon is very different both depending on the historical era and depending on the country. Whether we travel through time in search of an understanding of marriage or do it in the modern world moving from country to country, we are likely to draw a few conclusions.

First, understanding marriage is one of the most conservative concepts of family law. Being often closely related to religious norms, it can be changed only with enormous difficulties.

Secondly, I will add this to the understanding of marriage, - is the purpose of marriage and economic realities have a strong influence on it. Let's look at it. No matter how much we talk about gender equality (and from my point of view this is the only possible form of gender relations), we are very different physically. That is why in traditional society, a woman was in dire need of a man as a chance of survival. If to simplify it you can just say: for women and children's survival it was extremely important that someone had to bring a mammoth to the cave. And this "mammoth theory" successfully existed until the twentieth century, because at first they were centuries of outright economic discrimination against women when they could not count on any high-paying job, and then, when formal gender equality was formally proclaimed, the woman's physiology itself still put her in a dependent position from her husband when pregnancy and subsequent care for the baby excluded her from her career and public life for several years.

In ancient civilizations, the purpose of marriage was often the baby birth. There are many explanations for this. This is also the need for additional labor for family farming, which was necessary for the survival of the family. For many warring nations, the purpose of having a large number of children was the need to replenish the troops. Needless to say, boys were valued more.

And here's what's interesting, never the basis nor the purpose of marriage was love. We can say that in historical retrospect, marriage is a purely commercial event, a contract between families or between a man and a woman on joint overcoming life's difficulties and survival. But does this approach correspond to the modern realities in which humanity exists? Of course, we can find countries where it continues mainly through economic problems. But in general, humanity has already crossed this line.

_{Daria Obymaha}

Now that we have looked at the main points regarding the theory of marriage, I would like to present my vision of the answers to the questions of the author of the contest.

What is your understanding of the statement “for better and for worse till death do us part”?

Oh, that's very interesting! This formula arose a very, very long time ago. And this period "for better and for worse till death do us part" in those distant times did not last long. The situation changed, life expectancy passed, and the formula remained. From once a vital necessity, it turned into shackles that constrain the freedom of the spouses, forcing them to remain in marriage, which has either already outlived itself or turned out to be unsuccessful. Freedom of divorce is the only civilized approach, since no violence against the individual for the sake of traditions is acceptable in the modern world.

Which do you prefer marriage for life or a contract marriage.

Which marriage to choose? Will a marriage based on love be more successful than a marriage based on contract? There's no right answer here. Everyone has their own personal purpose of marriage. If this goal is eventually achieved, the marriage should be considered successful.

Do you agree that house chores should not be a role attached to a particular gender?

Of course I agree! And I explained this above. The gender approach to dividing domestic work into male and female was normal for traditional society when it was caused by our physical differences. Simply put, those who are physically stronger often got work outside the house: hunting, plowing the ground, etc. The woman, as weaker physically, was engaged in household chores. But now a man and a woman can "catch a mammoth" on an equal footing. And I'll tell you more, her "mammoth" is more often bigger than his! So what makes us stay in the cave age when it comes to household?

Consider yourself a specialist in the field, and share some tips with youths about marriage.

I think there can be only one advice here - choose the marriage option that suits you personally. Marriage should not turn into a heavy burden, its main task today - is to help two people feel better, have care and support.