5 ms·

That frame of mind implies that marriage is something women want and something men do not want. Why? It sounds like you're making some weird assumptions about

by mfoy_ 9y ago

That frame of mind implies that marriage is something women want and something men do not want. Why? It sounds like you're making some weird assumptions about sex-positivity, child-rearing, or finances.

msla 9y ago
Or just making assumptions about how well single women get on in life, which is, in turn, an assumption about how well women do in the workforce. If a woman's best life strategy is to get married so she doesn't have to take in laundry or become a shopgirl or take some similar low-pay/low-status job, marriage becomes seen as something the man is roped into, because men can (presumably) do just fine for themselves on their own, and, perhaps, are better off financially without "The Little Woman" to support. Dual-income households destroy that pretty well, but notice how universal such thinking was in the pop culture of the 1940s and 1950s. It's one more example of how all social effects are interrelated: It's hard to be sex-positive if the common STDs are effectively incurable, or require chemotherapy (vide mercury treatment for syphilis) to even attempt to cure. It's impossible to have same-sex marriage if your legal system has coverture, which means a marriage is a union of the husband and wife into the legal personality of the husband. It's impossible to take a modern view of marriage as something which can be put off if fully one half of the population depends on it to have a good life.
- dpark 9y ago
  > or require chemotherapy (vide mercury treatment for syphilis) Huh? Syphilis has been curable with antibiotics since penicillin. I don't think mercury is a common treatment for syphilis at this point.
  - msla 9y ago
    That's my point: If you're treating syphilis with mercury, it's hard to have sex-positive culture.
    - dpark 9y ago
      My apologies. I misread your comment and didn't interpret that part in the context of the "1940s and 1950s".
thriftwy 9y ago
As the article implies and also is said in comments, a lot of additional burden were placed on men in marriage. That could easily lead for many marriage to become "toxic assets" - i.e. you would be better without one. Disclaimer: I am happily married.

by mfoy_ 9y ago

msla 9y ago

Or just making assumptions about how well single women get on in life, which is, in turn, an assumption about how well women do in the workforce. If a woman's best life strategy is to get married so she doesn't have to take in laundry or become a shopgirl or take some similar low-pay/low-status job, marriage becomes seen as something the man is roped into, because men can (presumably) do just fine for themselves on their own, and, perhaps, are better off financially without "The Little Woman" to support. Dual-income households destroy that pretty well, but notice how universal such thinking was in the pop culture of the 1940s and 1950s. It's one more example of how all social effects are interrelated: It's hard to be sex-positive if the common STDs are effectively incurable, or require chemotherapy (vide mercury treatment for syphilis) to even attempt to cure. It's impossible to have same-sex marriage if your legal system has coverture, which means a marriage is a union of the husband and wife into the legal personality of the husband. It's impossible to take a modern view of marriage as something which can be put off if fully one half of the population depends on it to have a good life.

dpark 9y ago
> or require chemotherapy (vide mercury treatment for syphilis) Huh? Syphilis has been curable with antibiotics since penicillin. I don't think mercury is a common treatment for syphilis at this point.
- msla 9y ago
  That's my point: If you're treating syphilis with mercury, it's hard to have sex-positive culture.
  - dpark 9y ago
    My apologies. I misread your comment and didn't interpret that part in the context of the "1940s and 1950s".

thriftwy 9y ago

As the article implies and also is said in comments, a lot of additional burden were placed on men in marriage. That could easily lead for many marriage to become "toxic assets" - i.e. you would be better without one. Disclaimer: I am happily married.