4 ms·

I think anyone I know who considers marriage as “just a legal contract” isn’t saying that one should treat marriage as a contractual relationship like any other

I think anyone I know who considers marriage as “just a legal contract” isn’t saying that one should treat marriage as a contractual relationship like any other but rather that the ceremony itself is unimportant relative to the relationship as a whole. I think these are two very different things people may mean by the phrase and I feel like your comment suggests that one of those things is common while I would suggest that the other interpretation is more common. If people thought of marriage as nothing but a legal contract, likely to be broken, and acted rationally then I expect they wouldn’t bother at all: the benefits aren’t particularly great while the risks are large. I think we probably mostly agree with our own opinions but perhaps disagree on the opinions of others.

actuator 6y ago
> I feel like your comment suggests that one of those things is common while I would suggest that the other interpretation is more common. I read it as people taking that step in a relationship without much thought because that's what society has conditioned us to believe is normal and then divorcing like breaking-up.
- dan-robertson 6y ago
  Surely such people would consider it to be a social requirement they must satisfy rather than just another legal contract?
  - actuator 6y ago
    Kind of, more like just another legal contract to sign up to satisfy a social requirement.
throwaway2245 6y ago
> the benefits aren’t particularly great while the risks are large. Marriage brings specific legal and financial benefits, depending on the country (married couples tax allowances, spousal rights to pensions and inheritance etc, spousal privilege in court, visa/residency rights, child custody rights). As these benefits have reduced over a few decades, the number of marriages has gone down (at least in the West?). I don't think that's a coincidence. You don't need a legal marriage to share a loving and fulfilling life together with a partner. But, if you do share a loving and fulfilling life together, marriage might benefit you for one or more of the above reasons.
- watwut 6y ago
  Alternative framing is that in the past people stayed for benefits in marriages with people they disliked.

actuator 6y ago

> I feel like your comment suggests that one of those things is common while I would suggest that the other interpretation is more common. I read it as people taking that step in a relationship without much thought because that's what society has conditioned us to believe is normal and then divorcing like breaking-up.

dan-robertson 6y ago
Surely such people would consider it to be a social requirement they must satisfy rather than just another legal contract?
- actuator 6y ago
  Kind of, more like just another legal contract to sign up to satisfy a social requirement.

throwaway2245 6y ago

> the benefits aren’t particularly great while the risks are large. Marriage brings specific legal and financial benefits, depending on the country (married couples tax allowances, spousal rights to pensions and inheritance etc, spousal privilege in court, visa/residency rights, child custody rights). As these benefits have reduced over a few decades, the number of marriages has gone down (at least in the West?). I don't think that's a coincidence. You don't need a legal marriage to share a loving and fulfilling life together with a partner. But, if you do share a loving and fulfilling life together, marriage might benefit you for one or more of the above reasons.

watwut 6y ago
Alternative framing is that in the past people stayed for benefits in marriages with people they disliked.