Would you get married ?

foaltrace

I'm male - No

minidazzler wrote: »

But that would lead to alot of weak gene's surviving. And severely limits the pool to an eventual inbreeding.

Also, life just isn't fair. And who says the happiest society is one where we all have one person to reproduce with?

I would think the happiest society is one where all people do as they please with eachother as long as it's consentual and it does not need to lead to conception. Whether 2 males, 2 females or a mixture. May not be fair given that ugly people wouldn't get laid as much, but c'est la vie.

I'd like to think that we are civilised and have risen above our darwinistic ways. But if you really believe in social darwinism then i suppose there's no real argument against you. I can just say i value societal happines over genetic "quality" (besides if you really care, embryonic selection (which is only around the corner) could do away with ugliness).

I don't believe in forcing people to live a certain way, but i do think people have an individual moral responsiblity to act live their lives in a fair manner.

Finally, I think if polygamy was the norm in Ireland then we wouldn't have such a cooperative society. People have an evolutionary drive to mate. Fairness in mating opportunities allows people to cooperate with each other instead of engaging in fierce competition. I really think an even distribution in mating prospects is essential for a non-opressive society to function smoothly.

Your right its not impossible, but we have not evolved in such a way that we are not capable of monogamy, its the reverse. Civilisation has actually gone against our evolutionary line and tells us we should me monogamous, where as our evolution came about through survival of the fittest which certainly did not involve monogamy.

If everyone only ever had children with one partner since the days of the caves, where would we be now. None of us individuals would be here typing tonight anyway.

First of all, monogamy does not create a weak species. Natural selection will cruelly weed out the weak individuals regardless of the species' mating strategy. Loads of bird species are mostly monogamous, yet they seem to be doing fine .

But more importantly, see my earlier points on monogamy and civilisation. Had europe not adopted monogamy at some point, none of us individuals would be here typing tonight anyway .

Finally, do you have any proof that monogamy is unnatural? Why then did we evolve the ability to form these intensely pleasureably pair-bonds (i.e falling in love), something most mammals lack (the ability to fall in love is genetically based. That's a scientific fact ).
I'm not saying prehistoric people were totally monogamous, but i do think it was probably more widespread than most people think, and i definitely don't think casual sex would have been common at all (kids without a father- huge disadvantage).

PrincessLola

I'm female - No

robbie7730 wrote: »

I do, its called life. We are not designed to be with one person for life. Society and civilisation etc has forged us into this sort of expected way of life, but its against our instincts of survival and reproduction.



Your right its not impossible, but we have not evolved in such a way that we are not capable of monogamy, its the reverse. Civilisation has actually gone against our evolutionary line and tells us we should me monogamous, where as our evolution came about through survival of the fittest which certainly did not involve monogamy.

If everyone only ever had children with one partner since the days of the caves, where would we be now. None of us individuals would be here typing tonight anyway.

Was there also only one suitable partner for a caveman or woman thousands of years ago? Or did that only come in recently?

I'm not convinced by this sorry. Are you saying less attractive people shouldn't marry because they'll pass on weak genes? Good luck trying to police who gets to reproduce and with whom.
Polygamy results in some men with no partners, it creates more competition among men and thus leads to increased violence. I think the reason monogamy has become such an ingrained social construct is because polygamy tends to have socially detrimental consequences.

Bruthal

foaltrace wrote: »

Had europe not adopted monogamy at some point, none of us individuals would be here typing tonight anyway

O right, so we are here though all our ancestors being monogamous are we? There are many permutations that ended up with us as individuals coming into existance. If a couple are not monogamous they could still of had the same kids as if they had been monogamous, but if everyone was monogamous, then the descendents brought about by people not being monogamous would not have been born.

Loads of bird species are mostly monogamous, yet they seem to be doing fine

I would`t say most birds in ireland are:D

But anyway, mostly monogamous means not monogamous.

Sisko

foaltrace wrote: »

Don't know where to start? Could that possibly be because I might actually be right?

Hahahahaha.

No not at all, I've argued with fundamentalist religious fanatics before it just goes in circles. This 'immoral' crap that comes up, its all the same with the anti gays, anti abortionists and racists. There is little a post on the internet can do to change these peoples backwards outlook on life.


Also just because something is made legal doesn't mean everyones going to want to do it.

I sure as hell would not share a marriage with another guy. & I highly doubt I'll be able to handle two wifes even if I did some how find two women willing to marry me at the same time.

But who am I to say that in the rare occurrence that 3 people are completely happy to share a marriage together , that they are wrong and not allowed do so?

And who are you to say these people would be immoral!

Sounds like something that 'God Hates Fags' guy would come out with.

Frankie5Angels

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

I'm with my boyfriend 4 years next month, we're only 19 so the idea of marriage is a long way away but we have kind of discussed it. We're looking at 24 - 26 before we get engaged and at least another 2 years on top of that before we get married, that is if we're still together! I want to live the independent life I was brought up to live first (see first comment!) before I decide to settle down. I have the 2nd half of my undergrad, my masters, my FE1s, training contracts, etc to all get through before something like marriage enters the picture!

:eek: Holy crap!

Fair play and all for the ambition etc, but when are you going to live your life? You're 19, don't be getting bogged down so early.:)

minidazzler

I'm male - No

robbie7730 wrote: »

Well i would`t quite say there are 3.7 billion suitable females, or males, probably less than a billion, we would have to rule out children at least.

But yes spot on.

Oh, I agree, I normally go into it much further and whittle it down to there being roughly 3 million people we could all happily live with. But I got lazy!

XxMCRxBabyxX

I'm female - No

Frankie5Angels wrote: »

:eek: Holy crap!

Fair play and all for the ambition etc, but when are you going to live your life? You're 19, don't be getting bogged down so early.:)

I am living my life!
And I can live between al of that!

I'm living on my own in college, I have my social life in both college and home. my boyfriend is in a different college too so it's not like I spend all my time with him! I'm planning on maybe studying abroad at some stage or at least working for a bit!

I'm an ambitious person. it's the way i was brought up. But this is me living my life! And I am loving it!

Da Shins Kelly

Not really that bothered about it. I probably wouldn't be bothered going through it all in ordered to get married. It seems like a lot of hassle just for one day, and like you say, I probably wouldn't be bothered spending all the money on it either (not that weddings need to be expensive, but I still could think of better ways to spend money). Also like you say, I think if I loved someone, it would be enough to love them without having to marry them. I don't think that really makes a difference. However, having said all that, if I was with someone to whom marriage and the whole institution meant a lot, I would probably go with it. Like I say, it doesn't mean that much to me. I wouldn't be bothered if I got married, and likewise, it wouldn't bother me too much if I didn't.

Aisling(",)

I'm female - No

Shallow as this is the main draw to me for a wedding right now is the dress and whatnot.I do see the advantages of being married in a legal sense but I dont think its the option for me at least not in the forseeable future.
I'd be against getting married personally because I think people would start pressuming I'm going to be having children and I never want children to be a feature in my life.

Bruthal

PrincessLola wrote: »

I'm not convinced by this sorry. Are you saying less attractive people shouldn't marry because they'll pass on weak genes? Good luck trying to police who gets to reproduce and with whom.
Polygamy results in some men with no partners, it creates more competition among men and thus leads to increased violence. I think the reason monogamy has become such an ingrained social construct is because polygamy tends to have socially detrimental consequences.

ok i said this

I do, its called life. We are not designed to be with one person for life. Society and civilisation etc has forged us into this sort of expected way of life, but its against our instincts of survival and reproduction.

Your right its not impossible, but we have not evolved in such a way that we are not capable of monogamy, its the reverse. Civilisation has actually gone against our evolutionary line and tells us we should me monogamous, where as our evolution came about through survival of the fittest which certainly did not involve monogamy.

If everyone only ever had children with one partner since the days of the caves, where would we be now. None of us individuals would be here typing tonight anyway.

Was there also only one suitable partner for a caveman or woman thousands of years ago? Or did that only come in recently?

This was in answer to a post asking why there are so many broken marriages.

Now what part are you not convinced by?

Is it the one where i said we are not designed to be with one person for life, but society brings us up to be? Have you only been with one person so far?

Or is it the part where i said we evolved and this did not involve monogamy, dont forget evolution happened over thousands of centuries, tens of thousands probably. Or maybe you dont believe in evolution?

Or is it where i said none of us typing tonight would be here if everyone in history was monogamous?

Or is it where i mentioned about only 1 person for each of us being rubbish, maybe you also believe there is only one person out there for each of us?

I dont remember saying a thing about less attractive people getting married. I was giving a reason why marriages break up, why people have affairs etc, nothing to do with who should marry who.

And as for policing who is with who? where does this get mentioned?

We have actually learned to live mostly in society`s expected moral normalities, but if any man, or any woman could be with anyone they choose for a night, having been monogamous up till then, would they take the morally correct civilised route, or the other choice? My point being that a lot are monogamous because they are used to it rather than prefering it, and if a string of opportunities suddenly arose, many if not most would be very tempted, and just about all would like the idea. And at the end of the day, a good percentage dont remain monogamous for life. Because that instinctive drive is always there contractory to being monogamous for life.

Bruthal

Aisling(",) wrote: »

Shallow as this is the main draw to me for a wedding right now is the dress and whatnot.I do see the advantages of being married in a legal sense but I dont think its the option for me at least not in the forseeable future.
I'd be against getting married personally because I think people would start pressuming I'm going to be having children and I never want children to be a feature in my life.

That sounds reasonable, it should be what suits you, not what others expect, its mad the way we are expected to do this or do that by others.

Bruthal

minidazzler wrote: »

Oh, I agree, I normally go into it much further and whittle it down to there being roughly 3 million people we could all happily live with. But I got lazy!

3 million sounds great, certainly more promising than 1:)

chicken fingers

I'm male - No

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

I'm with my boyfriend 4 years next month, we're only 19

Its more than statistically probable that you won´t be happily with him when you are 30.
Think about it, how many older couples are still together from 15 to 50? or 60 or 80?

More than likely you will break up dont waste your youth on one fellow. More than likely people will jump down my throat for this. But we all know so many girls who went out with 1 guy from such a young age and later broke up with both of them being fooked because they can´t function as a single entity?

Bruthal

chicken fingers wrote: »

Its more than statistically probable that you won´t be happily with him when you are 30.
Think about it, how many older couples are still together from 15 to 50? or 60 or 80?

More than likely you will break up dont waste your youth on one fellow. More than likely people will jump down my throat for this. But we all know so many girls who went out with 1 guy from such a young age and later broke up with both of them being fooked because they can´t function as a single entity?

I was goin to say the same thing, but i did`t want to cause them to have a row and split up tomorrow from mentioning this:eek:

Bruthal

PrincessLola wrote: »

I'm not convinced by this sorry.

Ive a raging tooth ache tonight, i think something went wrong with teeth during evolution:)

XxMCRxBabyxX

I'm female - No

chicken fingers wrote: »

Its more than statistically probable that you won´t be happily with him when you are 30.
Think about it, how many older couples are still together from 15 to 50? or 60 or 80?

More than likely you will break up dont waste your youth on one fellow. More than likely people will jump down my throat for this. But we all know so many girls who went out with 1 guy from such a young age and later broke up with both of them being fooked because they can´t function as a single entity?

And I can appreciate that! I did mention if we're still together!
But I'm happy now, can I not have that? Why should I break up with him just because we're young? He's made me happy so far and gotten me through a lot of **** couples doubles my age haven't had to deal with.

I understand what you are saying and I know that the chances of us spending the rest of lives together are probably very slim but right now I love him, he loves me and we are really happy. That's all that matters. If we end, we end. I will survive. I'm an independent person as it is. I only see my boyfriend once/twice a week, I live my own life, look after myself.

Bottom line is while I get what you were saying it's not fair or necessary tbh. I'm smart enough to know these things without someone on the internet telling me that we'll never last. This is my relationship in the end of the day and I know it's nowhere near a magical fairytale. If it lasts, it lasts, if it doesn't, well then it doesn't and I'll survive

Millicent

Marriage is the modern romanticisation of the archaic sale of women. Look it up -- all this BS about cakes and pouffy dresses is a relatively modern construct. So no would be my answer.

chicken fingers

I'm male - No

Yeah I get ya. Just this is a thread about marriage, I always think hey why get married if yer just going to break up at some stage. Cynical view I know.

And Im not an "internet person" !! at least 80% of the replies on this forum are from actual people :cool:

XxMCRxBabyxX

I'm female - No

chicken fingers wrote: »

Yeah I get ya. Just this is a thread about marriage, I always think hey why get married if yer just going to break up at some stage. Cynical view I know.

And Im not an "internet person" !! at least 80% of the replies on this forum are from actual people :cool:

You're an internet person as in I don't know you personally! :P

But you could say that about any relationship. Why focus on mine just because we met at a young age. A couple in their twenties could also "break up at some stage" after getting married. Or 30s. or 40s.

I'm not even thinking about marriage until I'm in my mid 20s anyway! If we last til then we'll be 10 years together! If we are able to last that long hopefully we should be able to promise the rest of our lives to each other!

You can't predict a relationship. Every single one is different. There are couples who marry at 6 months and others who wait 6 years. Who's to say that the couple who were together 6 months will definitely break up whereas the 6 year couple won't. For all we know the 6 month couple will end up spending 50 years married while the 6 year couple won't last a year.

A relationship doesn't have to be about marriage anyway. it's something to look forward to when you feel you're ready but not every relationship naturally has to lead to marriage.

minidazzler

I'm male - No

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

You're an internet person as in I don't know you personally! :P

But you could say that about any relationship. Why focus on mine just because we met at a young age. A couple in their twenties could also "break up at some stage" after getting married. Or 30s. or 40s.

I'm not even thinking about marriage until I'm in my mid 20s anyway! If we last til then we'll be 10 years together! If we are able to last that long hopefully we should be able to promise the rest of our lives to each other!

You can't predict a relationship. Every single one is different. There are couples who marry at 6 months and others who wait 6 years. Who's to say that the couple who were together 6 months will definitely break up whereas the 6 year couple won't. For all we know the 6 month couple will end up spending 50 years married while the 6 year couple won't last a year.

A relationship doesn't have to be about marriage anyway. it's something to look forward to when you feel you're ready but not every relationship naturally has to lead to marriage.

Not saying I particularily agree with Chicken Fingers, but he does have a point.

The Friends I have who have been, or were in relationships from when they were young until now, or for a few years have little understanding of how to act when they are single. At the end of Puberty is when you are properly becoming your own identity, if another person is a huge part of your life then, your identity forms around that, so (not calling you needy) you would be dependant on them because they are part of you. It's not like being 24 and getting into a 3 year relationship because by that age you are mostly formed and not gonna really change too much.

If anything a relationship that starts so young is gonna be more devastating in the end because neither party will know how to cope without the other.

And finally, of course you can predict a relationship, find 2 people you know who get together and you WILL know if they will last or not.

Sisko

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

I'm not even thinking about marriage until I'm in my mid 20s anyway! If we last til then we'll be 10 years together! If we are able to last that long hopefully we should be able to promise the rest of our lives to each other!

Not to pick on you personally but this is the part I don't understand, so by 25 you'll be together 10 years. Why does that have to mean marriage , its like its not legit until then? There are couples together twice that long without getting married.

Imo 25 is way too young regardless of how long someones been together, again 10 years is nothing in the context of a lifetime but thats me as a 25 year old who doesn't feel much different from when I was 15.

I think rather then the length of time your with someone, your age and desire to start a family should be part of it too. Also imo living with the person for a few years before plunging into marriage might be good also.

I dunno I suppose it just makes more sense to me that its something that should come into play in the later half of life rather then the 1st half. But I guess its different for women.

Anyway this is all just opinion, fair play on the long lasting relationship etc etc

XxMCRxBabyxX

I'm female - No

minidazzler wrote: »

Not saying I particularily agree with Chicken Fingers, but he does have a point.

The Friends I have who have been, or were in relationships from when they were young until now, or for a few years have little understanding of how to act when they are single. At the end of Puberty is when you are properly becoming your own identity, if another person is a huge part of your life then, your identity forms around that, so (not calling you needy) you would be dependant on them because they are part of you. It's not like being 24 and getting into a 3 year relationship because by that age you are mostly formed and not gonna really change too much.

If anything a relationship that starts so young is gonna be more devastating in the end because neither party will know how to cope without the other.

And finally, of course you can predict a relationship, find 2 people you know who get together and you WILL know if they will last or not.

I accept all that. I'm aware of all this. But you can hardly just expect me to break up with my boyfriend because of it! Who knows, we could be the exception to the rule!

And as far as I'm concerned you can have an opinion as to whether a relationship will last but you can never know for definite! Things can happen that noone expected! So I repeat you cannot predict any relationship.

Sisko wrote: »

Not to pick on you personally but this is the part I don't understand, so by 25 you'll be together 10 years. Why does that have to mean marriage , its like its not legit until then? There are couples together twice that long without getting married.

Imo 25 is way too young regardless of how long someones been together, again 10 years is nothing in the context of a lifetime but thats me as a 25 year old who doesn't feel much different from when I was 15.

I think rather then the length of time your with someone, your age and desire to start a family should be part of it too. Also imo living with the person for a few years before plunging into marriage might be good also.

I dunno I suppose it just makes more sense to me that its something that should come into play in the later half of life rather then the 1st half. But I guess its different for women.

Anyway this is all just opinion, fair play on the long lasting relationship etc etc

Did you read my first post when I explained why I personally wanted to get married one day? That could answer your question!

In saying that though I would like to get married one day. I can't exactly explain why but I suppose in really sets a relationship in stone. My uncle was with his ex for 10 years and they never married he was with his now wife about 2 years when they got engaged. It just made the relationship seem to have a bigger importance or something like that to me. And please do not jump down my throat for that, that is completely a personal opinion.

But in the end of the day I still see marriage as being an extremely possible event in my life. Like I said, I see it as determining a relationship, as officially saying yes we are a couple and we do want to spend the rest of our lives together. That, however, is not saying it's to prove that you love each other! I see that as different to what I'm saying! It's more about promising that your relationship is for life than having to prove that you love each other. Love isn't something that should have to be proved!

And every single factor you mention there are the exact same factors I would think about before deciding to get married! Of course I will want to have lived with my boyfriend for a few years first, we will also have been together more than long enough, Late 20s/early 30s would be when I would want to start a family but being married a few years first would be nice and then age is relative to all the other factors!

25 may still be a bit young but that's only when I want to start thinking about marriage, getting engaged, etc. Give me another few years to get around to it!

minidazzler

I'm male - No

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

I accept all that. I'm aware of all this. But you can hardly just expect me to break up with my boyfriend because of it! Who knows, we could be the exception to the rule!

And afaic you can have an opinion as to whether a relationship will last but you can never know for definite! Things can happen that noone expected! So I repeat you cannot predict any relationship.

Little miss, you have been given advice now break up :P OK, of course I don't expect you to break up, I just think it's a terrible idea in general to get into a relationship at that age. That said, I have an aunt who has been with my uncle since she was 14, he was 17, and they are still happily married. So yeah, there are exceptions.

The thing is if you are friends with someone, and know them well enough then you CAN predict most of their relationships.

XxMCRxBabyxX

I'm female - No

minidazzler wrote: »

Little miss, you have been given advice now break up :P OK, of course I don't expect you to break up, I just think it's a terrible idea in general to get into a relationship at that age. That said, I have an aunt who has been with my uncle since she was 14, he was 17, and they are still happily married. So yeah, there are exceptions.

The thing is if you are friends with someone, and know them well enough then you CAN predict most of their relationships.

Well I hardly got into my relationship at 15 expecting to still be together four years later! He probably should have run numerous times during our first 6 months! (It wasn't the most normal time for a 16 year old for me!)
But somehow we beat the odds for teenage relationships. Who knows how long we'll last but none of ye are going to make me turn around to him tomorrow and say "the people on boards say we're never going to last so I'm going to break up with you!" :P

I still say that you can't predict, only guess quite accurately!
How do you know that the couple won't go through something like one suffering from cancer that could make or break a relationship? How do you know one will just meet someone else and decide to run away with them. There is no science to it. You can know people but you can't predict their every action. it's just impossible tbh.

OutlawPete

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylHiMtCPuiE

minidazzler

I'm male - No

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

I still say that you can't predict, only guess quite accurately!
How do you know that the couple won't go through something like one suffering from cancer that could make or break a relationship? How do you know one will just meet someone else and decide to run away with them. There is no science to it. You can know people but you can't predict their every action. it's just impossible tbh.

Do you understand the term prediction?

I didn't say I could predict every move, but I can predict if it will last.

dsmythy

I'm male - No

Poll results indicate men and women (on boards.ie) are equally open to marriage. But men are all evil liars apparently so perhaps it is not true.

chicken fingers

I'm male - No

yeah sorry XxxbunnybabyxxX91 Im not singling you out, its just moanings of old lad (27 years old but probably 50 years closer to the grave than you are!)

OPENROAD

I'm female - Yes

Voted no, that said I would make an exception for this woman but doesn't look like she wants to get married either

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1K10ekScI8Q

Sisko

I'm male - No

Sisko wrote: »

Its ILLEGAL to have more then one wife/husband.

Why? If 3 people want to share their lives together, why should that be against the law. Stupid religion, should have no place in making policies.

Sure it may seem crazy to a lot of people, but there are people out there who find happyness this way, no logical reason to make it illegal.

Although most of the people that get angry and even attack me and the girls (yes sometimes physically attack) for our "sinful" lifestyle of being in a three way... truple I guess you can call it rather than a couple... most of the legal concerns with why marriage is between 2 people are generally not religious in nature or history.

However you are right that many of those reasons are now defunct and marriage and the reasons for it becoming more obscure. There is an interesting thread you could read on the Humanities board here on boards.ie called "Is marriage becoming obsolete" which you might be interested in.

For us marriage clearly made no sense. You can not marry 3 people together. Everything we wanted from marriage we have been able to get legally by other avenues and means.