Rus Articles Journal

I do not know why and to whom it is necessary...

Why marry or marry? If to reflect, then at various times, in different territories, in different social groups on this question different answers were given. And, perhaps, most less often the word “Love“ appeared in these answers. Well - tell who left on love? The aristocracy - is not present, there all solved dynastic interests; handicraftsmen and dealers - again are not present, at best the man “redeemed“ the girl who was pleasant to him (the virgin! and that God forbid); peasants - hardly, married them and married at such age when everything was solved by parents. All literature 19 - go centuries are stories about unsuccessful fight of feelings against institute of marriage...

Means, earlier marriage had no relation to love? And what had? The constant man was always necessary to the woman for joint cultivation of children - it is clear. And man? And here huge number of factors... And it is not casual in one countries - a monogamy, in others - polygamy, and matriarchy somewhere remained. It is possible to track many dependences: poor men married if their income raised from increase in number of working hands (the wife, children); the rich - for transfer of family or private means to own children, again - from mercenary motives. And here city men of middle-income are military and small officials - were not inclined to marry. Esteem classics:) ))))) One more nuance: at the small income when the man was not able to employ the cook, the servant and so forth, the wife was the only way to solve purely household problems. Let`s present: to kindle the furnace in the morning, to apply waters, to put a samovar, to warm or weld food, to heat waters, to wash, rinse on the small river, to stroke, clean up in the house, to prepare food, to manage cattle... To continue? A half was necessary for the person for normal life: to it - for creation of the income during the compelled disability (and gave birth then every year), to it - for the solution of household problems. In general sad picture.

Yes, we will not forget the state! What is marriage? It is the state regulation of communication between the man and the woman and has to “marriage in heaven“ well very weak relation. In - the first, the institute of marriage existed also to Christianity and was regulated rather legal, than religious norms. And having read the Gospel, you will find out very little about it. To the state always was not all the same that happens in a bed at his citizens as control is the power! You think, the Father did not agree to Henry VIII`s divorce, worrying about his immortal soul? Fight for control over the region due to control over the monarch and only. Thanks to one persistent person England passed into Protestantism. You think, the love is involved here, she wanted to become stronger in feelings of the beloved? Again - is not present. There is something that is stronger than love, is stronger even than fear of death: thirst of the power - for the sake of that her daughter had the right for a throne, Anna Boleyn refused divorce and ascended to a scaffold. Let`s admit at least to ourselves - never the institute of marriage had relation to the tender feelings sometimes arising between men and women.

By the way what occurred in Russia after revolution and adoption of atheism by the state? After a decade of a relative personal freedom (the truth, only proletarian adjusted), practically along with the beginning of repressions crackdown on semeyno - the ideological front began. The state needed human material, children. Cancelled abortions, strengthened ideological fight against debauchery and fatherlessness. One more moment - the person, having a family and children, is much more under control, ten times will think before acting: and what will be with a family? In the country where Pavlik Morozov was an official hero, the institute of marriage had consciously retaliatory character. Here and our mothers and fathers during an era of total equalization and rigid control of sexual activity grew. And the meetings of labor collective discussing “amoral behavior“, and impossibility of career development for divorced? Only with crash of socialist ideology and system in Russia “there was a sex“, and people became more or less free in order that... what to marry again?

All - should not recognize

that for the last millennium a lot of things changed. Experience of grandmothers, mothers and present women is an experience of the people living during different eras. What main distinctions?

So induces people now, at the beginning of the 21st century, to follow a stamp in the passport and approval retaliatory (it is judicial - procedural) bodies? For a start, from experience of acquaintances:

Registration. Well, there is even no wish to comment. Obvious remnant of former repressive system when on a signal of vigilant neighbors the person of an opposite sex could be turned out from a living space on which it was not registered. Violation of a passport system whether you know... M - yes.

property Questions. It what, I stoop on his / her economy here, and me from here, at any time - a kick under the back?

Personal complexes. she is married it is necessary to visit, and that all will think that men do not peck. Here I will put on to her / him a ring a finger and all will see that they mine and will calm down. It is necessary that with serious intentions, and he me “just uses that“.

Related bonds. Various relatives saw on “fixing of the relations“, being based on the most different reasons: good intentions which, as we know, roads are paved; that all “as at people“ and when invite to a wedding (really will hackney?) .

we Will notice

that the argument of strengthening of feelings and development of the relations because all know is never used - well marriage of love does not promote, rescues nothing, helps nothing. At best - will not do much harm what joyfully and few successful spouses report about. Every second marriage so what here “strong bonds“ statistically breaks up. Yes, by the way, and the state recognizes a so-called civil marriage and existence of the general economy (on the basis of testimony) that allows cohabitants to use the same precepts of law, as to lawful spouses.

we Want it or not - people become more independent and independent and make the decision, proceeding also own requirements including economic.

What now gives official marriage? First of all - confidence that when this “knocks down the swine“, it will be possible to resort to the help of strangers for the section which is in common acquired and the rights for children. That is, already preparing for a wedding and discussing joint plans, it is possible to speak safely: “Expensive / expensive, I want to marry you what you did not get the apartment which your relatives promised to present us after our gap only...“ or: “Well, now I will control your income and I will not allow to start up money for wind, there are much more worthy objects - I, for example...“ Each couple deliberating joint life wants to advise to watch the movie “Rose`s War“ where Michael Douglas and Cathleen Turner intelligibly show in what the relations of the dispersing spouses when to them is what to divide can pour out.

Marriage is a form of relationship which initially assumes intention of one of the parties to break these relations and offers the whole set of punitive measures for suppression of it. Any presumption of innocence - each intending spouse is already a priori guilty and has to bear punishments in a look: deprivations of legal capacity (all sales / purchases and so forth - with the consent of the spouse), refusal of a personal liberty, loss of part of property. By what right one free conceiving being applies for control and the power over other freely conceiving being moreover with involvement of militia, jurymen, lawyers and judicial performers? What does it have to do with love, friendship, mutual respect and sympathy? Whether it helps then when on ruins of feelings people begin to divide property and children? Rather - disturbs...

the Unregistered relations, so far as concerns full-fledged joint life and joint children, always more intelligent, thought over, responsible. The possession of a source of the independent income allows to estimate precisely a contribution to everyone to the general budget, each project is financed together (or individually) according to the coordinated plan. An opportunity “to get“ quietly into a pocket to a favourite half only because started up the money for wind disappears. Marriage was thought up by women? Marriage was thought up by those who got used to be a parasite at the state, parents, partners. And among them there is a huge number of zapoyny drunkards, alcoholics, players, parasites - men. So it is not a sex, matter in approach to life.

Marriage gives to

sweet illusion of impunity for offenses in the personal relations: yes, I do not want to sleep with you and, I have a mistress and, I do not want to restrain and I arrange a hysterics and I flew into a rage and applied you about a corner of a door and I wanted to drink and I spent on drink a salary what you will do, will divorce? The main limiting factor in marriage is laziness - it is how many it is necessary to pass and bear before everything ends also fear - will beggar, without a corner will leave, children will be selected.

the Main limiting factor in the free relations is the respect - if I badly arrive in relation to him / her what will force the partner to remain with me? Probably, therefore this form of the relations also does not suit most of people. Abilities to be responsible for the acts, to share fears with the neighbor and in common to solve problems are not the most widespread qualities. But, nevertheless, they meet, and in free society of such people becomes more and more. Having only internally released and having learned to respect freedom of others, you become capable to love, without applying for possession. Everyone has a choice, and each medal has a back.