The true meaning of marriage.

I've posed the question to quite a number of intelligent, successful married people over the past week. I made it very basic...in fact, I dumbed it down to the max: What is marriage?

The responses have been less than definitive. As in: "Uhhh...It's a contract...uhhh between two people. ummm yeah, that's what it is". Or "marriage is a union between a man and a woman, sanctified by a religious institution...I think... like, anything else would be, like, a civil union, right?"

Remember, these weren't brain dead surfer dudes. As I said, these were intelligent, successful people, however when confronted with this seemingly very basic question about a seemingly very basic part of our lives they were, shall we say, dumbfounded. But think about it... how would you answer this question? Before you do I would suggest you go to Salon.com and read, What Does Marriage Mean? a particularly perceptive article on the subject by the extraordinarily talented Dan Savage. His premise, presented in an entertaining, down-to-earth, accessible manner, is that marriage has become terrifically difficult to define. Would anyone disagree?

'Sex is like money; only too much is enough.'

The title of this post is a quote from Couples, by John Updike. To my mind, no discussion of Sex and Marriage would be complete without referring (often) to the writing of John Updike.


Arguably the most talented living writer in the world, Updike writes about sex and marriage...A lot...in prose so extraordinary that his use of language sometimes completely eclipses the banal comings and goings of his characters. The ultimate Updike paradox is that within marriage, sex inevitably looses it's luster and becomes routine, while extramarital sex will almost inevitably end up angst-filled and destructive. His characters often wrestle with this paradox and ultimately all make their way to the inevitable conclusion that in a marriage, as nowhere else, there are irreconcilable opposites which must be accepted and endured... sometimes even enjoyed...but never resolved. Two novels, Couples and Marry Me are particularly pertinent to our topic, in addition, they're both set in the early 60s and sexy in a way today's novels rarely are. Read them, even if it's only for the prose.

Is marriage an oppressive societal institution?

Monogamy : Culturally Imposed?

This post is actually an article by David P. Barash and Judith E. Lipton, that appeared on ThirdAge.com - I present it here because it, and the book it introduces, are so pertinent to my topic.

A 'Free Pass' for Your Affair?

By David P. Barash and Judith Eve Lipton, Coauthors of The Myth of Monogamy

Think of it as a glitch in the world of "family values." The monogamous family is under siege, but not because of a homosexual agenda, political ideology or the misbehavior of a small number of high-profile individuals (you fill in the blanks). Rather, it's the shared instincts of human beings -- all of us -- that threaten to undermine the commitment to "forsake all others" and remain sexually faithful "till death do us part."

In recent years, as DNA fingerprinting has been applied to animals as well as people, the revelations have come fast and furious: Even those species long believed to be the perfect poster-child paragons of devoted monogamous fidelity have been revealed to cheat. When biologists have done genetic analysis on young birds, 10 percent to 40 percent of the offspring are shown to be fathered by someone other than the identified social partner of the mother.

In short, there is a whole lot of hanky-panky going on in the animal world. The myth of the monogamous species has been exploded, and the natural world is revealed to be more complicated and interesting than scientists themselves had believed.

On the other hand, it may be reassuring to know that at least one species appears to be truly monogamous: a parasitic flatworm. The male and female encounter each other as adolescents, their bodies fuse and they remain sexually faithful forever after. We'd like to think they are happily united.

In our book, The Myth of Monogamy, we describe these and other findings, showing their parallels to human beings. For example, philandering isn't just a "guy thing." There is no question that women, too, develop a roving eye -- and sometimes a wandering body. Indeed, it is even possible to predict who will be at greatest risk.

Another myth is that happily married couples, deeply in love with each other, will not be tempted. Virtually everyone is, or will be. It's part of our biology, like walking on two legs. In short, monogamy isn't natural -- for either sex.

But this doesn't mean that it isn't a good idea. It might well be for human relationships what Winston Churchill said of democracy: the worst possible system, except when you compare it with the alternatives. Moreover, just because something isn't natural doesn't mean that it isn't possible. After all, people learn to rein in many of their "natural" inclinations, learning to say please and thank you, wait in line and even become toilet trained.

People certainly can aspire to monogamy, and sometimes they can even achieve it. Yet along the way, they would be well-advised to acknowledge the reality of their own inclinations (as well as those of their partner) -- if only so they won't be blindsided by those biological instincts that virtually all living things appear to share.