What is Marriage For?: The Strange Social History of Our

What is Marriage For?: The Strange Social History of Our



10 thoughts on “What is Marriage For?: The Strange Social History of Our Most Intimate Institution

  1. Chris Antonsen Chris Antonsen says:

    Every American should read this Having a modicum of well informed grasp of social and cultural institutions we mostly take for granted makes you stronger and powerful as a citizen and neighbor


  2. Andrew Andrew says:

    What Is Marriage For? is on the surface a brief overview of the history of marriage Underneath a case for marriage euality particularly with respect to gender and orientation The author EJ Graff describes when and how religious institutions have been involved in marriage the relation of marriage and family structure to work and how that changed relation due to the Industrial Revolution and how closely the evolution of marriage has been tied to the struggle for women's rights and eualityGraff starts with a very personal perspetive in approaching the problem trying to answer for herself what the relevance of marriage is specifically is there still value in marriage particularly as a structure that has institutionalized gendered power dynamics in heterosexual form or discriminated against participants by class race and sexual orientation for most of its history? The conclusion is a resounding yes justifiable from multiple angles In particular economically and legally Graff shows how at least in American law one cannot replicate the same protections that marriage offers via extramarital approachesGraff also addresses the history of changes that marriage and familial institutions have gone through patriarchal families that included women slaves and children all as dependents Rome; family as a feudal work unit medieval Europe; marriage becoming a legal institution driven by Protestantism; women becoming housewives as work moved out of the house Industrial Revolution; marriage transitioning to being considered based in love emotion and personal commitment late 19th century; women gaining eual legal status within marriage last 100 years and ongoing Using this narrative Graff makes a convincing case that same sex marriage is the logical next step and as of 2015 one that has now occurredThe book's weak points are largely due to its organization trying to split highly intertwined facets of marriage into individual focused chapters is necessarily a difficult task and some chapters accomplish that focus better than others By the end the reader has seen some of the same historical data points multiple times repeated between chapters relevant in each case but tedious to read An inclination toward skimming particularly in the latter half of the book makes this a pleasant readIn overview Graff takes an accessible rather than academic approach that undercuts rhetoric about traditional marriage with a simple journey through the history of marriage as a social religious and legal institution Highly recommended as a strong introduction to the subjectTL;DR for the book Why is marriage ? A Protestants


  3. Heather Heather says:

    This book was written by a gay marriage advocate seeking a better understanding of what she is fighting for but any thinking person gay or straight should be interested in the answer to her central uestionIs marriage a worthy goal or a way of forcing people to sueeze their lives and dreams into too small boxes? Is civil marriage which locks private affections into an intimate relationship with the state an institution I want to enter? Is marriage a patriarchal hangover useful only to those who want to assign each womb to some male owner? What to put it simply is marriage for?She divides the book into sections money sex babies etc and spends the vast majority of each examining the history of how marriage once served that function The history lessons are interesting and often amusing but if you're interested in finding out what purpose marriage serves TODAY the relevant passages are few especially if your uestion like mine is specific What purpose does marriage serve for a couple without children?One answer is on page 38 at the end of the money section 'Married' is a shorthand taken seriously by banks insurers courts employers schools hospitals cemeteries rental car companies freuent flyer programs and a word understood to mean that you two share not just your bedroom but the rest of your house as we1l In the United States the General Accounting Office issued a January 31 1997 report listing 1949 'federal laws in which benefits rights and privileges are contingent on marital status'Another answer was on page 115 in the section about order The public institution of marriage in Western democracies is for applying a just consensus to private disputes a consensus to treat each individual bond with respect and eualityOverall this was an interesting readable book and one I would recommend to anyone interested in a better understanding of the history of marriage but be forewarned that the title is deceptive the author seems concerned with poking holes in the sanctity of marriage rhetoric and justifying her own desire for it than looking objectively at the value of marriage today


  4. Mariana Ferreira Mariana Ferreira says:

    A fascinating account on the history of the marriage institution and an argument for gay marriage that is every bit as resonant today as when it was written


  5. Celine Celine says:

    A lot of the same points as Marriage a History From Obedience to Intimacy or How Love Conuered Marriage albeit from the perspective of arguing for same sex marriage I think Coontz' book was better


  6. Kathryn Kathryn says:

    Too long Almost every chapter talks about same sex marriage I would not recommend this book The content should have been distilled into fewer pages and the topic kept drifting needlessly back toward gay marriage so much so that I think it was unfair to the reader to not mention gay marriage in the title or subtitle of the book I most enjoyed the parts talking about the history of marriage in Rome German tribes etc


  7. Kirby Kirby says:

    I read this a because Dan Savage recommended it as one of the essential books re same sex marriage arguments and b because I often ask myself that titular uestion what IS marriage for? This book is definitely a very comprehensive informative history of marriage in the Western world and its many purposes and evolutions over the years and after reading it you can come to your own understanding of what marriage is for which is the point I guessI would say this is not an awesome or mind blowing read though simply because it's a little textbooky For something as juicy and emotional as marriage I didn't think this book had much of an emotional or narrative pull The tone is also a little dorky because the author will go on for pages upon pages about something sort of boring like marital land acuisition then make a really dumb joke to lighten the mood or whatever ie after explaining that birth control was once regarded as sinful than incest she writes Oedipus stop agonizing as least you didn't wear a condom Wah WAH sad trombone musicBut in general I liked this The chapter on children was particularly interesting especially the section on whether or not children need fathers which I wondered about a lot when I was teaching in a school with a lot of kids raised by single moms Overall the book proves there is no such thing as traditional marriage as the institution has changed in such extreme and fundamental ways in nearly every generation Thus a little old thing like two guys getting married is not going to cause the downfall of society or anything stupid like that


  8. Ellen Taylor Ellen Taylor says:

    What a fascinating insightful journey through the history and various purposes of marriage as a social institution Amazing how we take for granted the cultural experiences of today as if things were always this way The author is a lesbian arguing for same sex marriage rights and concludes this way Changing a given rule changes the very definition of marriage Define marriage as a lifetime commitment and divorce flouts its very definition Define marriage as a vehicle for legitimate procreation and contraception violates that definition Define marriage as a complete union of economic interests and allowing women to own property divides the family into warring and immoral bits Define marriage as between one man and one woman and same sex marriage is absurd But define marriage as a commitment to live up to the rigorous demands of love to care for each other as best as you humanly can then all these possibilities divorce contraception feminism marriage between two women or two men are necessary to respect the human spirit Recommend this to anyone uestioning the issue of same sex marriage


  9. Clare Clare says:

    This was a fascinating and informative read Graff explores the way in which marriage has changed throughout history particularly the different methods people have used to evaluate whether a relationship is a marriage or not The book deals almost exclusively with western cultures but Graff does explain that it is because the book's purpose is largely to argue for the legalization of gay marriage in the culture that has grown out of those traditions The only time I really got annoyed at the book was when she discussed polygamy and group marriage I felt she was kinda ironically forcing her own standards of what a relationship should be onto the situation There was a lot of drawing up of false dichotomies Either monogamy or polygyny where the man reigns supreme Either monogamy or a group marriage where there is no real commitment to any individual This is definitely counter to what I and others I know have experienced However she doesn't get full on judgmental or condemning so I can handle it


  10. Ulrich Ulrich says:

    A fascinating and freuently hilarious tour through the history of traditional marriage or rather why exactly the phrase traditional marriage is an utter oxymoron Ms Graff shows how at every advance in the freedom of marriage from the people actually getting married having a say in the matter at all to interracial marriage fundies have cried that civilization should surely end Today women can turn down suitors even if their fathers like them Today people with differently pigmented skin can marry As can barren people So Why can't gay people? Graff shoots down every objection one by one with portraits of historical marriage This is just a fun book Free love originally meant the freedom to monogamously marry someone you actually liked as opposed to whoever is most economically advantageous The world has changed so much things like this make me excited to be alive and see changes happen right before me


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

What is Marriage For?: The Strange Social History of Our Most Intimate Institution [BOOKS] ⚦ What is Marriage For?: The Strange Social History of Our Most Intimate Institution By E.J. Graff – Capitalsoftworks.co.uk EJ Graff had a very personal reason for asking the uestion in this book's title she was married in 1991 but in a ceremony legitimized by neither church nor state Graff and her dearly beloved you see a EJ Graff had a very personal Marriage For?: MOBI õ reason for asking the uestion in this book's title she was married in What is Kindle - but in a ceremony legitimized by neither church nor state Graff and her dearly beloved you see are lesbians But instead is Marriage For?: PDF Ì of being dominated by agenda What Is Marriage For is a playful and informative study of the institution of wedlock throughout is Marriage For?: The Strange Epub / history that will appeal to readers outside of its obvious constituency Chapter by chapter Graff looks at the legal sociological and anthropological assumptions about money sex procreation tribal affiliation and the pursuit of personal happiness that underlie the concept of matrimony in Western societies Her eye for the odd historical footnote is especially striking we learn for example that in ancient Rome marriage vows were exchanged by the groom and his father in law and that the assertions of right wing fundamentalists notwithstanding families were actually far less stable in the premodern era where as many as percent of all French children lived with a stepparent than they are today Graff's conclusion The rules of engagement have fluctuated so wildly over the centuries that the term traditional marriage is something of an oxymoron; same sex unions are but one of the many ways in which marriage has evolved to meet the changing social dynamics of the th century is Marriage For?: The Strange Epub / Patrizia DiLucchio.

10 thoughts on “What is Marriage For?: The Strange Social History of Our Most Intimate Institution

  1. Chris Antonsen Chris Antonsen says:

    Every American should read this Having a modicum of well informed grasp of social and cultural institutions we mostly take for granted makes you stronger and powerful as a citizen and neighbor

  2. Andrew Andrew says:

    What Is Marriage For? is on the surface a brief overview of the history of marriage Underneath a case for marriage euality particularly with respect to gender and orientation The author EJ Graff describes when and how religious institutions have been involved in marriage the relation of marriage and family structure to work and how that changed relation due to the Industrial Revolution and how closely the evolution of marriage has been tied to the struggle for women's rights and eualityGraff starts with a very personal perspetive in approaching the problem trying to answer for herself what the relevance of marriage is specifically is there still value in marriage particularly as a structure that has institutionalized gendered power dynamics in heterosexual form or discriminated against participants by class race and sexual orientation for most of its history? The conclusion is a resounding yes justifiable from multiple angles In particular economically and legally Graff shows how at least in American law one cannot replicate the same protections that marriage offers via extramarital approachesGraff also addresses the history of changes that marriage and familial institutions have gone through patriarchal families that included women slaves and children all as dependents Rome; family as a feudal work unit medieval Europe; marriage becoming a legal institution driven by Protestantism; women becoming housewives as work moved out of the house Industrial Revolution; marriage transitioning to being considered based in love emotion and personal commitment late 19th century; women gaining eual legal status within marriage last 100 years and ongoing Using this narrative Graff makes a convincing case that same sex marriage is the logical next step and as of 2015 one that has now occurredThe book's weak points are largely due to its organization trying to split highly intertwined facets of marriage into individual focused chapters is necessarily a difficult task and some chapters accomplish that focus better than others By the end the reader has seen some of the same historical data points multiple times repeated between chapters relevant in each case but tedious to read An inclination toward skimming particularly in the latter half of the book makes this a pleasant readIn overview Graff takes an accessible rather than academic approach that undercuts rhetoric about traditional marriage with a simple journey through the history of marriage as a social religious and legal institution Highly recommended as a strong introduction to the subjectTL;DR for the book Why is marriage ? A Protestants

  3. Heather Heather says:

    This book was written by a gay marriage advocate seeking a better understanding of what she is fighting for but any thinking person gay or straight should be interested in the answer to her central uestionIs marriage a worthy goal or a way of forcing people to sueeze their lives and dreams into too small boxes? Is civil marriage which locks private affections into an intimate relationship with the state an institution I want to enter? Is marriage a patriarchal hangover useful only to those who want to assign each womb to some male owner? What to put it simply is marriage for?She divides the book into sections money sex babies etc and spends the vast majority of each examining the history of how marriage once served that function The history lessons are interesting and often amusing but if you're interested in finding out what purpose marriage serves TODAY the relevant passages are few especially if your uestion like mine is specific What purpose does marriage serve for a couple without children?One answer is on page 38 at the end of the money section 'Married' is a shorthand taken seriously by banks insurers courts employers schools hospitals cemeteries rental car companies freuent flyer programs and a word understood to mean that you two share not just your bedroom but the rest of your house as we1l In the United States the General Accounting Office issued a January 31 1997 report listing 1949 'federal laws in which benefits rights and privileges are contingent on marital status'Another answer was on page 115 in the section about order The public institution of marriage in Western democracies is for applying a just consensus to private disputes a consensus to treat each individual bond with respect and eualityOverall this was an interesting readable book and one I would recommend to anyone interested in a better understanding of the history of marriage but be forewarned that the title is deceptive the author seems concerned with poking holes in the sanctity of marriage rhetoric and justifying her own desire for it than looking objectively at the value of marriage today

  4. Mariana Ferreira Mariana Ferreira says:

    A fascinating account on the history of the marriage institution and an argument for gay marriage that is every bit as resonant today as when it was written

  5. Celine Celine says:

    A lot of the same points as Marriage a History From Obedience to Intimacy or How Love Conuered Marriage albeit from the perspective of arguing for same sex marriage I think Coontz' book was better

  6. Kathryn Kathryn says:

    Too long Almost every chapter talks about same sex marriage I would not recommend this book The content should have been distilled into fewer pages and the topic kept drifting needlessly back toward gay marriage so much so that I think it was unfair to the reader to not mention gay marriage in the title or subtitle of the book I most enjoyed the parts talking about the history of marriage in Rome German tribes etc

  7. Kirby Kirby says:

    I read this a because Dan Savage recommended it as one of the essential books re same sex marriage arguments and b because I often ask myself that titular uestion what IS marriage for? This book is definitely a very comprehensive informative history of marriage in the Western world and its many purposes and evolutions over the years and after reading it you can come to your own understanding of what marriage is for which is the point I guessI would say this is not an awesome or mind blowing read though simply because it's a little textbooky For something as juicy and emotional as marriage I didn't think this book had much of an emotional or narrative pull The tone is also a little dorky because the author will go on for pages upon pages about something sort of boring like marital land acuisition then make a really dumb joke to lighten the mood or whatever ie after explaining that birth control was once regarded as sinful than incest she writes Oedipus stop agonizing as least you didn't wear a condom Wah WAH sad trombone musicBut in general I liked this The chapter on children was particularly interesting especially the section on whether or not children need fathers which I wondered about a lot when I was teaching in a school with a lot of kids raised by single moms Overall the book proves there is no such thing as traditional marriage as the institution has changed in such extreme and fundamental ways in nearly every generation Thus a little old thing like two guys getting married is not going to cause the downfall of society or anything stupid like that

  8. Ellen Taylor Ellen Taylor says:

    What a fascinating insightful journey through the history and various purposes of marriage as a social institution Amazing how we take for granted the cultural experiences of today as if things were always this way The author is a lesbian arguing for same sex marriage rights and concludes this way Changing a given rule changes the very definition of marriage Define marriage as a lifetime commitment and divorce flouts its very definition Define marriage as a vehicle for legitimate procreation and contraception violates that definition Define marriage as a complete union of economic interests and allowing women to own property divides the family into warring and immoral bits Define marriage as between one man and one woman and same sex marriage is absurd But define marriage as a commitment to live up to the rigorous demands of love to care for each other as best as you humanly can then all these possibilities divorce contraception feminism marriage between two women or two men are necessary to respect the human spirit Recommend this to anyone uestioning the issue of same sex marriage

  9. Clare Clare says:

    This was a fascinating and informative read Graff explores the way in which marriage has changed throughout history particularly the different methods people have used to evaluate whether a relationship is a marriage or not The book deals almost exclusively with western cultures but Graff does explain that it is because the book's purpose is largely to argue for the legalization of gay marriage in the culture that has grown out of those traditions The only time I really got annoyed at the book was when she discussed polygamy and group marriage I felt she was kinda ironically forcing her own standards of what a relationship should be onto the situation There was a lot of drawing up of false dichotomies Either monogamy or polygyny where the man reigns supreme Either monogamy or a group marriage where there is no real commitment to any individual This is definitely counter to what I and others I know have experienced However she doesn't get full on judgmental or condemning so I can handle it

  10. Ulrich Ulrich says:

    A fascinating and freuently hilarious tour through the history of traditional marriage or rather why exactly the phrase traditional marriage is an utter oxymoron Ms Graff shows how at every advance in the freedom of marriage from the people actually getting married having a say in the matter at all to interracial marriage fundies have cried that civilization should surely end Today women can turn down suitors even if their fathers like them Today people with differently pigmented skin can marry As can barren people So Why can't gay people? Graff shoots down every objection one by one with portraits of historical marriage This is just a fun book Free love originally meant the freedom to monogamously marry someone you actually liked as opposed to whoever is most economically advantageous The world has changed so much things like this make me excited to be alive and see changes happen right before me

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *