Marriage is Simply An M&A Contract:
By Anonymous Onyx


Contrary to popular opinion, the institution of marriage is nothing more than a family structure to assist in the protection of the community.  It is a fictitious legal entity like a corporation that is only seen performed by humans.  The marriage contract is a simple merger and acquisition contract where in essence two families merge to solidify, protect, and continue the family structure.  This is what it is and what it has always been.  Is it sanctified by God or some divine creation?  Perhaps, it is.  But do you think God looks at the papers you sign or the actions you take?   The modern romanticized concept of movie marriage is really a stage of lust where the suitor pursues the mate that he or she is infatuated with.  At this stage it is unclear whether this merger is a sound business move or not.  At this stage there is no rationale thought or objective criteria being used (nor are any elders or family members consulted).  It would be nice to see more sequels to those “Let’s get married” movies to see where they are 10 years later.

 

If we look at the history of marriage, we will see that it is very much a business (between families).  Most men had to send an agent of his family with a dowry that was agreeable to the family of the potential wife.  And if accepted often the husband and wife ultimately moved into the wife’s family compound or the husband’s family compound.  Usually there was an interim point where the wife had to learn the customs and ways of the new family she was merging with.  In European history (especially among the noble class), we see that marriages were very much arranged.  The king of France would marry off his daughter to the prince of Germany to protect the crown or expand the empire.  This was seen in many other non-European cultures as well.  We can look at many of the folktales of unrequited love where Grecian wives fantasized about and/or engaged in adulterous affairs with men who were not their husbands.  We know that men were never expected to be monogamous.  Which begs the question – what was the contract (mutual agreement) and agreement of?  The answer is continuing or expanding the family by creating offspring.  Sometimes it is about gaining an empire or land or money, but any real analytical thought will reveal that those things are only as permanent and secure as the offspring that are produced with it.

 

This all changed, I believed during the sexual liberation era of the 1960’s.  This false notion of free love (really lust) and sexual exploitation of the individuals became the mantra that evolved into the indicia of who was supposed to marry who.  Even today, marriage upon those individuals of the country of India are often arranged marriages.   Prior to that, marriage was arranged or ratified only by the elders of the community or family.  Even in America and Western Europe, a man had to ask the father for his daughters hand in marriage.  Often the gentleman caller had to perform this courtship game where he would sit around the young lady’s family for a set period of time so they could get to know him.  In religious sects, it was needed for the priest or preacher to counsel the couple for a period.  Notice how unromantic all of this was.  In fact, it was frowned upon to marry a man or a woman outside of your faith (or race).  Why? Because speaking objectively, those of the same religious or ethnic group more likely have more in common than those of different ethnic or religious groups.

 

However, now it is all about falling in love (which is lust).  Lust like adrenaline is a biochemical reaction.  Except lust has a different purpose than adrenaline in that it is setting the body up for sexual procreation.  Adrenaline is giving a boost of energy to fight or flight.  Both adrenaline and lust are short term energy boosts that will subside.  And when the smoke clears people are amazed at who they are with because they did not perform the proper due diligence.    Ironically, most people who point to falling in love as the divine feeling that affirms that the partner (business partner) is the one to marry FOR LIFE, use fairy tales which really have nothing to do with that.  Notice the two major fairy tales, which Hollywood continuously recycles as movies (often under different names), “Cinderella” and “Sleeping Beauty” which are used to say this is what marriage is about.  Yet, both tales are about a woman trying to move up in social standing (whether economic or financial).  Cinderella, was an abused unwanted poor child who would have taken almost anyone (beside her current situation).   Sleeping beauty was in a coma before her knight came.  And the modern Hollywood re-writes, “Maid in Manhattan”, “Pretty Woman” are about social upward moving.  That is a business move by the ladies and then men are simply attracted to the female physique and the fact that they still retain the financial dominance in the relationship.  The woman becomes a trophy, a conquest.

 

So next time, we wonder how Tiger Woods could commit adultery.  Let’s remember  John F. Kennedy, King James, or  King Solomon.  Let’s remember that marriage is not about falling in lust because that will not last.  It is about an agreement between two people to stay together for live to continue the family social construct.  Note that most primates don’t even mate for life besides humans.  Once we realize it is a business agreement similar to an M&A (Merger and Acquisition) deal and not a fairy tale, then perhaps we will do the proper due diligence regarding ourselves and our mates.  Perhaps we will consult our elders.  Perhaps we will have an objective criteria of what we need in a mate.  Perhaps we will get rid of the unrealistic expectations of what we expect our mate to be or do.

 


Comments




Leave a Reply