Marriage in 2009? What is going on!

  • Thread starter Thread starter prodigalson12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
*But, why aren’t we keeping our oaths these days? Over the past say 40 years–what’s changed so much, that promises and vows mean nothing, or not what they once did?

I will say that some of my aunts, from stories I have heard, were cheated on repeatedly by my uncles, and/or hit a few times…they had grounds to leave. I would never advocate for someone to stay in dangerous situations, but even those women stayed. There didn’t seem to be this notion of…waaaaa, things aren’t going my way, I’m outta here! I just wonder why they seemed more mature or something, than modern day couples? (on average, I mean) *
Back then, divorce was frowned upon. A man could divorce a woman without having much stigma attached to it. A divorcee’, on the other hand, was considered a trashy woman. (She couldn’t keep her man happy.) The jobs for woman in previous generations were pitiful and the sexual harassment they endured was part of the reason why a divorced woman who had to work was considered trashy. There was a time in the first half of the twentieth century that married or divorced women were not allowed to be teachers. (My grandmother was a teacher who had to quit when she got married, because married women were not allowed to teach.) My other grandmother was married off to a friend of her father’s when she was 17. He brought her back pregnant, 8 weeks later, because he said she kept acting like a child. Her father was humiliated. His people had been sheriff’s and judges etc. He gave her a room to stay in, but she had to work as a waitress the whole time she was pregnant. It was difficult work. She said she was frequently slapped on the bottom or pinched on the breast.
After awhile, she remarried a Catholic man. His parents didn’t think she was good enough for him. Her parents despised Catholics. When he went out to find work before WWII, their parents made sure that they never got together again. (Another story.)
Suffice it to say, she endured great hardship, with no help from anyone. Her parents and his parents wanted my father, but not his sisters. She wouldn’t give custody to either.

This is the type of thing women endured when they divorced. Most women preferred to be slapped across the bottom by their husband and have a roof over their head, rather than be slapped and pinched by strangers. Ah the good old days when everyone stayed married! It didn’t matter if your husband was a child molester like my ex- father-in-law, his wife honored the vows she took. They were the same age as my grandparents. They stayed together until he died. One of my ex’s- brothers dressed like a woman and thought he was in love with a transvestite. I often wondered what he would have been like if his father would have left him alone or if his mother had divorced his father. She was highly respected in the community and so was her family.

My aunt married a man who turned out to be a child-molester. Horror of horrors, she divorced him. The one child he molested turned out all screwed up. The others are productive tax-paying citizens. Did she announce to the world that her former husband was a child molester? No. The wife of a child molester was considered just as low as the molester himself. These things were not discussed in public, but being a divorcee’ was enough to get her shunned until the 1960’s. After that, her life became easier. She was allowed to become a bookkeeper and was able to earn a decent living for her children.

There were child molesters, wife beaters, child abusers, men who abandoned their families, but their was so much shame attached to it that it was never discussed in public. Women who left these husbands were left to live quiet lives of destitution. Women who stayed with these husband’s were left to live quiet lives of desolation. Ah the good old days, when people honored the vow til death do us part.

I know many people who are divorced. They didn’t divorce because it was an easy thing to do. They often do it to protect their children or in hopes of finding a man who will stand up to the duties and responsibilities of an adult. Divorce is a difficult thing.

Why don’t I hear the lament of everyone is living together, breaking up and living with some one else without ever having married in the first place? It’s very commonplace.

Even the OP admits that he was in a long term relationship with a live in that didn’t work out. He has been consoled by others. I guess it was okay because he’s not divorced.
 
My post wasn’t meant to spark anger, Galnextdoor. I’m well aware that there were marriages back in the old days, that were bad marriages.
 
*But, why aren’t we keeping our oaths these days? Over the past say 40 years–what’s changed so much, that promises and vows mean nothing, or not what they once did?

I will say that some of my aunts, from stories I have heard, were cheated on repeatedly by my uncles, and/or hit a few times…they had grounds to leave. I would never advocate for someone to stay in dangerous situations, but even those women stayed. There didn’t seem to be this notion of…waaaaa, things aren’t going my way, I’m outta here! I just wonder why they seemed more mature or something, than modern day couples? (on average, I mean) *
I really think it was more because most women prior to the mid 20th and 21st centuries had no real way to support themselves if they divorced husbands like that. And as others have mentioned, the stigma, shame and humiliation it brought upon a divorced woman was something many women were not willing to endure especially when they didn’t have a way to support themselves. Sometimes they were even shunned by their own family. The other thing is that I’ve read many instances in historical biographies where if a woman left her husband, even for reasons of abuse, infidelity, etc., it was very difficult to obtain custody of her children. She would have to give up her children to her husband and that was something most mothers would not want to do. So, they chose to endure the abuse.

And, as I might have mentioned before, it was actually a common thing to be allowed to beat your wife and children. Girls were brought up to believe that if their husband or father beat you, you deserved it, since you were only supposed to obey and submit. Some of that thinking started to diminish by the 1500s/1600s. Thus that quote from an Englishman in the 1500s lamenting the day when a man couldn’t even beat his wife. There is even a scene in “Romeo and Juliet” when Juliet’s father wants to beat his daughter. Lady Jane Grey, a girl in line to the English crown and whose family used her as a pawn to get her on the throne and thus was beheaded at the age of 16 or so after only a few days as queen, was beaten into submission by her father in order to marry the man they chose for her as a husband. I’m not saying all husbands and fathers did this, but it was not surprising if you heard about it.

The old days really wasn’t as great as we’d all like it to be. I read so much history because I’ve always loved the past. There were things that I truly loved and wish we still practiced from the past. Some things were better back then. But there were some things that were down-right horrible, especially for women. People had the same problems - maybe even worse. But they hid them, endured them because they had not choice, or if the problems weren’t so bad, they worked them out instead of getting out of the marriage. That’s the difference from then and now. I agree that people did take vows and promises much more seriously then than they do now. Although, I’m also glad that women who are in abusive situations are more free to get out of it and protect themselves and their children today - much more so than in the past.
 
I agree with Sarabande to a point. Like her, I am a big fan of history, and I spend a good deal of time reading it. In fact, I ended up having to do a bucket-load of study about the position of women in Elizabethan and Jacobean England for my MA (in Shakespeare).

However, I am not willing to grant that that was anywhere near all the reason why women stayed in marriages.

Men, too, were looked down upon for divorce. A divorced man, especially if the woman was able to prove fault–which was necessary then, and I wish it still were–was not “socially acceptable” either.

Now, I do agree that it is a sorry comment on our society that so many people merely cohabit without even attempting to marry. That is part and parcel of the same thing, immaturity. They don’t get married because they don’t have to.
 
I really think it was more because most women prior to the mid 20th and 21st centuries had no real way to support themselves if they divorced husbands like that. And as others have mentioned, the stigma, shame and humiliation it brought upon a divorced woman was something many women were not willing to endure especially when they didn’t have a way to support themselves. Sometimes they were even shunned by their own family. The other thing is that I’ve read many instances in historical biographies where if a woman left her husband, even for reasons of abuse, infidelity, etc., it was very difficult to obtain custody of her children. She would have to give up her children to her husband and that was something most mothers would not want to do. So, they chose to endure the abuse.

And, as I might have mentioned before, it was actually a common thing to be allowed to beat your wife and children. Girls were brought up to believe that if their husband or father beat you, you deserved it, since you were only supposed to obey and submit. Some of that thinking started to diminish by the 1500s/1600s. Thus that quote from an Englishman in the 1500s lamenting the day when a man couldn’t even beat his wife. There is even a scene in “Romeo and Juliet” when Juliet’s father wants to beat his daughter. Lady Jane Grey, a girl in line to the English crown and whose family used her as a pawn to get her on the throne and thus was beheaded at the age of 16 or so after only a few days as queen, was beaten into submission by her father in order to marry the man they chose for her as a husband. I’m not saying all husbands and fathers did this, but it was not surprising if you heard about it.

The old days really wasn’t as great as we’d all like it to be. I read so much history because I’ve always loved the past. There were things that I truly loved and wish we still practiced from the past. Some things were better back then. But there were some things that were down-right horrible, especially for women. People had the same problems - maybe even worse. But they hid them, endured them because they had not choice, or if the problems weren’t so bad, they worked them out instead of getting out of the marriage. That’s the difference from then and now. I agree that people did take vows and promises much more seriously then than they do now. Although, I’m also glad that women who are in abusive situations are more free to get out of it and protect themselves and their children today - much more so than in the past.
I feel badly for those women, that they felt there were no other options afforded them, and they stayed in abusive settings. 😦
 
I agree with Sarabande to a point. Like her, I am a big fan of history, and I spend a good deal of time reading it. In fact, I ended up having to do a bucket-load of study about the position of women in Elizabethan and Jacobean England for my MA (in Shakespeare).

However, I am not willing to grant that that was anywhere near all the reason why women stayed in marriages.

Men, too, were looked down upon for divorce. A divorced man, especially if the woman was able to prove fault–which was necessary then, and I wish it still were–was not “socially acceptable” either.

Now, I do agree that it is a sorry comment on our society that so many people merely cohabit without even attempting to marry. That is part and parcel of the same thing, immaturity. They don’t get married because they don’t have to.
Awesome!!! 😃 Another history buff and one also very much interested in Elizabethan England, like me!!! 👍

I’m not willing to grant that either, and I did not mean for it come out that that was the main reason why women stayed in marriages. I know that there are and were many reasons and factors surrounding the times of each period in history. I was focusing on abused women because it was brought up. But I also wanted to make a point that all of us, including myself despite how much history I read and reenact in living history presentations and reenactments, have a tendency to paint a rosy picture of the past and that things were better then than it is now. Sure, some things were better in the past, but there were also things that weren’t. Times and people do not change. What can change, though, are the ways people handle problems and situations. Many of us probably know women even up to present day who is or was afraid of leaving abusive husbands for one reason or another. I’ve known a few myself - usually from my grandmother’s and mother’s generations. It is something that has unfortunately been going on for generations. It didn’t just start in our lifetime. Less women had the courage to give up everything then to protect themselves and their children. More women have the courage to do it now. One young woman comes to my mind, who was a friend of my husband’s. She was sexually abused continuously by her father and had been pregnant a few times by him. Her mother let it happen because she was very submissive and fearful of him. When this young woman brought charges against her father, the mother, still afraid of her husband’s wrath, abandoned her daughter and shunned her for “ruining” the family.

This thread shows how complicated it all is. What we’re discussing is just a little section of the reasons behind it all. I do have to say, this is probably one of the more interesting threads I’ve participated in.
 
"They took an oath, and that actually meant something to them. To give one’s word was a big deal. They stayed married because they promised that they would."

I wonder how many families were abandoned in older times? Even though divorce was not allowed, there were people who abandoned their families, were there not? Wasn’t that an issue in Ireland when divorce was still considered illegal? The number of abandoned families, where the spouse was stuck, unable to divorce or get an annulment? Anyone know?
 
Divorce was a stigma, as was illegitimacy.
Nothing wrong being illegitimate. Nothing wrong having illegitimate children, either. The only wrong thing is begetting illegitimate children.

The result of that stigma was and often still is that people born out of wedlock have a screwed start in life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top