Should sex and marriage go hand in hand?

by **Samata** » Sat Apr 26, 2003 10:38 pm

All over the world the divorce rate is climbing and increasingly people are choosing to remain unmarried. It seems to me then that it is time to rethink the concept of marriage. Marriage is ideally supposed to: 1. offer an avenue for sexual activity. 2. offer companionship and friendship and 3. offer a safe and stable environment to raise children. Of all these activities it seems to me that the second and third are well suited and in harmony with each other whereas the first is often in conflict with the other two.
 
 
While there are marriages where the partners are in love and intend to be monogamous it seems that such couples are in a minority. I wonder if it would not be more sensible to delink sex from marriage and make the primary reason for and the business of marriage the raising of children. If sex and marriage were not linked it is a lot more likely that people would get married only when they are very certain that they want to spend the rest of their lives with each other and raise children with them.

by **bull** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 1:32 am

Hi samata, looks like you have a point here, but whose child will we be raising in this case!!??

by **Samata** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 10:36 am

Bull, I would think that for the most part people in today\'s world are educated enough about the use of contraceptives to ensure that the only children that they would be raising are the children that they planned to have.

by **me!** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 1:52 pm

bull, like your query man...hahaha

by **Doc** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 1:53 pm

Bull, U missed the point. In many societies it is normal to raise children from previous marriges. One has to grow to respect each other in these relationships. When Divorce becomes common, remarriage also become normal and every one try to live with each others kids.

by **peeping tom** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 3:41 pm

These are hard painful facts, but definitely true. I have heard of a brother born to father and lady X, and his sister is born to their mother and Mr Y. They are not at all related by blood, but are still living in the same house as brother and sister. Going to a posh school in Hyderabad. I feel pained to see all these things.

by **bull** » Sun Apr 27, 2003 8:56 pm

I am sorry to be such a tubelight! But who\'s me?

by **funda** » Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:45 am

Let me imagine the situation where my wife and I are living together with MY child and her child, just for the sake of taking care of children / having a family ...probably to tell the world that I have one... and each is going about having their own sex lives O:) I think sex forms an integral part of marriage - marriage is not for sex alone. Probably you are too much used to studying science, Ms. Samata, where you study considering all other variables as constants. You observe what\'s happening to this variable. This is mutually dependent stuff.

by **Funk Engine** » Mon Apr 28, 2003 11:18 am

Life’s too short; Love isn\'t always an easy road to traverse. If you\'ve found yourself confused about your path, take a minute and let Love help you find your way. Love has answered to help your situation desiring a great sex life is something every couple strives for. What one couple may find stimulating, may not work for another. Each couple\'s tastes are what make sex unique and exciting. In our guide you\'ll find tips and advice to help you create the long-lasting and fulfilling sexual relationship you\'ve always desired with your partner. From new and exciting tips to advice on handling many common problems, you\'ll find everything you need. Sex is something that is a serious responsibility, and should be treated as so. If you feel that sex is something special then you need to make sure the sexual partners you choose also feel the same way. You can\'t assume the other person has the same viewpoints you do. You have to ask and question these things; otherwise you can find yourself in the same situation you are in. A week or so isn\'t typically enough time to find out this type of information. In the future, if you want to avoid getting hurt like this, guard your sexuality until you are sure the other person shares your same viewpoints. That doesn\'t mean don\'t have sex, or that your viewpoints can’t change. If you understand and are willingly to have a non-committal fling then that is great; just make sure that is what you want AND what the other person wants. As for your current situation, I\'d say forget him. If it causes you too much pain to be around him, let sleeping dogs lie for awhile. Maybe in a few months you can rethink the friendship aspect of the relationship.

by **vivek** » Mon Apr 28, 2003 12:35 pm

This seems straight out of some webpage, anyway, strictly speaking if Sex and Marriage don\'t go hand in hand then sex would also go in hand and thats every man\'s nightmare!

by **ananth** » Mon Apr 28, 2003 1:21 pm

good point. But there are consequences for every choice that you make. Sex and marriage need NOT go hand in hand. You can always have sex without marriage but rarely marriage without sex. A compromise is ideal in that have sex before marriage , experiment and find out what suits you best,then get married and stay monogamous. Marriage is a responsibility but it should be fun too. Sex is fun but there is need for responsible sex.Your choice should depend on what you desire and the time and place where you live. Indian society is \"very restrictive\". Western society is \"too permissive\".Being permissive in indian mileu is very inconvenient but is a normal phenomenon in the West. I tend to lean towards permissiveness.But thats just me.

by **Arun** » Mon Apr 28, 2003 2:15 pm

Let me help you vivek. See this URL[ http://www.lovingyou.com/content/sex/ ]

I\'m really against this idea of copy & paste jobs. Guys please express all by yourselves not with the help of commercial articles.

by **Hole** » Tue Apr 29, 2003 11:57 pm

And I wondered where this person writing in Deccan wrote the SAME sentence in one of his posts. Vivek?

by **Samata** » Wed Apr 30, 2003 3:17 am

Let me clarify what I meant. In most societies pre-marital or extra-marital sex runs the gamut of mild to extreme disapprobation. By contrast marital sex is considered almost holy, to the extent that marital rape is almost never characterised as rape. When I said that sex and marriage should be delinked I meant merely that it should not matter if the sexual partners are married or not or even if they are having an extra-marital relationship.
 
 
Statistically, the number of extra-marital affairs is considerable (for both sexes)and so are the divorces caused due to these affairs. A tolerant view of such affairs would preclude traumatic divorces.
 
 
Again, I am not implying that monogamy is wrong, I am just suggesting that it should not be considered a necessary ingredient for a happy marriage.

by d » Wed Apr 30, 2003 6:59 am

If we make sex and marriage separate, then it becomes a society where it becomes common to say: \'bang-bang-yawn-bye-gottogo-yawn-uh,o! I forgot-yawn-tha(yawn)nks-and-bye\'.And If it is not a courteous person, \" oh, well, whatever!\"

by **practical mind** » Tue May 06, 2003 9:58 pm

Well, sex and marriage are totally unrelated if we are not talking about culture clashes. Marriage is a social behavior and has been adapted to what our ancestors felt they did wrong. In many ways, I think the concept of a family should arise only after marriage (or, if u don\'t believe in marriage, be together - living in). The child should always have a mother and a father (biological) as the human tendency to care to your own blood is different from being humanitarian. Marriage is so embedded in the society that there are many legal and socio-economic advantages to benefit from. To break away from social norms is being rebellious, but this decision of yours should not affect your siblings. I good discussion, but a lot of thought needs to be brought in here to make the quote \"Marriages are made in heaven\" come true.

by **Samata** » Wed May 07, 2003 12:59 am

I would like to posit that marriage has become in many ways obsolete and that the very concept needs radical reform. I think neither sex nor love have anything to do with marriage. Marriage is a socio-legal contract that enforces certain responsibilities and rights to each party to the contract. Marriage is primarily concerned with property rights. Married people can claim benefits from their spouse’s insurance etc., for example. In case of death the surviving spouse automatically has a claim on marital property. The only difference between ‘legitimate’ and ‘illegitimate’ children is in the rights of inheritance.
 
 
People will refute my definition of marriage as nothing but a contract and point to myriad instances of marriages which are based on love and so on. I would say though that such relationships have nothing to do with marriage and were the partners merely living together they would still retain their domestic felicity. Humans are social animals and it is in our nature to partner. We form many partnerships through out our lives most of them fluid though some are lifelong. Many of us have best friends that we have grown up and grown old with and there are many instances in history and literature illustrating the strength of such bonds, which often times supercede all other ties including those of marriage.
 
 
I would like to use a partnership firm as a metaphor for marriage. The purpose of a partnership is to pool necessary resources. Often partners are friends (love marriages) who decide to work together, though relative strangers (arranged marriages) may also form an association. In any such venture, however, the underlying ingredient is trust and the contract is what usually makes trust possible. No two partnership contracts are alike and each one is customized to the needs and objects of that particular venture and its promoters. Marriage is the only contract that is ‘a one size fits all,’ and it needs to be rethought and made flexible so as to be able to accommodate the partnerships on their own terms.
 

While the partners are willing to trust and work with each other the primary activity of the partnership (rearing children) will prosper. Oftentimes, though, partnerships fail due to dissensions that develop between the partners and leave devastation in their wake for all concerned. Unfortunately, with a partnership it is not possible to insulate the partners from damage done to the firm. The chances of failure can be minimized, however, by careful planning and continued harmony among partners. 
 
Side notes: 
Many people adopt children and the familial bonds formed are no less adamantine than the bonds between biological parents and their offspring. 
Mother Teresa, Princess Noor Inayat Khan and Rani Lakshmibai, to name only a few, were people who broke away from the prevailing social norms and forged new paths. If dislodging vested interests and taking up cudgels for social causes is rebellion, that I am all for it.

by **practical mind** » Fri May 09, 2003 9:40 pm

Marriage is a word that u may not look for but as of now it has no replacement. When examples can be taken to compare, a couple of examples can be provided to show that marriages are truly successful. To the ordinary mind, marriage is still the only discipline to stay together. In a marriage, we talk about a compromise .. in relationship if ever there is a problem the first u do is to split. as i said if u think relationships can work beyond a point where people wont split because of silly issues .. so can marriages.

by **mrk** » Tue Jul 08, 2003 11:42 am

Marriage is to get a life partner. Sex is for relief and enjoyment, and for new contacts. Sex is that kind which will touch at any age or any time. But marriage is not like that. I think you understood my point.

Who is online