Criticisms of marriage are arguments against the practical or moral value of the institution of matrimony or particular forms of matrimony. These have included the effects that marriage has on individual liberty, equality between the sexes, the relation between marriage and violence, philosophical questions about how much control can a government have over its population, the amount of control a person has over another, the financial risk when measured against the divorce rate, and questioning of the necessity to have a relationship sanctioned by government or religious authorities.
Feminist activists often point to historical, legal and social inequalities of wedding, family life and divorce in their criticism of marriage. Sheila Cronan claimed that the freedom for women "cannot be won without the abolition of marriage." "The institution of marriage – wrote Marlene Dixon of the Democratic Workers Party – is the chief vehicle for the perpetuation of the oppression of women; it is through the role of wife that the subjugation of women is maintained". Andrea Dworkin said that marriage as an institution, developed from rape, as a practice.
Early Second Wave feminist literature in the West, specifically opposed to marriage include personalities such as Kate Millett (Sexual Politics, 1969), Germaine Greer (The Female Eunuch, 1970), Marilyn French (The Women's Room, 1977), Jessie Bernard (The Future of Marriage, 1972), and Shulamith Firestone (The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution, 1970).
History
Sylvia Pankhurst (1882 – 1960), British feminist, refused to marry her son's father, creating public scandal.
In 380 BC, Plato criticised marriage in the Republic. He stated that the idea of marriage was a "natural enemy" of the "commonwealth," aiming for its own higher unity.
In the industrial age a number of notable women writers including Sarah Fielding, Mary Hays, and Mary Wollstonecraft,
raised complaints that marriage in their own societies could be
characterized as little more than a state of "legal prostitution" with
underprivileged women signing in to support themselves.
Sociologists Naomi Gerstel and Natalia Sarkisian wrote that marriage is
also found to be often at odds with community, diminishing ties to
relatives, neighbors, and friends. The Lonely American: Drifting Apart in the Twenty-First Century]
by Jacqueline Olds and Richard S. Schwartz. According to Dan Moller's
"Bachelor's Argument", modern marriage can be compared to the act of
"forging professional credentials." Over 40 percent of them fail and
therefore should be avoided similar to any high-risk venture.
Commentators have often been critical of individual local
practices and traditions, leading to historical changes. Examples
include the early Catholic Church's efforts to eliminate concubinage and temporary marriage, the Protestant acceptance of divorce, and the abolition of laws against inter-faith and inter-race marriages in the western countries.
The decision not to marry is a presumed consequence of Søren Kierkegaard's philosophy. His well-documented relationship with Regine Olsen is a subject of study in existentialism,
as he called off their engagement despite mutual love. Kierkegaard
seems to have loved Regine but was unable to reconcile the prospect of
marriage with his vocation as a writer and his passionate and
introspective Christianity.
A similar argument is found in Franz Kafka's journal entry titled "Summary of all the arguments for and against my marriage":
I must be alone a great deal. What I accomplished was only the result of being alone.
As a high-profile couple, Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir
always expressed opposition to marriage. Brian Sawyer says "Marriage,
understood existentially, proposes to join two free selves into one
heading, thus denying the freedom, the complete foundation, of each
self."
Presently, the high divorce rates
are leading to questioning of the purpose of marriage. Some
contemporary critics of marriage question why governments (in Western
countries) continue to support marriage, when it has such a high failure
rate. Anthropologist Lionel Tiger wrote:
It is astonishing that, under the circumstances, marriage is still legally allowed. If nearly half of anything else ended so disastrously, the government would surely ban it immediately. If half the tacos served in restaurants caused dysentery, if half the people learning karate broke their palms, if only 6 percent of people who went on roller coaster rides damaged their middle ears, the public would be clamoring for action. Yet the most intimate of disasters...happens over and over again.
In response to the passage of California Proposition 22 and the current controversy regarding same-sex unions in the United States, a group of people have banded together to boycott
marriage until all people can legally marry. The argument is that since
marriage is not an inclusive institution of society, the members of the
boycott refuse to support the institution as it exists.
In the West, cohabitation and births outside marriage are becoming more common. In the United States, conservative and religious
commentators are highly critical of this trend. They are also often
critical of present-day marriage law and the ease of divorce. John Witte, Jr.,
Professor of Law and director of the Law and Religion Program at Emory
University, argues that contemporary liberal attitudes toward marriage
produce a family that is "haphazardly bound together in the common
pursuit of selfish ends" exactly as prophesied by Nietzsche. In his From Sacrament to Contract, Witte has argued that John Stuart Mill's secular and contractarian model of marriage, developed during the Enlightenment,
provided the theoretical justification for the present-day
transformation of Anglo-American marriage law, promoting unqualified
"right to divorce" on plaintiff's demand, one-time division of property,
and child custody without regard for marital misconduct. A Catholic professor Romano Cessario, in a review of Witte's book published in an ecumenical journal the First Things,
suggested that a solution to the current crisis of marriage in the
West, could come from the possible revival of the sacramental marriage
among Christians, thus counterbalancing Nietzsche's pessimism (as echoed
by Witte).
Cultural criticisms
"Esposas de Matrimonio" ("Wedding Cuffs"), a wedding ring sculpture expressing the criticism of marriages' effects on individual liberty. Esposas is a Spanish pun, in which the singular form of the word esposa refers to a spouse, and the plural refers to handcuffs.
Male dominance
Critics
of marriage argue that it is an institution which contributes to the
maintaining of traditional gender roles, thus preventing women from
achieving social equality, and reinforcing the idea that women exist to
serve men, which in turn increases the abuse of women. They argue that
marriage reinforces the traditional paradigm of male-female interaction:
subordination of the woman to the man in exchange of subsistence.
According to Sheila Jeffreys
"the traditional elements of marriage have not completely disappeared
in western societies, even in the case of employed, highly educated and
well paid professional women".
She argues that even such women remain in abusive marriages out of fear
of leaving and out of duty. Even in Western countries, married women
"feel they have no choice but to stay and endure and may be 'loving to
survive".
Normalization and discrimination
Some commentators criticize government authorities for promotion of marriage. They also criticize the romanticized image that marriage is given in films and romance novels. Over 40% of books sold in America were romance novels.
Some critics argue that people cannot form an objective image of what marriage is if they are from early childhood indoctrinated into believing marriage is desirable and necessary.
Critics of marriage argue that this institution represents a form
of state sponsored discrimination, in a generalized way against people
who do not marry, and in a particular way against certain racial or
ethnic groups who are less likely to marry and more likely to have
children outside marriage, such as African Americans in the US - by stigmatizing such individuals, presenting their lifestyle as abnormal and denying them rights. Dean Spade and Craig Willse write that
The idea that married families and their children are superior was and remains a key tool of anti-Black racism. Black families have consistently been portrayed as pathological and criminal in academic research and social policy based on marriage rates, most famously in the Moynihan Report.
Social isolation
What is it about modern coupledom that makes policing another person's behaviour a synonym for intimacy? (Or is it something about the conditions of modern life itself: is domesticity a venue for control because most of us have so little of it elsewhere?) Then there's the fundamental premise of monogamous marriage: that mutual desire can and will last throughout a lifetime. And if it doesn't? Well apparently you're just supposed to give up on sex, since waning desire for your mate is never an adequate defence for 'looking elsewhere'. At the same time, let's not forget how many booming businesses and new technologies have arisen to prop up sagging marital desire. Consider all the investment opportunities afforded: Viagra, couples pornography, therapy. If upholding monogamy in the absence of desire weren't a social dictate, how many enterprises would immediately fail?— American cultural critic and essayist Laura Kipnis, 2003
A criticism of marriage is that it may lead to the social isolation
of a person, who is often expected to diminish other relations with
friends, relatives or colleagues, in order to be fully dedicated to
their spouse. Julie Bindel
writes that: "Maybe those at the most risk of ending up alone are not
the folk who never marry, but rather the people who chuck all their eggs
in one basket. [...] During their marriage, believing as they did that
they only needed each other, both parties would have neglected
friendships, or indeed, failed to cultivate new ones".
Symbolism
Some critics assert that marriage will always remain a symbolic
institution signifying the subordination of women to men. Clare Chambers
points to the sexist traditions surrounding marriage and weddings; she
writes:
Symbolically, the white wedding asserts that women's ultimate dream and purpose is to marry, and remains replete with sexist imagery: the white dress denoting the bride's virginity (and emphasising the importance of her appearance); the minister telling the husband "you may now kiss the bride" (rather than the bride herself giving permission, or indeed initiating or at least equally participating in the act of kissing); the reception at which, traditionally, all the speeches are given by men; the wife surrendering her own name and taking her husband's.
The history of marriage in relation to women makes it an institution
that some critics argue cannot and should not be accepted in the 21st
century; to do so would mean to trivialize the abuses it was responsible
for. Some critics argue that it is impossible to dissociate marriage
from its past. Clare Chambers argues that:
(...) it is impossible to escape the history of the institution. Its status as a tradition ties its current meaning to its past". Past abuses of marriage are sometimes depicted in documentaries. A documentary in Ireland presented the story of elderly women who described their experiences with repeated acts of rape in marriage and the children born from these rapes, during the time when marital rape was not criminalized, contraception, abortion and divorce were all illegal, and the marriage bar restricting married women's employment outside home was in force. Marital rape in Ireland was made illegal in 1990, and divorce was legalized in 1996.
Violence against women
Violence related to female virginity
is considered a problem. In many parts of the world it is socially
expected for the bride to be a virgin; if the husband has sex with his
wife after marriage and she does not bleed (it is possible for a woman
to not bleed when she has sex for the first time ), this can end in extreme violence, including an honor killing.
The common view of marital life as "private" and outside the sphere of public intervention allows violence to flourish. Elizabeth Brake
writes that ""privacy" protects unequal divisions of domestic labor,
domestic violence, and exclusion of health coverage for abortion and
contraception." Mary Lyndon Shanley
writes that police often "ignore complaints of domestic violence
because they do not want to "intrude" on the private realm of the
married couple".
Legal criticisms
Economic dependence
Marriage
has been criticized in its complicity of wives' economic dependence on
husbands due to the gendered division of labour and that women's' work
typically pays less than men's work. Women are more likely to downgrade
or drop out of their careers to assist in child rearing or when their
career conflicts with their husband's. Absent a career, women become
dependent on legally granted marriage benefits such as a husband's
health insurance, and are thus increasingly dependent on their husband.
This dependence can facilitate abuse because the marriage becomes
economically difficult to leave.
Immobility
In
some conservative cultures, married women are not allowed to leave home
without the consent of the husband - a prohibition that is supported by
the law itself in many of these countries. For instance, in Yemen
marriage regulations state that a wife must obey her husband and must
not leave home without his permission.
Marital rape
Historically, in many cultures marriage has been used to regulate sexuality, rather than consent
regulating it. That is, non-marital sex was banned regardless of
consent, while marital sex was an enforceable obligation. From the
mid-20th century onward, changing social norms have led to, among other
things, the decriminalization of consensual non-marital sex and the
criminalization of marital rape. These changes are not universal around the world, and in many countries they have not occurred. One of the concerns about marriage is that it may contradict the notion
of sexual self-determination, due to cultural, religious, and in many
countries also legal norms. For instance, sex outside marriage is still punishable by death
in some jurisdictions. In 2014, Amnesty International's Secretary
General stated that "It is unbelievable that in the twenty-first century
some countries are condoning child marriage and marital rape while
others are outlawing abortion, sex outside marriage and same-sex sexual
activity – even punishable by death."
In various places, men have sexual authority over their wives, in
law and in practice. The men decide when and where to have sex, and
wives have no power to stop unwanted sex. In certain countries marital rape is legal, and even where it is illegal it is infrequently reported or prosecuted. Often, married women also cannot stop unwanted pregnancy, because in various countries modern contraception
is not available, and in some countries married women need legal
permission from the husband to use contraception (and even in countries
where the husband's consent is not legally required in practice it is
asked for), and abortion
is illegal or restricted, and in some countries married women need the
consent of husband for abortion. Therefore, marriage leads to a
situation which allows not only forced sex, but also forced pregnancy, and in some of these countries pregnancy and childbirth remain dangerous because of lack of adequate medical care. The effects of sexual violence inside marriage are exacerbated by the practice of child marriage; in 2013 an 8-years-old Yemeni girl died from internal bleeding after she was raped by her 40-year-old new husband.
Sheila Jeffreys argues that the very institution of marriage is based
on the idea that heterosexual sex is the absolute right of the man and
the absolute duty of the woman; that men are entitled to demand sex on
their terms and to coerce sex, and women are not allowed to ever refuse
it. Lack of economic opportunity means that wives have no choice but to
"allow sexual access to their bodies in return for subsistence".
Relationship favoritism
Another issue is the question on why relations that are (or are
believed to be) sexual are favored in law with regard to legal
protections and promotion, and those that are not (or are believed not
to be) are not. This is especially the case as marriage rates are quite
low in many Western countries, and the state has been criticized for
ingoing other living arrangements that are not sexual relations; and
there have been increased objections to legal concepts such as consummation or adultery that critics argue do not belong in modern law.
It is argued that with regard to family life, the state should regulate
the parental rights and responsibilities of parents, not focus on
whether there is an ongoing sexual/romantic relation between the
parents.
State control
A
criticism of marriage is that it gives the state an undue power and
control over the private lives of the citizens. The statutes governing
marriage are drafted by the state, and not by the couples who marry
under those laws. The laws may, at any time, be changed by the state
without the consent (or even knowledge) of the married people. The terms
derived from the principles of institutionalized marriage represent the
interests of the governments.
Critics of marriage argue that it is an institution based on
control, domination and possession, and that attempting to exercise
control over another person's life is immoral and dangerous, and should
not be encouraged by the state. Claudia Card, professor of Philosophy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, writes that:
The legal rights of access that married partners have to each other's persons, property, and lives makes it all but impossible for a spouse to defend herself (or himself), or to be protected against torture, rape, battery, stalking, mayhem, or murder by the other spouse... Legal marriage thus enlists state support for conditions conducive to murder and mayhem.
Violence against women
Anti-dowry poster in Bangalore, India.
The United Nations General Assembly defines "violence against women" as "any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or mental harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life." The 1993 Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women noted that this violence could be perpetrated by assailants of either gender, family members and even the "State" itself.
Critics of marriage argue that it is complicit in the
mistreatment and subjugation of women across the world. Common concerns
raised today focus on the health and general well-being of women, who,
in parts of the world, have virtually no protection in law or in
practice, against domestic violence within marriage. It is also nearly impossible for women there to get out of abusive relationships. Abuses are upheld by claims of possession and entitlement in some cultures and the well-being of women is undermined by a powerful act of subordination.
According to Gerstel and Sarkisian, domestic violence, isolation, and
housework tend to increase for women who sign marriage contracts. Those with lower income draw even fewer benefits from it.
Bad marriages, according to Gerstel and Sarkisian, result in higher
levels of stress, suicide, hypertension, cancer, and slower wound
healing in women.
Opponents of legal marriage contend that it encourages violence against women, both through practices carried out within a marriage (such as beating and rape
inside marriage - which are legal in some countries and tolerated in
many more), and through acts related to marital customs (such as honor killings for refusing arranged marriages; forcing rape victims to marry their rapist, marriage by abduction; or executions for sex outside marriage).
In some parts of the world, the extreme stigma cast on women who have
reached a certain age and are still unmarried often leads these women to
suicide. Suicide is also a common response of women caught in abusive marriages with no possibility of leaving those marriages. Women who are faced with the prospect of forced marriage may commit suicide. Violence and trafficking related to payment of dowry and bride price are also problems. Dowry deaths especially occur in South Asia, and acid throwing is also a result of disputes related to dowry conflicts.
In various countries married men have authority over their wives. For instance, Yemeni marriage regulations state that a wife must obey her husband and must not leave home without his permission.
In Iraq
husbands have a legal right to punish their wives. The criminal code
states that there is no crime if an act is committed while exercising a
legal right. Examples of legal rights include: "The punishment of a wife
by her husband, the disciplining by parents and teachers of children
under their authority within certain limits prescribed by law or by
custom". In the Democratic Republic of Congo
the Family Code states that the husband is the head of the household;
the wife owes her obedience to her husband; a wife has to live with her
husband wherever he chooses to live; and wives must have their husbands'
authorization to bring a case in court or to initiate other legal
proceedings.
Specific criticisms
Anarchist
Famous anarchist Emma Goldman
wrote how marriage was not a love pact but an economic agreement that
restricts men's and mainly women's freedoms. She criticized how wives
were surrendered freedoms permanently for the sake of marriage, and how
sexuality and child rearing outside of marriage is shamed.
Feminist
Marriage
is a focus of many feminist concerns. Of these many cultural concerns
include the fact that within many marriages women are generally expected
to do most of the work in the home, even if they had careers outside
the home. A more economic concern is that marriage may also foster
economic dependence since women's work is underpaid and women are
expected to downgrade their careers when their careers conflict with
their husband's or with work in the home. Without appropriate finances
women can become dependent on their husband's marriage benefits like
health insurance.
Some feminists have argued for the reform of marriage while
others have argued for its abolition arguing it is entrenched in sexist
cultural norms and a legal structure that promotes it.
Marxist
The separation of the family from the clan and the institution of monogamous marriage were the social expressions of developing private property; so-called monogamy afforded the means through which property could be individually inherited. And private property for some meant no property for others, or the emerging of differing relations to production on the part of different social groups. The core of Engels’ formulation lies in the intimate connection between the emergence of the family as an economic unit dominated by the male and this development of classes.— Anthropologist and social theorist Eleanor Leacock
Within early Marxist texts there existed critiques of marriage. Friedrich Engels
wrote how the origins of marriage were not for the purposes of love but
instead for private property rights. Monogamous marriage became an
institution to be the base of the family and solidify a system for the
family to handle private property and its inheritance. Monogamy would
later spur on adultery and the business of prostitution.
In the book The Second Sex author Simone de Beauvoir
argues that marriage is an alienating institution. Men can become tied
to supporting a wife and children and women can become dependent on
their husbands, and for children who become the target of rage when the
stresses of marriage overwhelm their parents. She argues about marriage
that "Any institution which solders one person to another, obliging
people to sleep together who no longer want to is a bad one".
Queer theory
Within Queer theory a critique exists that the legalization of same-sex marriage
simply normalizes the cultured gender norms and economic inequalities
of marriage into the LGBT community. Also that the normalization of
marriage delegitimizes non-monogamous relationships which are considered
common in the LGBT community.
