Marriage - How Badly Can We Suck

Now that domestic partnerships are being signed into law for gays and lesbians, I think that it is time that heterosexuals take a good look at our own institution of marriage. That’s right - marriage – a social experiment long past needing a make over. We’ve given it a good millennium or two and the jury has long been in – we suck at marriage in it’s current state. So how about we re-visit the institution and it’s terms. When I say we, of course I mean Americans. I also think that as a whole, we have some serious self esteem issues. Re-vamping this tired and broken institution could be a real ego booster. Our stock abroad would soar, or at least improve a bit.

First – marriage in its current state primarily benefits the husband – in hetero unions. I have high hopes for gay marriages, I hope that they set the standard in long term commitment. I know from experience what I speak because my ex-husband didn’t believe in marriage. I was married – he wasn’t. His life went on as it had before and he kept his wedding bands (yes multiple) in an assortment of odd places – like the console of his car (that was later re-po’d and taken away) or at one point – on his key ring? I have no idea what that last one was about psychologically.

But marriage benefits the husband - generally speaking. I have heard tell of a rare kind of union where couples share responsibilities and enjoy each others company, laugh, dance together. I’ve not witnessed nor experienced it so I cannot confirm. It benefits the husband because it’s in our DNA to give and care for and it’s in their DNA to pretend not to see and to be disabled, dim witted or in some other way impaired – when convenient.

Yes – I’m bitter. And a bit wiser – about the farce that we wax so poetic about, incessantly called love. But that’s for a later entry. Marriage is an institution for the insane and it should be a union of like minded people who agree to co-mingle assets and body fluids for a guesstimated period of time, hence a contract.

First of all if we all know that a life time commitment to anything is just silly. Written for a time when a life sentence was maybe 30 years – we now would have to go through 3 of those today. From there the contract could be as specific or general as you want it to be. A contract between two people who agree to behave a certain way for the good of the pair or group as it expands, for a period of time, with liberal options to extend. Whether you choose to bring God into it is your preference. And as far as kids are concerned – who knows whether it’s better to expose them to a loveless, selfish experiment in long term torture OR to the rigors of divorce. Either way, they will definitely have topics to discuss in group or individual therapy.

I think that if marriage vows were written to reflect our collective attention spans we would be better at it. We would also have to revise how marriage statistics were reported. That would be a real image and self esteem booster. If a couple contracted for 5 years with an option chose not to renew – that would go in the success column. Our numbers would soar as would our reputation abroad. Wow – check out the Americans – 92% success rate – how do they do it?!

I envision a time in the distant future when this relic called marriage will be gazed at with great wonder and amazement. Picture it – 500 years in the future a father and son in a museum. “Wow, Dad – you mean people actually stayed together till they died? That would be like 130 years with the same person!” Dad - "Well they didn’t live that long way back then, son. Still it could amount to 50, 60 years. Yep. I hear tell that men would have affairs, online porn and order brides from catalogs. It was a crazy time. Now go find your fifth step sister and 3rd mom twice removed so we can go get lunch.”

It could happen.