dss00@amdahl.UUCP (dss00) (06/11/85)
This article is intended primarily for net.nlang.india (because
most readers of that group will probably not consider my rambling
as if emanating from Mars), but I thought this may be of interest
to some other groups too.
The question is prompted by some of the questions raised by some
folks about "arranged marriage" vs. "love marriage" etc.
Some opponents of "arranged marriage" (opponent is the key word here)
have questioned the "educatedness" of some of us poor blokes who are
dumb enough to allow our parents a say in our life after we have
reached puberty (read that as enlightenment).
Wonder how people feel about premarital sex. Someone compared arranged
marriages to "shopping" as in shopping for a car. Am I allowed to
extend the analogy to say that premarital sex feel like "test driving"
the car?
Cheers...........
--
Deepak S. Sabnis ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,nsc}!amdahl!dss00 (408) 746-6058
(Usual Disclaimer Here)pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul Dubuc) (06/13/85)
>... >The question is prompted by some of the questions raised by some >folks about "arranged marriage" vs. "love marriage" etc. >Some opponents of "arranged marriage" (opponent is the key word here) >have questioned the "educatedness" of some of us poor blokes who are >dumb enough to allow our parents a say in our life after we have >reached puberty (read that as enlightenment). Allowing parents to have a *say* isn't dumb. Their experience can help you from making some big mistakes. When someone talks about "arranged marriage", however, I think of it as parents telling you who you *will* marry. Parents who don't allow their offspring more of a say in their own lives as they mature are selling their kids short. >Wonder how people feel about premarital sex. Someone compared arranged >marriages to "shopping" as in shopping for a car. Am I allowed to >extend the analogy to say that premarital sex feel like "test driving" >the car? >Deepak S. Sabnis ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,nsc}!amdahl!dss00 (408) 746-6058 I'm not sure how arranged marriage compares to shopping. Who's doing the shopping? But premarital sex defintely isn't analogous to "test driving". There's a little more to marriage than sex, I think. Good sex doesn't make good marriage. It's more like the other way around. -- Paul Dubuc cbscc!pmd
cher@ihlpm.UUCP (cherepov) (06/13/85)
> > Wonder how people feel about premarital sex. Someone compared arranged > marriages to "shopping" as in shopping for a car. Am I allowed to > extend the analogy to say that premarital sex feel like "test driving" > the car? > Why, sure. I just do not see the reason to single out premarital sex. Premarital talking would qualify for analogy just as well. Me, I feel very good about it... Mike Cherepov
vallath@ucbcad.UUCP (Vallath Nandakumar) (06/15/85)
> >... > >Some opponents of "arranged marriage" (opponent is the key word here) > >have questioned the "educatedness" of some of us poor blokes who are > >dumb enough to allow our parents a say in our life after we have > >reached puberty (read that as enlightenment). > > Allowing parents to have a *say* isn't dumb. Their experience can > help you from making some big mistakes. When someone talks about > "arranged marriage", however, I think of it as parents telling you > who you *will* marry. > As with parents everywhere, there are degrees to which Indian parents influence their children, and degrees to which the children obey their parents. Parents often make a suggestion, and the children are allowed to say yes or no. Other parents might be more autocratic. I also object to the all too frequent use of "love marriage", since in a large number of these marriages, the partners are not as much in love with each other as is made out - it is an attraction based as much on calculated decisions as to suitability of the other partner as on "love". This last statement is merely a premise of mine based on observations - I don't wish to imply that everybody has a cynical attitude about love and marriage. Vallath Nandakumar .
barryg@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Lee Gold) (06/16/85)
First off, I'm going to suggest we distinguish between premarital sex (sex between two people who intend to get married) and nonmarital sex (sex between two people are not married and don't currently intend to). And that we state age and background, since it's very likely views will differ influenced by background. I'm 42, Jewish, born in Los Angeles as were my parents. My first marriage was preceded by premarital cuddling, but not sex. And annulled because there wan't any postmarital sex either. I went into that marriage full of ideals about a "white wedding" and "giving one's virginity to one's husband on one's wedding night." I left it somewhat disillusioned. When I accepted a second marriage proposal (with a guy I'd been cuddling with but not having sex with), I told him that before we announced the news officially I wanted to have sex with him a few times and verify all would be well. Later on we went to our rabbi for a pre-wedding conference and one of the first questions he asked was whether we'd agreed on if/when we wanted children and on birth control methods to be used. I don't object to anyone else have nonmarital sex but I'm not emotionally suited to physical intimacy without the commitment of an intention to marry, so it's not for me. I look forward to reading other comments. --Lee Gold
rafferty@cmu-cs-edu1.ARPA (Colin Rafferty) (06/19/85)
> I don't object to anyone else have nonmarital sex but I'm not emotionally > suited to physical intimacy without the commitment of an intention to > marry, so it's not for me. > > I look forward to reading other comments. > > --Lee Gold I am very happy to hear someone say that she doesn't like premarital sex and not try to enforce that preference on anybody else. I am a 20 year old male, brought up under Jewish influence (currently agnostic), not married, and have no plans for it in the near future. On the other hand, I have tried my hand at nonmarital sex, and have enjoyed it very much. The young lady that I had it with was someone that I had known well, and I had gotten very close to before. My idea is that if a man and a woman are consenting, anything goes. I would not have sex with someone that I just met, or don't care very much for, and I don't quite understand why other people do, but I am not one to impose my own morals on anybody else. I just think that commitment is the keyword here, but it does not necessarily have to be towards marriage. ---- Colin Rafferty { Math Department, Carnegie-Mellon University } "I suspect that CMU would deny ever knowing me, let alone sharing my views."
wmmw@ukc.UUCP (W.M.M.Weir) (06/24/85)
[Munch me] I often think that there is a good deal of material talked about premarital sex that people should be ashamed of. The talk that's going on at the present is mere pandering to wont. It is very easy to say that there is nothing wrong with premarital sex, and equally very easy to say (dogmatically) that it's right out. What annoys me is that people are so ready to jump on the band wagon. I mean, for instance, is the analogy of shopping for a car *really* applicable to marriage? Would the marriage be best arranged if the partner was a belonging, primarily designed to satisfy? It's a very appealing analogy because it favours that which satisfies. Now just suppose I came up with an analogy suggesting that premarital sex is completely immoral. I'd have a flame on my hands. And should we also rule out talking to the opposite sex if we are to rule out premarital sex (an infered, serious suggestion)? Surely this "reasoning" is folly. Let us have consideration for other people and not ourselves when we come to judgements about morals which will effect future generations. What we decide here will either de-restrict pre-marital sex or control it. A new generation of children will be, in increased measure, of single parent families, and if the concept of marriage cheapens further, the family unit will dissolve. These are facets of the permission of pre-marital sex which we should not ignore. How can we argue with respect only to our own benefit? And here I should make my point of view clear. I am deciding. But I am not willing to jump on a bandwagon, and I am not willing to take the easy way out merely because it is satisfying. [Note, I am seemingly arguing here for sex restriction, but that is only because it is the system under attack. If sex were totally de-restricted I would probably argue from the other point of view. Just let's THINK!] No smileys. W.Weir
fderavi@cybavax.UUCP (F. Deravi) (06/26/85)
> Wonder how people feel about premarital sex. ... > > -- > > Deepak S. Sabnis ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,nsc}!amdahl!dss00 (408) 746-6058 > > (Usual Disclaimer Here) [+ != -] The function of marriage, as I see it, is to provide a structure for the formation of a physio-emotional relationship through the means of a formal contract. Is there a need for a contract? Consider what is at stake -- a PER could potentially lead to new life ( the success rate of contraceptives is less than 100% ). So there needs to be a means of safegaurding the interests of any potential babies, don't you think. And there are other ways in which a contract can help. In the Islamic tradition for example, after separation the woman must wait for 4 months before re-marrying. This is to clarify arrangements for any child that she might be bearing. This may prove to be difficult without a formal contract. And so on ... The problem may be in regarding marriage as more than a social contract. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - F. Deravi, | UUCP : {UK}!ukc!reading!cybavax!fderavi | EE, University College, | JANET : fderavi@swxa/000060601800 | Swansea, SA2 8PP, U.K. | phone : +44 792 205678 Ext. 4565 | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -