Content
Why modern men are not eager to get married
10.05.2023 09:14
Consciously or unconsciously, but, moving into the status of new gender relations, the newlyweds in principle understood their essence, the features of certain contractual relations, written down on paper or assumed.
The second was always worse than the first, because it was perceived subjectively, naively, and based on assumptions more than on responsibility.
As relationships changed, it was this “time bomb” that led to the collapse of relationships that were once filled with passion and mutual respect, says psychologist Andrei Kashkarov .
However, our contemporaries are not deprived of the opportunity to debate this issue of constructive discourse, and the best thing to do is to analyze this “Albanian question” in two aspects – historical retrospect and from the point of view of modern legal education.
Historical retrospective
The 19th century in Europe significantly changed traditions and customs, becoming a turning point in the considered key of civilized relations between a man and a woman. With the development of technical progress, the spread of material surpluses among the masses in society, relations were built taking into account the emerging consumerism (the culture of consumption of not only things and food), and this could not but lead to a new status of gender relations of social consumption. The conventionally commodity nature of marriage, of course, arose much earlier than the appearance of the explanatory treatise of Immanuel Kant.
At the same time, a new impetus was given and a fashion for flirting arose, and women in high-status aristocratic and merchant circles increasingly began to be perceived in accordance with the maxim "Woman is money". The concept of flirting, by the way, was improved at the same time.
It is clear that the fashion and trend that arose at that time can only be judged conditionally, this did not happen without exceptions, and in the working environment, among the bourgeois class, not everything rested on money and position in society where there was none... However, for people who took the trouble to think about the essence of things and concepts, a woman was not positioned as a victim in such a union, on the contrary, a woman had her own advantages from marital status (we are talking about material), even then the trend changed radically, and a man often became a victim of marital relations, partly due to thoughtlessness, partly voluntarily, partly to please the established traditional European morality, bringing his savings and fortunes to the altar of marital happiness.
The phenomenon of the transformation of the institution of marriage and marital values already then had a “bright, prominent character, and although elements in traditions (say, Orthodoxy and Lutheranism) differed and imposed conditions on family life, style and values, it was still necessary to reckon with them everywhere; the phenomenon and tendencies differed on the continents, but in general they can be called “international”, and not only Russian realities.
By the way, in Russian literature of the early 19th and subsequent centuries, Russian authors with a world-wide reputation beautifully reflected the morals and characteristics of society in the epistolary genre; for example, the vice-governor of Ryazan and Tver (at different times) M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin in "Poshekhonskaya Starina".
It even got to the point that it was not shameful to consider, beyond any chimera and camouflage, the words: “it is not love that leads to marriage, but, on the contrary, marriage leads to love, and marriage of convenience becomes clearly expressed.”
Thus, the phenomenon has a number of features, has been improved over the years, is not only a Russian or Slavic problem, is not determined only by the features of faith, belonging to a certain religious denomination and church practice, although it takes them into account. But one of the main influencing factors, elements of "new" gender relations precisely then began to be based on material wealth and status.
It is quite clear that the relationship between a man and a woman does not only arise on a material basis, and at all times not all marriages have been broken. Nevertheless, speaking about the typical, about the general tendency of relationships and their basis, one cannot bury one's head in the sand, pretending not to know "what one is doing", neglecting the legal features and consequences of marriage, because at all times tragic endings make one think, they make one think... And a man too.
Features of legal education
No professional lawyer with good practice in modern realities will advise a man to marry if it carries risks to his well-being. The risks are too great. It is not for nothing that the previous paragraph provides an excursion into the history of traditions to show the important thing: in all times of civilized relations, marriages were concluded the faster, the less materially and status-wise the spouses were burdened.
Figuratively speaking, having nothing material to your name, you have nothing to lose. Why not get married? And if you have, you will involuntarily start thinking, and legal experience, Russian law enforcement practice in this regard is very useful.
In our turbulent times, when a person who has material assets (at least some) wants to influence and shine, "everyone wants everything at once." This is not the USSR with its planned economy and conditional stability of tomorrow. A woman, perhaps more than a man, wants... comfort, brilliance, to be confident in the future, in her chosen one, in providing for children and daily smaller "pleasures" according to her status, which is in demand depending on the characteristic features of the "kanimura." This is normal - we must admit, why scratch against the grain, against nature?
But what about a man? Let's think about him too. It is incredibly difficult for a young man, a conventional Belarusian or Russian, to earn money in a stable and permanent perspective for many of the declared female whims. People hold on to good jobs, and those who don't have them are forced to work three jobs and are proud of it without any sarcasm... Do you know the most popular female question (overheard in the provinces from conversations more than once, when two ladies talk about their husbands)? Attention, here it is. "Where does yours work?" "How much does he earn?" "Is it possible to get mine a job there - a third one?"
It is clear that the situation is better in megacities. Therefore, social competition on the career and public path has not been cancelled, the redistribution of assets is hardly possible today (and is also associated with risk - no matter how you look at it), it is sometimes easier to steal than to earn, but there are risks everywhere.
The average man tries and works and saves, but stable and large fortunes, at least over the presidential salary per year, have never been achieved by working like a "squirrel in a wheel" and labor savings. These are either hard efforts for years with loss of health and, without exaggeration, "on the galleys", or risky schemes, of which, including in the SVO, there are enough today. Against this background, the conditional imbalance has decreased: women have the opportunity to earn well, which has generally raised their self-esteem of the species in the last 20 years of "getting off their knees". It would seem, live in a family and be happy. But... no.
Time passes very quickly and, as philosophers have rightly noted, "time is the same for everyone." With age, people of both sexes have less energy, a family has one or more children, they traditionally stay with the mother in the event of a divorce - this is the imperfect law enforcement practice in Russia, significantly weakening the cause-and-effect relationship of the institution of marriage. Most judges to this day are representatives of the "beautiful half" of humanity.
And no matter how they tell tales about some kind of objectivity, we will not generalize, but psychological patterns of behavior cannot be eradicated from them either: when making decisions about the fate of others, they inevitably associate subjective preferences with their own lives, even the presence of a person making a decision is unconsciously associated with such a nuance as what kind of child in the family is a boy or a girl.
All this is very shaky and creates additional risks for a family man, sometimes beyond his control. And why is it necessary? If he himself is inexperienced, there are plenty of friends around who have witnessed, so to speak, terrible family dramas with resulting material losses, for which he earned 20-30 years. Further. Law enforcement practice, not only Russian-Belarusian, but also world, shows that 2/3, or even more, of the remaining jointly acquired property of a man after “outstanding events” is spent on the maintenance of children and former family. Plus to this, the strongest emotional experiences, which are sometimes deliberately provoked by his ex.
It is important to know: the feeling of guilt imposed in one way or another is just a pretext for manipulation. It is easier to control the “guilty”. And not only in family life. But not every man is deeply aware of this. Therefore, even a relatively healthy man, especially after 45 years of decorating this world with him (it is clear that there are nuances even without generalizations), is not as strong as a “working ant” 20 years younger, his “earnings” are not the same. The said tendency is relevant today and the main determining factor in the development of the institution of marriage for the next 50 years. And therefore such men remain under attack from their ex-wives, who, including thanks to lawyers, successfully “milk” them. The fear of being left with nothing, having invested everything (both time and money) is a very serious human emotional factor. Creating a new family with such “remnants” of assets is also a special, difficult task, although solvable.
From here it is clear how a man with partial, unimpaired intellect and, perhaps, already prudently cooled experience thinks: it is better to come to an agreement (in case of dramatic necessity) with a “common-law wife”, giving her a piece of assets like a bone to a dog, than to have almost everything taken away in an official divorce, and then to be told that you are the worst of all, “you ruined everything yourself” and it turns out that “people around you live better”. The latter, however, can be lived through quite well.
In the said paradigm of law enforcement practice and the established impeccable traditions of "community life", it is the woman who decides what she needs, how and when. As long as the man earns money, she decides. "Does he interfere with my personal growth" or not yet. If yes, then "he" can go to hell.
On the other hand, in the same law enforcement practice it is noticeable that it is the wives with experience after 40 who are becoming increasingly aggressive in securing “marital rights”, “the future of children” and do not spare money on legal support of their desires – this pays off a hundredfold. Pay attention to the available statistics of the registry offices during the period of the beginning of mobilization in Russia (or other cataclysms) – during these months the number of registered marriages increases sharply. This is how a practical woman manages. But a man is also a person, and not every man is a Pithecanthropus, and judging a fish by its ability to climb a tree is terribly unwise. Therefore, from the legal side and precisely in modern law enforcement practice, the official registration of relations is under a big semantic question. And men understand this.
It is bad to talk about men only on the basis of their logical mind, open eyes without rose-colored glasses and "uncaulked" ears - this does not make a woman look better. This is typical. Of course, there are (and many) long-lasting marriages for love, of course, there can be other arguments, and other opinions, of course, a man is more willing to marry when he feels his diverse interest in the chosen one, and material too. First of all, we are all poor sinful people. And none of us (species) is better than the other.
After such a lengthy discussion, it is appropriate not only to spoil the mood of the readers, but it is also necessary to offer something... For criticism is possible, but not for the sake of criticism, and discussion and condemnation - in themselves - are not an argument. It must be said with joy that even in the regions of multi-confessional Russia, old and good traditions have been preserved (in places), based on the experience and wisdom of elders. The institution of "dowry" in our dear fatherland and in the Slavic tradition as a whole has not sunk into oblivion, it has only become camouflaged. Kalym in Muslim and generally Eastern practice also exists to this day in various forms. Wedding, like the marriage contract, in different ways, but also are called upon to restrain existing marriages, to strengthen families, and not to destroy them. Let's return to where we started, to a historical excursion. In Germany at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries. Men were typically and categorically unwilling to enter into marriage without a dowry from their wife; moreover, it was considered immoral.
Confirmation of this can be found at least in Immanuel Kant's "Metaphysics of Morals". And even more interesting is Kant's categorical imperative, which in an adapted form sounds like: "Man is an end in himself and should not be a means", "man is above any concepts, ideologies, states; his purpose is unknown to anyone; no one has the right to use him; only that to which he gives voluntary consent is moral; any coercion is immoral; retribution is suffering, destruction, hostility." This fair maxim is especially relevant in love and intimacy. In essence, none of the species (woman and man) owes anything to anyone. But biased figures are constantly trying to marginalize this fair formula.
A man, entering into marriage without thinking, simply neglects these “conventions”, blinded by “desire” or opportunities, but in vain... All these and other forms of conditioned relationships between a man and a woman are in demand today.
Where a woman, entering into marriage out of a good and spontaneous desire, is not initially oriented toward deception, seasoned with cunning (and God forbid anyone to experience female revenge) and charms, she is ready, without being offended herself and without criticizing her partner, to recognize the right of her beloved to such a desire as prudent legal security of marital relations.
As a rule, such marriages are long-lasting, and if they break up under the influence of circumstances, they do not bring great disappointment to the man. Unlike marriages "blinded" by feelings, when you have to divide both assets and children. They are the ones you feel the most sorry for. But adults are used to finding any available justification for their own actions, no matter what abominations are committed in their name.
In this vein, it is entirely possible to restore a man’s trust in the institution of marriage (officially registered relationships), albeit inertly, like all questions of the universe associated with a change in the cultural paradigm.
