Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
I think in answer to your question that I would argue that fewer marriages are probably better overall, but only in combination with a dramatic increase in more responsible sexual activity.
|
I have to disagree completely with the above. Even though I know from history that disagreeing with Textcritic rarely works out well.
Our society is designed around a two person team. So many aspects of life are easier when you have a partner to help and support you. Living on your own is far more costly than living with a partner. Two individuals living in single small apartment will spend less money on the basics than two individuals living in separate accommodations. Buying a house will be easier with two incomes. Even if only one person is working I think it is still safe to say that the person with support will have more opportunities to succeed at work if they have someone at home to help out with the other aspects of life (cooking, cleaning, shopping, social events).
Marriage provides a permanency and stability that allows people to plan for the future. I think that a model of reduced marriage with random safe couplings would place a far greater burden on the individual and would lead to a more cut throat, me-first society.
I know that there will be a ton of examples of single people who succeeded and their married counterparts who didn't as a direct result of their relationship status but on the whole I think it holds true.
Extrapolating what I have said would lead to the obvious conclusion that if two is better than one then three must be better than two (see polyamory above). I would hazard a guess that the statement is correct except that society has had thousands of years to work out the dynamics of a two person relationship. If you can make a threesome work though you would probably be ahead of the game. At some point though the benefit of increased people will be lost by the reduced productivity inherent in a collective (see downfall of communism).