Friday, July 11, 2008

Defending the Wrongfully Accused



Now, in today's Sun-Times, within the first three pages, one can find stories on three separate instances of men who killed/tried to kill their wives.

People around the office have been commenting on it. Many women have been making the comment 'I'm glad I'm not married' or 'I'm never getting married'. Whenever there are very public stories of very unfortunate situations involving a married couple (such as this, or a raging celeb divorce - oh, we've got those in the daily paper too!) - these lamentations come out.

I would like to propose an alternative theory - in these specific cases, it's not the institution of marriage - it's the asshole(s) involved in it.

Now, granted - let me say this. I'm not married. I don't know what it's like to be married. And, I understand that planning a life with and being with the same person day in and day out for decades on end can be challenging and stressful in many ways. I understand that it's something that one doesn't truly understand unless he or she is experiencing it, and I understand that it might push one to do things he or she normally wouldn't.

WITHIN REASON.

Is murder within reason? Um, not so much!!!

When people hear stories like this - they look to blame marriage. I'm not sure who or what is to blame, exactly, but I don't think marriage is the right target. I'd sooner say to swear off the opposite (or, I suppose, same) sex, dating, romance, relationships, or people in general. Although I'm not sure these are the right targets either, I think they're closer to the bullseye.

Here's my personal take - it takes a certain kind of person to murder someone. We all have certain limits to our character. A normal, decent, good person is not going to be driven to murder by marriage. He (or she) will address conflicts within the relationship in other ways. Most people I know who have sworn off marriage are either a) in a relationship that is pretty close to the equivalent of being married or b) still quick to trust and date.

Not that I'm saying these people should be swearing off all of the aforementioned. However, in the same sense that I wouldn't want to be married to the kind of person who would do something so horrendous, I wouldn't want to be casually hooking up with him either. If someone is a questionable character - what good is ANY romantic involvement with the person?

My proposed solution...I don't really have one. But I think people are using marriage as a scapegoat to justify staying in a relationship with or getting involved with someone whose character is questionable, as if this makes everything ok (it's ok, cause we're not married!). I think we need to more objectively evalute and be more cynical to other people, not institutions. Although I realize that just because two people are good people doesn't mean they can necessarily make a relationship work with each other (in or out of marriage), I think if there's a red flag that one shouldn't be married to someone because of issues of character, the same goes that one probably shouldn't be dating him or her, either.
(Me, recommending cynicism. Surprising?)

1 comment:

Tom said...

"I would like to propose an alternative theory - in these specific cases, it's not the institution of marriage - it's the asshole(s) involved in it."

Ding. Gold star.

In fact, that's a formula that works for and should be applied to quite a lot of other widespread institutions, customs, and categories.

Example: When I came home from Jordan, I thought I would spend most of my discussion time with friends and family explaining all of my wonderful experiences, travels, and interesting people I met. Instead, 75% of the time was spent disconnecting listeners' links between Islamic doctrine and Arab culture and terrorism. "But what about those 9/11 hijackers and the Iraqi insurgents, Tom?" Ugghh...

It's human nature for people to be implicitly flawed, to make mistakes, and to perpetrate awful behavior. It also seems to be human nature to deny imperfections and culpability, and deflect them to other, larger constructs.

[Valid Atom 1.0]