Available Balance
Romance – Civil war & Broken Heart.
pexels-photo-60253

140 years ago sometime between Apr 12, 1861 – May 9, 1865. Love was in the air. Wedding bells were ringing as the young couple was enjoying their special day.
Wedding gifts were piling up fast. Opening their gifts the young lady reach out to pick up the last and final gift. Opening their gift together inside was a key. Looking up at her husband they both realized, they had been given a home, in central Kentucky was their wedding gift.
Being blessed as husband and wife & enjoying their new home. The bride’s groom went away & served in the Civil War. Heartbroken his wife told him she would never leave the window until he returned.
Few years has gone passed. The soldier had returned home to his bride. Someone has informed the groom, his wife had become ill and died in her sleep. His heartbroken and his bride gone. He shut the window she was staring out of, and he passed away in the room from a broken heart.
Today as nearby neighbors of the house say the shutters of the window cannot open. Keeping you from, seeing out the window or into the house. Many in Jessamine County, Kentucky say the ghost from the groom & bride has caused many traffic accidents in the area.
Today you can come to the three way stop and drive by this house, and the window still the same. Will not open even if you try. You do not want to see the window open. No one knows if the bride and groom are together after death. Alternatively, is the bride still looking out the window? Waiting for her groom to come home. Is the groom laying on the bed with a brokenhearted, Or are the bride & groom holding each other in the afterlife. Do you believe the bride & groom is keeping the window shut?

Best Thing To Do This Rainy Day
fb san esteban

It’s been raining since this morning. This has been the weather for the past three days. Just last week we are having problem about the long drought causing  scarcity of water—water level in the well getting deep and the city ration of water among the houses were limited or  given schedule. This problem is solved now because of the non-stop raining.

photo is mine

photo is mine

The advantage of rain was already felt—and so with the disadvantage now. When it’s raining your outdoor activity is limited: the children cannot play outside, becoming muddy in the area, flood in some areas and so on.

As I have said, the children cannot go out and so with us. The TV has been busy since this morning. We wanted to eat and eat. We wanted some indoor activity to keep our day going in this day of raining.

What have we done in this day when we can’t go out.

  1. Watching TV. I think this is the best thing to do? Play some movies or watch some cable channels and that is already a good bonding in the family. The kids watch Cartoon Network, wife watches her Sunday series and I watched the game 3 of western conference finals of National Basketball Association.
  2. Cook some food. I made some popcorn so we can have some picking while watching. Macaroni soup is also in the list and then some pastries to munch in.
  3. Playing indoor games. We have scrabble board, sungka for children, and even some mobile apps game.
  4. Playing under the rain. The kids love it. While I’m picking some mango fruits to ripen, the kids are running, playing and having fun under the rain. I was like them when I was a kid. It’s their turn now.

It’s a family bonding for us. We are all here. Sometimes it’s a riot because our children are six but it’s always a big happy family for me. Rain or shine we are keeping together. This is how we spend the day when it’s raining.###

What do you understand by marriage ???
200w(2)

Marriage, also called matrimony or wedlock, is a socially or ritually recognized union between spouses that establishes rights and obligations between them, betweeAn absolute submission of a wife to her husband is accepted as natural in many parts of the world, for instance surveys by UNICEF have shown that the percentage of women aged 15–49 who think that a husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife under certain circumstances is as high as 90% in Afghanistan and Jordan, 87% in Mali, 86% in Guinea and Timor-Leste, 81% in Laos, 80% in Central African Republic.[180] Detailed results from Afghanistan show that 78.4% of women agree with a beating if the wife “goes out without telling him [the husband]” and 76.2% agree “if she argues with him”.[181]

Throughout history, and still today in many countries, laws have provided for mitigating circumstances, partial or complete defenses, for men who killed their wives due to adultery, with such acts often being seen as crimes of passion and being covered by legal defenses such as provocation or defense of family honor. [182]

Right and ability to divorce
While international law and conventions recognize the need for consent for entering a marriage – namely that people cannot be forced to get married against their will – the right to obtain a divorce is not recognized; therefore holding a person in a marriage against their will (if such person has consented to entering in it) is not considered a violation of human rights, with the issue of divorce being left at the appreciation of individual states. The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly ruled that under the European Convention on Human Rights there is neither a right to apply to divorce, nor a right to obtain the divorce if applied for it; in 2017, in Babiarz v. Poland, the Court ruled that Poland was entitled to deny a divorce because the grounds for divorce were not met, even if the marriage in question was acknowledged both by Polish courts and by the ECHR as being a legal fiction involving a long term separation where the husband lived with another woman with whom he had an 11-years-old child.[183]
In the EU, the last country to allow divorce was Malta, in 2011. Around the world, the only countries to forbid divorce are Philippines and Vatican City,[184] although in practice in many countries which use a fault based divorce system obtaining a divorce is very difficult. The ability to divorce, in law and practice, has been and continues to be a controversial issue in many countries, and public discourse involves different ideologies such as feminism, social conservatism, religious interpretations.[185]n them and their children, and between them and their in-laws.[1] The definition of marriage varies according to different cultures, but it is principally an institution in which interpersonal relationships, usually sexual, are acknowledged. In some cultures, marriage is recommended or considered to be compulsory before pursuing any sexual activity. When defined broadly, marriage is considered a cultural universal.

Nepali wedding
Individuals may marry for several reasons, including legal, social, libidinal, emotional, financial, spiritual, and religious purposes. Whom they marry may be influenced by socially determined rules of incest, prescriptive marriage rules, parental choice and individual desire. In some areas of the world, arranged marriage, child marriage, polygamy, and sometimes forced marriage, may be practiced as a cultural tradition. Conversely, such practices may be outlawed and penalized in parts of the world out of concerns for women’s rights and because of international law.[2] In developed parts of the world, there has been a general trend towards ensuring equal rights within marriage for women and legally recognizing the marriages of interfaith or interracial, and same-sex couples. These trends coincide with the broader human rights movement.
Marriage can be recognized by a state, an organization, a religious authority, a tribal group, a local community or peers. It is often viewed as a contract. Civil marriage, which does not exist in some countries, is marriage without religious content carried out by a government institution in accordance with the marriage laws of the jurisdiction, and recognised as creating the rights and obligations intrinsic to matrimony. Marriages can be performed in a secular civil ceremony or in a religious setting via a wedding ceremony. The act of marriage usually creates normative or legal obligations between the individuals involved, and any offspring they may produce. In terms of legal recognition, most sovereign states and other jurisdictions limit marriage to opposite-sex couples and a diminishing number of these permit polygyny, child marriages, and forced marriages. Over the twentieth century, a growing number of countries and other jurisdictions have lifted bans on and have established legal recognition for interracial marriage, interfaith marriage, and most recently, gender-neutral marriage.[3] Some cultures allow the dissolution of marriage through divorce or annulment. In some areas, child marriages and polygamy may occur in spite of national laws against the practice.
Since the late twentieth century, major social changes in Western countries have led to changes in the demographics of marriage, with the age of first marriage increasing, fewer people marrying, and more couples choosing to cohabit rather than marry. For example, the number of marriages in Europe decreased by 30% from 1975 to 2005.[4]

Historically, in most cultures, married women had very few rights of their own, being considered, along with the family’s children, the property of the husband; as such, they could not own or inherit property, or represent themselves legally (see for example coverture). In Europe, the United States, and other places in the developed world, beginning in the late 19th century and lasting through the 21st century, marriage has undergone gradual legal changes, aimed at improving the rights of the wife. These changes included giving wives legal identities of their own, abolishing the right of husbands to physically discipline their wives, giving wives property rights, liberalizing divorce laws, providing wives with reproductive rights of their own, and requiring a wife’s consent when sexual relations occur. These changes have occurred primarily in Western countries. In the 21st century, there continue to be controversies regarding the legal status of married women, legal acceptance of or leniency towards violence within marriage (especially sexual violence), traditional marriage customs such as dowry and bride price, forced marriage, marriageable age, and criminalization of consensual behaviors such as premarital and extramarital sex.
Etymology

The word “marriage” derives from Middle English mariage, which first appears in 1250–1300 CE. This in turn is derived from Old French, marier (to marry), and ultimately Latin, marītāre, meaning to provide with a husband or wife and marītāri meaning to get married. The adjective marīt-us -a, -um meaning matrimonial or nuptial could also be used in the masculine form as a noun for “husband” and in the feminine form for “wife”.[5] The related word “matrimony” derives from the Old French word matremoine, which appears around 1300 CE and ultimately derives from Latin mātrimōnium, which combines the two concepts: mater meaning “mother” and the suffix -monium signifying “action, state, or condition”.[6]

Definitions

Anthropologists have proposed several competing definitions of marriage in an attempt to encompass the wide variety of marital practices observed across cultures.[7] Even within Western culture, “definitions of marriage have careened from one extreme to another and everywhere in between” (as Evan Gerstmann has put it).[8]

Relation recognized by custom or law
In The History of Human Marriage (1922), Edvard Westermarck defined marriage as “a more or less durable connection between male and female lasting beyond the mere act of propagation till after the birth of the offspring.”[9] In The Future of Marriage in Western Civilization (1936), he rejected his earlier definition, instead provisionally defining marriage as “a relation of one or more men to one or more women that is recognized by custom or law”.[10]
Legitimacy of offspring
The anthropological handbook Notes and Queries (1951) defined marriage as “a union between a man and a woman such that children born to the woman are the recognized legitimate offspring of both partners.”[11] In recognition of a practice by the Nuer people of Sudan allowing women to act as a husband in certain circumstances (the Ghost marriage), Kathleen Gough suggested modifying this to “a woman and one or more other persons.”[12]
In an analysis of marriage among the Nayar, a polyandrous society in India, Gough found that the group lacked a husband role in the conventional sense; that unitary role in the west was divided between a non-resident “social father” of the woman’s children, and her lovers who were the actual procreators. None of these men had legal rights to the woman’s child. This forced Gough to disregard sexual access as a key element of marriage and to define it in terms of legitimacy of offspring alone: marriage is “a relationship established between a woman and one or more other persons, which provides a child born to the woman under circumstances not prohibited by the rules of relationship, is accorded full birth-status rights common to normal members of his society or social stratum.”[13]

Economic anthropologist Duran Bell has criticized the legitimacy-based definition on the basis that some societies do not require marriage for legitimacy.
n the countries which do not permit polygamy, a person who marries in one of those countries a person while still being lawfully married to another commits the crime of bigamy. In all cases, the second marriage is considered legally null and void. Besides the second and subsequent marriages being void, the bigamist is also liable to other penalties, which also vary between jurisdictions.

Serial monogamy
Governments that support monogamy, may allow easy divorce. In a number of Western countries divorce rates approach 50%. Those who remarry do so on average 3 times. Divorce and remarriage can thus result in “serial monogamy”, i.e. multiple marriages but only one legal spouse at a time. This can be interpreted as a form of plural mating, as are those societies dominated by female-headed families in the Caribbean, Mauritius and Brazil where there is frequent rotation of unmarried partners. In all, these account for 16 to 24% of the “monogamous” category.[17]

Serial monogamy creates a new kind of relative, the “ex-“. The “ex-wife”, for example, remains an active part of her “ex-husband’s” life, as they may be tied together by transfers of resources (alimony, child support), or shared child custody. Bob Simpson notes that in the British case, serial monogamy creates an “extended family” – a number of households tied together in this way, including mobile children (possible ex’s may include an ex-wife, an ex-brother-in-law, etc., but not an “ex-child”). These “unclear families” do not fit the mould of the monogamous nuclear family. As a series of connected households, they come to resemble the polygynous model of separate households maintained by mothers with children, tied by a male to whom they are married or divorced.[18]

Polygamy
Polygamy is a marriage which includes more than two partners.[19] When a man is married to more than one wife at a time, the relationship is called polygyny, and there is no marriage bond between the wives; and when a woman is married to more than one husband at a time, it is called polyandry, and there is no marriage bond between the husbands. If a marriage includes multiple husbands and wives, it can be called group marriage.[19]

A molecular genetic study of global human genetic diversity argued that sexual polygyny was typical of human reproductive patterns until the shift to sedentary farming communities approximately 10,000 to 5,000 years ago in Europe and Asia, and more recently in Africa and the Americas.[20] As noted above, Anthropologist Jack Goody’s comparative study of marriage around the world utilizing the Ethnographic Atlas found that the majority of Sub-Saharan African societies that practice extensive hoe agriculture show a correlation between “Bride price,” and polygamy.[15] A survey of other cross-cultural samples has confirmed that the absence of the plough was the only predictor of polygamy, although other factors such as high male mortality in warfare (in non-state societies) and pathogen stress (in state societies) had some impact

would this make you mad or happy?
4400_81990997978_619134_n

would this make you mad or happy?
a few years ago when I live in Florida, me and
my friend went to a ray baseball game. we were kind of rushing to get there . Why were we rushing becusae we were going to get a
big rain storm yes we did get wet on the way in to the game.This was in St.Petersburg Florida
Ok so what do I mean by happy or mad here what happen I kind say it a negative positive
when the game was over my friend found out he left his keys in his truck and he did lock the door of the truck. He was worry that he would have to spend a lot of money for a lock smith to unlock the truck. Now here the negative I forgot to lock my side of the door.It was a old model with out the lock switch. so that how we got in to the truck but on one hand some one could of came to the truck and stole it since I forgot to lock my side of the door , but on the other hand my friend did not have to pay for a lock smith to unlock the doors. this is why I ask would this make you mad or happy? my friend is a pretty cool guy he does not smoke but he was happy that my door was unlock so we did not have to wait for a lock smith or some one to give him a ride home to get his spare key yes he did have a spare key but not with him.but I know other people who might get mad if the door was left unlock even if they lock their keys in to the car or truck. For me I was all so happy that we did not have to wait like I said it was all so raining that day. when we went to the baseball game. How was the game still being played not have a rain out? because the rays play inside the trop. it has air conditioning or heat depending on the weather. The origanl name of the trop was the thunder dome and at that time the Tampa bay lighting plays there, Before the lighting move to Tampa. The Tampa bay Rays all so use to be know as the devil rays plays in St. Petersburg Florida. Tropican orange juice change the name of the thunder dome to tropican field when they became a big sponsor of the rays games.I think Tropicana should of kept the thunder dome name I like it a lot better they could of call it Tropicana thunder dome.OK that it for now,

What is the meaning of marriage ???
giphy_s(1)

A small number of items of a type, often two
Couple (relationship), two people to whom each is the significant other of the other
Couple (mechanics), a system of forces with a resultant moment but no resultant force
Thermocouple, a type of temperature sensor
Couple, a name for one pair of rafters
Couple (app), a mobile app which provides a mobile messaging service for two people
Marriage, also called matrimony or wedlock, is a socially or ritually recognized union between spouses that establishes rights and obligations between them, between them and their children, and between them and their in-laws.[1] The definition of marriage varies according to different cultures, but it is principally an institution in which interpersonal relationships, usually sexual, are acknowledged. In some cultures, marriage is recommended or considered to be compulsory before pursuing any sexual activity. When defined broadly, marriage is considered a cultural universal.
Individuals may marry for several reasons, including legal, social, libidinal, emotional, financial, spiritual, and religious purposes. Whom they marry may be influenced by socially determined rules of incest, prescriptive marriage rules, parental choice and individual desire. In some areas of the world, arranged marriage, child marriage, polygamy, and sometimes forced marriage, may be practiced as a cultural tradition. Conversely, such practices may be outlawed and penalized in parts of the world out of concerns for women’s rights and because of international law.[2] In developed parts of the world, there has been a general trend towards ensuring equal rights within marriage for women and legally recognizing the marriages of interfaith or interracial, and same-sex couples. These trends coincide with the broader human rights movement.

Marriage can be recognized by a state, an organization, a religious authority, a tribal group, a local community or peers. It is often viewed as a contract. Civil marriage, which does not exist in some countries, is marriage without religious content carried out by a government institution in accordance with the marriage laws of the jurisdiction, and recognised as creating the rights and obligations intrinsic to matrimony. Marriages can be performed in a secular civil ceremony or in a religious setting via a wedding ceremony. The act of marriage usually creates normative or legal obligations between the individuals involved, and any offspring they may produce. In terms of legal recognition, most sovereign states and other jurisdictions limit marriage to opposite-sex couples and a diminishing number of these permit polygyny, child marriages, and forced marriages. Over the twentieth century, a growing number of countries and other jurisdictions have lifted bans on and have established legal recognition for interracial marriage, interfaith marriage, and most recently, gender-neutral marriage.[3] Some cultures allow the dissolution of marriage through divorce or annulment. In some areas, child marriages and polygamy may occur in spite of national laws against the practice.

Since the late twentieth century, major social changes in Western countries have led to changes in the demographics of marriage, with the age of first marriage increasing, fewer people marrying, and more couples choosing to cohabit rather than marry. For example, the number of marriages in Europe decreased by 30% from 1975 to 2005.[4]
Historically, in most cultures, married women had very few rights of their own, being considered, along with the family’s children, the property of the husband; as such, they could not own or inherit property, or represent themselves legally (see for example coverture). In Europe, the United States, and other places in the developed world, beginning in the late 19th century and lasting through the 21st century, marriage has undergone gradual legal changes, aimed at improving the rights of the wife. These changes included giving wives legal identities of their own, abolishing the right of husbands to physically discipline their wives, giving wives property rights, liberalizing divorce laws, providing wives with reproductive rights of their own, and requiring a wife’s consent when sexual relations occur. These changes have occurred primarily in Western countries. In the 21st century, there continue to be controversies regarding the legal status of married women, legal acceptance of or leniency towards violence within marriage (especially sexual violence), traditional marriage customs such as dowry and bride price, forced marriage, marriageable age, and criminalization of consensual behaviors such as premarital and extramarital sex.
The word “marriage” derives from Middle English mariage, which first appears in 1250–1300 CE. This in turn is derived from Old French, marier (to marry), and ultimately Latin, marītāre, meaning to provide with a husband or wife and marītāri meaning to get married. The adjective marīt-us -a, -um meaning matrimonial or nuptial could also be used in the masculine form as a noun for “husband” and in the feminine form for “wife”.[5] The related word “matrimony” derives from the Old French word matremoine, which appears around 1300 CE and ultimately derives from Latin mātrimōnium, which combines the two concepts: mater meaning “mother” and the suffix -monium signifying “action, state, or condition”.[6]
Anthropologists have proposed several competing definitions of marriage in an attempt to encompass the wide variety of marital practices observed across cultures.[7] Even within Western culture, “definitions of marriage have careened from one extreme to another and everywhere in between” (as Evan Gerstmann has put it).[8]

Relation recognized by custom or law
In The History of Human Marriage (1922), Edvard Westermarck defined marriage as “a more or less durable connection between male and female lasting beyond the mere act of propagation till after the birth of the offspring.”[9] In The Future of Marriage in Western Civilization (1936), he rejected his earlier definition, instead provisionally defining marriage as “a relation of one or more men to one or more women that is recognized by custom or law”.[10]

Legitimacy of offspring
The anthropological handbook Notes and Queries (1951) defined marriage as “a union between a man and a woman such that children born to the woman are the recognized legitimate offspring of both partners.”[11] In recognition of a practice by the Nuer people of Sudan allowing women to act as a husband in certain circumstances (the Ghost marriage), Kathleen Gough suggested modifying this to “a woman and one or more other persons.”[12]

In an analysis of marriage among the Nayar, a polyandrous society in India, Gough found that the group lacked a husband role in the conventional sense; that unitary role in the west was divided between a non-resident “social father” of the woman’s children, and her lovers who were the actual procreators. None of these men had legal rights to the woman’s child. This forced Gough to disregard sexual access as a key element of marriage and to define it in terms of legitimacy of offspring alone: marriage is “a relationship established between a woman and one or more other persons, which provides a child born to the woman under circumstances not prohibited by the rules of relationship, is accorded full birth-status rights common to normal members of his society or social stratum.”[13]

Economic anthropologist Duran Bell has criticized the legitimacy-based definition on the basis that some societies do not require marriage for legitimacy. He argued that a legitimacy-based definition of marriage is circular in societies where illegitimacy has no other legal or social implications for a child other than the mother being unmarried.[7]

Collection of rights
Edmund Leach criticized Gough’s definition for being too restrictive in terms of recognized legitimate offspring and suggested that marriage be viewed in terms of the different types of rights it serves to establish. In 1955 article in Man, Leach argued that no one definition of marriage applied to all cultures. He offered a list of ten rights associated with marriage, including sexual monopoly and rights with respect to children, with specific rights differing across cultures. Those rights, according to Leach, included:
To establish a legal father of a woman’s children.
To establish a legal mother of a man’s children.
To give the husband a monopoly in the wife’s sexuality.
To give the wife a monopoly in the husband’s sexuality.
To give the husband partial or monopolistic rights to the wife’s domestic and other labour services.
To give the wife partial or monopolistic rights to the husband’s domestic and other labour services.
To give the husband partial or total control over property belonging or potentially accruing to the wife.
To give the wife partial or total control over property belonging or potentially accruing to the husband.
To establish a joint fund of property – a partnership – for the benefit of the children of the marriage.
To establish a socially significant ‘relationship of affinity’ between the husband and his wife’s brothers.”[14]
Right of sexual access
In a 1997 article in Current Anthropology, Duran Bell describes marriage as “a relationship between one or more men (male or female) in severalty to one or more women that provides those men with a demand-right of sexual access within a domestic group and identifies women who bear the obligation of yielding to the demands of those specific men.” In referring to “men in severalty”, Bell is referring to corporate kin groups such as lineages which, in having paid brideprice, retain a right in a woman’s offspring even if her husband (a lineage member) deceases (Levirate marriage). In referring to “men (male or female)”, Bell is referring to women within the lineage who may stand in as the “social fathers” of the wife’s children born of other lovers. (See Nuer “Ghost marriage”)[7]
Monogamy
Main article: Monogamy
Monogamy is a form of marriage in which an individual has only one spouse during their lifetime or at any one time (serial monogamy).

Anthropologist Jack Goody’s comparative study of marriage around the world utilizing the Ethnographic Atlas found a strong correlation between intensive plough agriculture, dowry and monogamy. This pattern was found in a broad swath of Eurasian societies from Japan to Ireland. The majority of Sub-Saharan African societies that practice extensive hoe agriculture, in contrast, show a correlation between “Bride price,” and polygamy.[15] A further study drawing on the Ethnographic Atlas showed a statistical correlation between increasing size of the society, the belief in “high gods” to support human morality, and monogamy.[16]

In the countries which do not permit polygamy, a person who marries in one of those countries a person while still being lawfully married to another commits the crime of bigamy. In all cases, the second marriage is considered legally null and void. Besides the second and subsequent marriages being void, the bigamist is also liable to other penalties, which also vary between jurisdictions.

Serial monogamy
Governments that support monogamy, may allow easy divorce. In a number of Western countries divorce rates approach 50%. Those who remarry do so on average 3 times. Divorce and remarriage can thus result in “serial monogamy”, i.e. multiple marriages but only one legal spouse at a time. This can be interpreted as a form of plural mating, as are those societies dominated by female-headed families in the Caribbean, Mauritius and Brazil where there is frequent rotation of unmarried partners. In all, these account for 16 to 24% of the “monogamous” category.[17]

Serial monogamy creates a new kind of relative, the “ex-“. The “ex-wife”, for example, remains an active part of her “ex-husband’s” life, as they may be tied together by transfers of resources (alimony, child support), or shared child custody. Bob Simpson notes that in the British case, serial monogamy creates an “extended family” – a number of households tied together in this way, including mobile children (possible ex’s may include an ex-wife, an ex-brother-in-law, etc., but not an “ex-child”). These “unclear families” do not fit the mould of the monogamous nuclear family. As a series of connected households, they come to resemble the polygynous model of separate households maintained by mothers with children, tied by a male to whom they are married or divorced.
Polygamy
Main article: Polygamy
Polygamy is a marriage which includes more than two partners.[19] When a man is married to more than one wife at a time, the relationship is called polygyny, and there is no marriage bond between the wives; and when a woman is married to more than one husband at a time, it is called polyandry, and there is no marriage bond between the husbands. If a marriage includes multiple husbands and wives, it can be called group marriage.[19]

A molecular genetic study of global human genetic diversity argued that sexual polygyny was typical of human reproductive patterns until the shift to sedentary farming communities approximately 10,000 to 5,000 years ago in Europe and Asia, and more recently in Africa and the Americas.[20] As noted above, Anthropologist Jack Goody’s comparative study of marriage around the world utilizing the Ethnographic Atlas found that the majority of Sub-Saharan African societies that practice extensive hoe agriculture show a correlation between “Bride price,” and polygamy.[15] A survey of other cross-cultural samples has confirmed that the absence of the plough was the only predictor of polygamy, although other factors such as high male mortality in warfare (in non-state societies) and pathogen stress (in state societies) had some impact.[21]

Marriages are classified according to the number of legal spouses an individual has. The suffix “-gamy” refers specifically to the number of spouses, as in bi-gamy (two spouses, generally illegal in most nations), and poly-gamy (more than one spouse).

Societies show variable acceptance of polygamy as a cultural ideal and practice. According to the Ethnographic Atlas, of 1,231 societies noted, 186 were monogamous; 453 had occasional polygyny; 588 had more frequent polygyny; and 4 had polyandry.[22] However, as Miriam Zeitzen writes, social tolerance for polygamy is different from the practice of polygamy, since it requires wealth to establish multiple households for multiple wives. The actual practice of polygamy in a tolerant society may actually be low, with the majority of aspirant polygamists practicing monogamous marriage. Tracking the occurrence of polygamy is further complicated in jurisdictions where it has been banned, but continues to be practiced (de facto polygamy).[23]

Zeitzen also notes that Western perceptions of African society and marriage patterns are biased by “contradictory concerns of nostalgia for traditional African culture versus critique of polygamy as oppressive to women or detrimental to development.”[23] Polygamy has been condemned as being a form of human rights abuse, with concerns arising over domestic abuse, forced marriage, and neglect. The vast majority of the world’s countries, including virtually all of the world’s developed nations, do not permit polygamy. There have been calls for the abolition of polygamy in developing countries.

Polygyny
Main article: Polygyny
See also: Concubinage
Polygyny usually grants wives equal status, although the husband may have personal preferences. One type of de facto polygyny is concubinage, where only one women get the wife right and status, while other women remain legal house mistresses.
Polygamy
Main article: Polygamy
Polygamy is a marriage which includes more than two partners.[19] When a man is married to more than one wife at a time, the relationship is called polygyny, and there is no marriage bond between the wives; and when a woman is married to more than one husband at a time, it is called polyandry, and there is no marriage bond between the husbands. If a marriage includes multiple husbands and wives, it can be called group marriage.[19]

A molecular genetic study of global human genetic diversity argued that sexual polygyny was typical of human reproductive patterns until the shift to sedentary farming communities approximately 10,000 to 5,000 years ago in Europe and Asia, and more recently in Africa and the Americas.[20] As noted above, Anthropologist Jack Goody’s comparative study of marriage around the world utilizing the Ethnographic Atlas found that the majority of Sub-Saharan African societies that practice extensive hoe agriculture show a correlation between “Bride price,” and polygamy.[15] A survey of other cross-cultural samples has confirmed that the absence of the plough was the only predictor of polygamy, although other factors such as high male mortality in warfare (in non-state societies) and pathogen stress (in state societies) had some impact.[21]

Marriages are classified according to the number of legal spouses an individual has. The suffix “-gamy” refers specifically to the number of spouses, as in bi-gamy (two spouses, generally illegal in most nations), and poly-gamy (more than one spouse).

Societies show variable acceptance of polygamy as a cultural ideal and practice. According to the Ethnographic Atlas, of 1,231 societies noted, 186 were monogamous; 453 had occasional polygyny; 588 had more frequent polygyny; and 4 had polyandry.[22] However, as Miriam Zeitzen writes, social tolerance for polygamy is different from the practice of polygamy, since it requires wealth to establish multiple households for multiple wives. The actual practice of polygamy in a tolerant society may actually be low, with the majority of aspirant polygamists practicing monogamous marriage. Tracking the occurrence of polygamy is further complicated in jurisdictions where it has been banned, but continues to be practiced (de facto polygamy).[23]

Zeitzen also notes that Western perceptions of African society and marriage patterns are biased by “contradictory concerns of nostalgia for traditional African culture versus critique of polygamy as oppressive to women or detrimental to development.”[23] Polygamy has been condemned as being a form of human rights abuse, with concerns arising over domestic abuse, forced marriage, and neglect. The vast majority of the world’s countries, including virtually all of the world’s developed nations, do not permit polygamy. There have been calls for the abolition of polygamy in developing countries.

Polygyny
Main article: Polygyny
See also: Concubinage
Polygyny usually grants wives equal status, although the husband may have personal preferences. One type of de facto polygyny is concubinage, where only one women get the wife right and status, while other women remain legal house mistresses.
Although a society may be classified as polygynous, not all marriages in it necessarily are; monogamous marriages may in fact predominate. It is to this flexibility that Anthropologist Robin Fox attributes its success as a social support system: “This has often meant – given the imbalance in the sex ratios, the higher male infant mortality, the shorter life span of males, the loss of males in wartime, etc. – that often women were left without financial support from husbands. To correct this condition, females had to be killed at birth, remain single, become prostitutes, or be siphoned off into celibate religious orders. Polygynous systems have the advantage that they can promise, as did the Mormons, a home and family for every woman.”[24]

Nonetheless, polygyny is a gender issue which offers men asymmetrical benefits. In some cases, there is a large age discrepancy (as much as a generation) between a man and his youngest wife, compounding the power differential between the two. Tensions not only exist between genders, but also within genders; senior and junior men compete for wives, and senior and junior wives in the same household may experience radically different life conditions, and internal hierarchy. Several studies have suggested that the wive’s relationship with other women, including co-wives and husband’s female kin, are more critical relationships than that with her husband for her productive, reproductive and personal achievement.[25] In some societies, the co-wives are relatives, usually sisters, a practice called sororal polygyny; the pre-existing relationship between the co-wives is thought to decrease potential tensions within the marriage.[26]

Fox argues that “the major difference between polygyny and monogamy could be stated thus: while plural mating occurs in both systems, under polygyny several unions may be recognized as being legal marriages while under monogamy only one of the unions is so recognized. Often, however, it is difficult to draw a hard and fast line between the two.”[27]

As polygamy in Africa is increasingly subject to legal limitations, a variant form of de facto (as opposed to legal or de jure) polygyny is being practised in urban centres. Although it does not involve multiple (now illegal) formal marriages, the domestic and personal arrangements follow old polygynous patterns. The de facto form of polygyny is found in other parts of the world as well (including some Mormon sects and Muslim families in the United States).[28] In some societies such as the Lovedu of South Africa, or the Nuer of the Sudan, aristocratic women may become female ‘husbands.’ In the Lovedu case, this female husband may take a number of polygamous wives. This is not a lesbian relationship, but a means of legitimately expanding a royal lineage by attaching these wives’ children to it. The relationships are considered polygynous, not polyandrous, because the female husband is in fact assuming masculine gendered political roles.[26]

Religious groups have differing views on the legitimacy of polygyny. It is allowed in Islam and Confucianism. Judaism and Christianity have mentioned practices involving polygyny in the past, however, outright religious acceptance of such practices was not addressed until its rejection in later passages. They do explicitly prohibit polygyny today.
Polyandry is notably more rare than polygyny, though less rare than the figure commonly cited in the Ethnographic Atlas (1980) which listed only those polyandrous societies found in the Himalayan Mountains. More recent studies have found 53 societies outside the 28 found in the Himalayans which practice polyandry.[29] It is most common in egalitarian societies marked by high male mortality or male absenteeism. It is associated with partible paternity, the cultural belief that a child can have more than one father.[30]

The explanation for polyandry in the Himalayan Mountains is related to the scarcity of land; the marriage of all brothers in a family to the same wife (fraternal polyandry) allows family land to remain intact and undivided. If every brother married separately and had children, family land would be split into unsustainable small plots. In Europe, this was prevented through the social practice of impartible inheritance (the dis-inheriting of most siblings, some of whom went on to become celibate monks and priests).[31]

Plural marriage
Group marriage (also known as multi-lateral marriage) is a form of polyamory in which more than two persons form a family unit, with all the members of the group marriage being considered to be married to all the other members of the group marriage, and all members of the marriage share parental responsibility for any children arising from the marriage.[32] No country legally condones group marriages, neither under the law nor as a common law marriage, but historically it has been practiced by some cultures of Polynesia, Asia, Papua New Guinea and the Americas – as well as in some intentional communities and alternative subcultures such as the Oneida Perfectionists in up-state New York. Of the 250 societies reported by the American anthropologist George P. Murdock in 1949, only the Caingang of Brazil had any group marriages at all.[33]

Child marriage
Main article: Child marriage
A child marriage is a marriage where one or both spouses are under the age of 18.[34][35] It is related to child betrothal and teenage pregnancy.

Child marriage was common throughout history, even up until the 1900s in the United States, where in 1880 CE, in the state of Delaware, the age of consent for marriage was 7 years old.[36] Today it is condemned by international human rights organizations.[37][38] Child marriages are often arranged between the families of the future bride and groom, sometimes as soon as the girl is born.[37] However, in the late 1800s in England and the United States, feminist activists began calling for raised age of consent laws, which was eventually handled in the 1920s, having been raised to 16-18.[39]

Child marriages can also occur in the context of marriage by abduction.[37]

In the year 1552 CE, John Somerford and Jane Somerford Brereton were both married at the ages of 3 and 2, respectively. Twelve years later, in 1564, John filed for divorce.[40][41]

While child marriage is observed for both boys and girls, the overwhelming majority of child spouses are girls.[42] In many cases, only one marriage-partner is a child, usually the female, due to the importance placed upon female virginity.[37] Causes of child marriage include poverty, bride price, dowry, laws that allow child marriages, religious and social pressures, regional customs, fear of remaining unmarried, and perceived inability of women to work for money.
Today, child marriages are widespread in parts of the world; being most common in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, with more than half of the girls in some countries in those regions being married before 18.[37] The incidence of child marriage has been falling in most parts of the world. In developed countries child marriage is outlawed or restricted.

Girls who marry before 18 are at greater risk of becoming victims of domestic violence, than those who marry later, especially when they are married to a much older man.[38]

Same-sex and third-gender marriages
Main articles: Same-sex marriage and History of same-sex unions
As noted above, several kinds of same-gendered, non-sexual marriages exist in some lineage-based societies; this section relates to same-gendered sexual unions. Some cultures include third-gender (two-spirit or transgender) individuals, such as the berdache of the Zuni in New Mexico. We’wha, one of the most revered Zuni elders (an Ihamana, spiritual leader) served as an emissary of the Zuni to Washington, where he met President Grover Cleveland. We’wha had a husband who was generally recognized as such.[43]

While it is a relatively new practice to grant same-sex couples the same form of legal marital recognition as commonly granted to mixed-sex couples, there is some history of recorded same-sex unions around the world.[44][45] Ancient Greek same-sex relationships were like modern companionate marriages, unlike their different-sex marriages in which the spouses had few emotional ties, and the husband had freedom to engage in outside sexual liaisons. The Theodosian Code (C. Th. 9.7.3) issued in 438 CE imposed severe penalties or death on same-sex relationships,[46] but the exact intent of the law and its relation to social practice is unclear, as only a few examples of same-sex marriage in that culture exist.[47] Same-sex unions were celebrated in some regions of China, such as Fujian.[48]

Temporary marriages
Several cultures have practiced temporary and conditional marriages. Examples include the Celtic practice of handfasting and fixed-term marriages in the Muslim community. Pre-Islamic Arabs practiced a form of temporary marriage that carries on today in the practice of Nikah Mut’ah, a fixed-term marriage contract. The Islamic prophet Muhammad sanctioned a temporary marriage – sigheh in Iran and muta’a in Iraq – which can provide a legitimizing cover for sex workers.[49] The same forms of temporary marriage have been used in Egypt, Lebanon and Iran to make the donation of a human ova legal for in vitro fertilization; a woman cannot, however, use this kind of marriage to obtain a sperm donation.[50] Muslim controversies related to Nikah Mut’ah have resulted in the practice being confined mostly to Shi’ite communities. The matrilineal Mosuo of China practice what they call “walking marriage”.

Cohabitation
See also: Cohabitation and Common-law marriage
In some jurisdictions cohabitation, in certain circumstances, may constitute a common-law marriage, an unregistered partnership, or otherwise provide the unmarried partners with various rights and responsibilities; and in some countries the laws recognize cohabitation in lieu of institutional marriage for taxation and social security benefits. This is the case, for example, in Australia.[51] Cohabitation may be an option pursued as a form of resistance to traditional institutionalized marriage. However, in this context, some nations reserve the right to define the relationship as marital, or otherwise to regulate the relation, even if the relation has not been registered with the state or a religious institution.[52]
Conversely, institutionalized marriages may not involve cohabitation. In some cases couples living together do not wish to be recognized as married. This may occur because pension or alimony rights are adversely affected; because of taxation considerations; because of immigration issues, or for other reasons. Such marriages have also been increasingly common in Beijing. Guo Jianmei, director of the center for women’s studies at Beijing University, told a Newsday correspondent, “Walking marriages reflect sweeping changes in Chinese society.” A “walking marriage” refers to a type of temporary marriage formed by the Mosuo of China, in which male partners live elsewhere and make nightly visits.[53] A similar arrangement in Saudi Arabia, called misyar marriage, also involves the husband and wife living separately but meeting regularly.

What is the meaning of marriage ???
giphy_s(1)

A small number of items of a type, often two
Couple (relationship), two people to whom each is the significant other of the other
Couple (mechanics), a system of forces with a resultant moment but no resultant force
Thermocouple, a type of temperature sensor
Couple, a name for one pair of rafters
Couple (app), a mobile app which provides a mobile messaging service for two people
Marriage, also called matrimony or wedlock, is a socially or ritually recognized union between spouses that establishes rights and obligations between them, between them and their children, and between them and their in-laws.[1] The definition of marriage varies according to different cultures, but it is principally an institution in which interpersonal relationships, usually sexual, are acknowledged. In some cultures, marriage is recommended or considered to be compulsory before pursuing any sexual activity. When defined broadly, marriage is considered a cultural universal.
Individuals may marry for several reasons, including legal, social, libidinal, emotional, financial, spiritual, and religious purposes. Whom they marry may be influenced by socially determined rules of incest, prescriptive marriage rules, parental choice and individual desire. In some areas of the world, arranged marriage, child marriage, polygamy, and sometimes forced marriage, may be practiced as a cultural tradition. Conversely, such practices may be outlawed and penalized in parts of the world out of concerns for women’s rights and because of international law.[2] In developed parts of the world, there has been a general trend towards ensuring equal rights within marriage for women and legally recognizing the marriages of interfaith or interracial, and same-sex couples. These trends coincide with the broader human rights movement.

Marriage can be recognized by a state, an organization, a religious authority, a tribal group, a local community or peers. It is often viewed as a contract. Civil marriage, which does not exist in some countries, is marriage without religious content carried out by a government institution in accordance with the marriage laws of the jurisdiction, and recognised as creating the rights and obligations intrinsic to matrimony. Marriages can be performed in a secular civil ceremony or in a religious setting via a wedding ceremony. The act of marriage usually creates normative or legal obligations between the individuals involved, and any offspring they may produce. In terms of legal recognition, most sovereign states and other jurisdictions limit marriage to opposite-sex couples and a diminishing number of these permit polygyny, child marriages, and forced marriages. Over the twentieth century, a growing number of countries and other jurisdictions have lifted bans on and have established legal recognition for interracial marriage, interfaith marriage, and most recently, gender-neutral marriage.[3] Some cultures allow the dissolution of marriage through divorce or annulment. In some areas, child marriages and polygamy may occur in spite of national laws against the practice.

Since the late twentieth century, major social changes in Western countries have led to changes in the demographics of marriage, with the age of first marriage increasing, fewer people marrying, and more couples choosing to cohabit rather than marry. For example, the number of marriages in Europe decreased by 30% from 1975 to 2005.[4]
Historically, in most cultures, married women had very few rights of their own, being considered, along with the family’s children, the property of the husband; as such, they could not own or inherit property, or represent themselves legally (see for example coverture). In Europe, the United States, and other places in the developed world, beginning in the late 19th century and lasting through the 21st century, marriage has undergone gradual legal changes, aimed at improving the rights of the wife. These changes included giving wives legal identities of their own, abolishing the right of husbands to physically discipline their wives, giving wives property rights, liberalizing divorce laws, providing wives with reproductive rights of their own, and requiring a wife’s consent when sexual relations occur. These changes have occurred primarily in Western countries. In the 21st century, there continue to be controversies regarding the legal status of married women, legal acceptance of or leniency towards violence within marriage (especially sexual violence), traditional marriage customs such as dowry and bride price, forced marriage, marriageable age, and criminalization of consensual behaviors such as premarital and extramarital sex.
The word “marriage” derives from Middle English mariage, which first appears in 1250–1300 CE. This in turn is derived from Old French, marier (to marry), and ultimately Latin, marītāre, meaning to provide with a husband or wife and marītāri meaning to get married. The adjective marīt-us -a, -um meaning matrimonial or nuptial could also be used in the masculine form as a noun for “husband” and in the feminine form for “wife”.[5] The related word “matrimony” derives from the Old French word matremoine, which appears around 1300 CE and ultimately derives from Latin mātrimōnium, which combines the two concepts: mater meaning “mother” and the suffix -monium signifying “action, state, or condition”.[6]
Anthropologists have proposed several competing definitions of marriage in an attempt to encompass the wide variety of marital practices observed across cultures.[7] Even within Western culture, “definitions of marriage have careened from one extreme to another and everywhere in between” (as Evan Gerstmann has put it).[8]

Relation recognized by custom or law
In The History of Human Marriage (1922), Edvard Westermarck defined marriage as “a more or less durable connection between male and female lasting beyond the mere act of propagation till after the birth of the offspring.”[9] In The Future of Marriage in Western Civilization (1936), he rejected his earlier definition, instead provisionally defining marriage as “a relation of one or more men to one or more women that is recognized by custom or law”.[10]

Legitimacy of offspring
The anthropological handbook Notes and Queries (1951) defined marriage as “a union between a man and a woman such that children born to the woman are the recognized legitimate offspring of both partners.”[11] In recognition of a practice by the Nuer people of Sudan allowing women to act as a husband in certain circumstances (the Ghost marriage), Kathleen Gough suggested modifying this to “a woman and one or more other persons.”[12]

In an analysis of marriage among the Nayar, a polyandrous society in India, Gough found that the group lacked a husband role in the conventional sense; that unitary role in the west was divided between a non-resident “social father” of the woman’s children, and her lovers who were the actual procreators. None of these men had legal rights to the woman’s child. This forced Gough to disregard sexual access as a key element of marriage and to define it in terms of legitimacy of offspring alone: marriage is “a relationship established between a woman and one or more other persons, which provides a child born to the woman under circumstances not prohibited by the rules of relationship, is accorded full birth-status rights common to normal members of his society or social stratum.”[13]

Economic anthropologist Duran Bell has criticized the legitimacy-based definition on the basis that some societies do not require marriage for legitimacy. He argued that a legitimacy-based definition of marriage is circular in societies where illegitimacy has no other legal or social implications for a child other than the mother being unmarried.[7]

Collection of rights
Edmund Leach criticized Gough’s definition for being too restrictive in terms of recognized legitimate offspring and suggested that marriage be viewed in terms of the different types of rights it serves to establish. In 1955 article in Man, Leach argued that no one definition of marriage applied to all cultures. He offered a list of ten rights associated with marriage, including sexual monopoly and rights with respect to children, with specific rights differing across cultures. Those rights, according to Leach, included:
To establish a legal father of a woman’s children.
To establish a legal mother of a man’s children.
To give the husband a monopoly in the wife’s sexuality.
To give the wife a monopoly in the husband’s sexuality.
To give the husband partial or monopolistic rights to the wife’s domestic and other labour services.
To give the wife partial or monopolistic rights to the husband’s domestic and other labour services.
To give the husband partial or total control over property belonging or potentially accruing to the wife.
To give the wife partial or total control over property belonging or potentially accruing to the husband.
To establish a joint fund of property – a partnership – for the benefit of the children of the marriage.
To establish a socially significant ‘relationship of affinity’ between the husband and his wife’s brothers.”[14]
Right of sexual access
In a 1997 article in Current Anthropology, Duran Bell describes marriage as “a relationship between one or more men (male or female) in severalty to one or more women that provides those men with a demand-right of sexual access within a domestic group and identifies women who bear the obligation of yielding to the demands of those specific men.” In referring to “men in severalty”, Bell is referring to corporate kin groups such as lineages which, in having paid brideprice, retain a right in a woman’s offspring even if her husband (a lineage member) deceases (Levirate marriage). In referring to “men (male or female)”, Bell is referring to women within the lineage who may stand in as the “social fathers” of the wife’s children born of other lovers. (See Nuer “Ghost marriage”)[7]
Monogamy
Main article: Monogamy
Monogamy is a form of marriage in which an individual has only one spouse during their lifetime or at any one time (serial monogamy).

Anthropologist Jack Goody’s comparative study of marriage around the world utilizing the Ethnographic Atlas found a strong correlation between intensive plough agriculture, dowry and monogamy. This pattern was found in a broad swath of Eurasian societies from Japan to Ireland. The majority of Sub-Saharan African societies that practice extensive hoe agriculture, in contrast, show a correlation between “Bride price,” and polygamy.[15] A further study drawing on the Ethnographic Atlas showed a statistical correlation between increasing size of the society, the belief in “high gods” to support human morality, and monogamy.[16]

In the countries which do not permit polygamy, a person who marries in one of those countries a person while still being lawfully married to another commits the crime of bigamy. In all cases, the second marriage is considered legally null and void. Besides the second and subsequent marriages being void, the bigamist is also liable to other penalties, which also vary between jurisdictions.

Serial monogamy
Governments that support monogamy, may allow easy divorce. In a number of Western countries divorce rates approach 50%. Those who remarry do so on average 3 times. Divorce and remarriage can thus result in “serial monogamy”, i.e. multiple marriages but only one legal spouse at a time. This can be interpreted as a form of plural mating, as are those societies dominated by female-headed families in the Caribbean, Mauritius and Brazil where there is frequent rotation of unmarried partners. In all, these account for 16 to 24% of the “monogamous” category.[17]

Serial monogamy creates a new kind of relative, the “ex-“. The “ex-wife”, for example, remains an active part of her “ex-husband’s” life, as they may be tied together by transfers of resources (alimony, child support), or shared child custody. Bob Simpson notes that in the British case, serial monogamy creates an “extended family” – a number of households tied together in this way, including mobile children (possible ex’s may include an ex-wife, an ex-brother-in-law, etc., but not an “ex-child”). These “unclear families” do not fit the mould of the monogamous nuclear family. As a series of connected households, they come to resemble the polygynous model of separate households maintained by mothers with children, tied by a male to whom they are married or divorced.
Polygamy
Main article: Polygamy
Polygamy is a marriage which includes more than two partners.[19] When a man is married to more than one wife at a time, the relationship is called polygyny, and there is no marriage bond between the wives; and when a woman is married to more than one husband at a time, it is called polyandry, and there is no marriage bond between the husbands. If a marriage includes multiple husbands and wives, it can be called group marriage.[19]

A molecular genetic study of global human genetic diversity argued that sexual polygyny was typical of human reproductive patterns until the shift to sedentary farming communities approximately 10,000 to 5,000 years ago in Europe and Asia, and more recently in Africa and the Americas.[20] As noted above, Anthropologist Jack Goody’s comparative study of marriage around the world utilizing the Ethnographic Atlas found that the majority of Sub-Saharan African societies that practice extensive hoe agriculture show a correlation between “Bride price,” and polygamy.[15] A survey of other cross-cultural samples has confirmed that the absence of the plough was the only predictor of polygamy, although other factors such as high male mortality in warfare (in non-state societies) and pathogen stress (in state societies) had some impact.[21]

Marriages are classified according to the number of legal spouses an individual has. The suffix “-gamy” refers specifically to the number of spouses, as in bi-gamy (two spouses, generally illegal in most nations), and poly-gamy (more than one spouse).

Societies show variable acceptance of polygamy as a cultural ideal and practice. According to the Ethnographic Atlas, of 1,231 societies noted, 186 were monogamous; 453 had occasional polygyny; 588 had more frequent polygyny; and 4 had polyandry.[22] However, as Miriam Zeitzen writes, social tolerance for polygamy is different from the practice of polygamy, since it requires wealth to establish multiple households for multiple wives. The actual practice of polygamy in a tolerant society may actually be low, with the majority of aspirant polygamists practicing monogamous marriage. Tracking the occurrence of polygamy is further complicated in jurisdictions where it has been banned, but continues to be practiced (de facto polygamy).[23]

Zeitzen also notes that Western perceptions of African society and marriage patterns are biased by “contradictory concerns of nostalgia for traditional African culture versus critique of polygamy as oppressive to women or detrimental to development.”[23] Polygamy has been condemned as being a form of human rights abuse, with concerns arising over domestic abuse, forced marriage, and neglect. The vast majority of the world’s countries, including virtually all of the world’s developed nations, do not permit polygamy. There have been calls for the abolition of polygamy in developing countries.

Polygyny
Main article: Polygyny
See also: Concubinage
Polygyny usually grants wives equal status, although the husband may have personal preferences. One type of de facto polygyny is concubinage, where only one women get the wife right and status, while other women remain legal house mistresses.
Polygamy
Main article: Polygamy
Polygamy is a marriage which includes more than two partners.[19] When a man is married to more than one wife at a time, the relationship is called polygyny, and there is no marriage bond between the wives; and when a woman is married to more than one husband at a time, it is called polyandry, and there is no marriage bond between the husbands. If a marriage includes multiple husbands and wives, it can be called group marriage.[19]

A molecular genetic study of global human genetic diversity argued that sexual polygyny was typical of human reproductive patterns until the shift to sedentary farming communities approximately 10,000 to 5,000 years ago in Europe and Asia, and more recently in Africa and the Americas.[20] As noted above, Anthropologist Jack Goody’s comparative study of marriage around the world utilizing the Ethnographic Atlas found that the majority of Sub-Saharan African societies that practice extensive hoe agriculture show a correlation between “Bride price,” and polygamy.[15] A survey of other cross-cultural samples has confirmed that the absence of the plough was the only predictor of polygamy, although other factors such as high male mortality in warfare (in non-state societies) and pathogen stress (in state societies) had some impact.[21]

Marriages are classified according to the number of legal spouses an individual has. The suffix “-gamy” refers specifically to the number of spouses, as in bi-gamy (two spouses, generally illegal in most nations), and poly-gamy (more than one spouse).

Societies show variable acceptance of polygamy as a cultural ideal and practice. According to the Ethnographic Atlas, of 1,231 societies noted, 186 were monogamous; 453 had occasional polygyny; 588 had more frequent polygyny; and 4 had polyandry.[22] However, as Miriam Zeitzen writes, social tolerance for polygamy is different from the practice of polygamy, since it requires wealth to establish multiple households for multiple wives. The actual practice of polygamy in a tolerant society may actually be low, with the majority of aspirant polygamists practicing monogamous marriage. Tracking the occurrence of polygamy is further complicated in jurisdictions where it has been banned, but continues to be practiced (de facto polygamy).[23]

Zeitzen also notes that Western perceptions of African society and marriage patterns are biased by “contradictory concerns of nostalgia for traditional African culture versus critique of polygamy as oppressive to women or detrimental to development.”[23] Polygamy has been condemned as being a form of human rights abuse, with concerns arising over domestic abuse, forced marriage, and neglect. The vast majority of the world’s countries, including virtually all of the world’s developed nations, do not permit polygamy. There have been calls for the abolition of polygamy in developing countries.

Polygyny
Main article: Polygyny
See also: Concubinage
Polygyny usually grants wives equal status, although the husband may have personal preferences. One type of de facto polygyny is concubinage, where only one women get the wife right and status, while other women remain legal house mistresses.
Although a society may be classified as polygynous, not all marriages in it necessarily are; monogamous marriages may in fact predominate. It is to this flexibility that Anthropologist Robin Fox attributes its success as a social support system: “This has often meant – given the imbalance in the sex ratios, the higher male infant mortality, the shorter life span of males, the loss of males in wartime, etc. – that often women were left without financial support from husbands. To correct this condition, females had to be killed at birth, remain single, become prostitutes, or be siphoned off into celibate religious orders. Polygynous systems have the advantage that they can promise, as did the Mormons, a home and family for every woman.”[24]

Nonetheless, polygyny is a gender issue which offers men asymmetrical benefits. In some cases, there is a large age discrepancy (as much as a generation) between a man and his youngest wife, compounding the power differential between the two. Tensions not only exist between genders, but also within genders; senior and junior men compete for wives, and senior and junior wives in the same household may experience radically different life conditions, and internal hierarchy. Several studies have suggested that the wive’s relationship with other women, including co-wives and husband’s female kin, are more critical relationships than that with her husband for her productive, reproductive and personal achievement.[25] In some societies, the co-wives are relatives, usually sisters, a practice called sororal polygyny; the pre-existing relationship between the co-wives is thought to decrease potential tensions within the marriage.[26]

Fox argues that “the major difference between polygyny and monogamy could be stated thus: while plural mating occurs in both systems, under polygyny several unions may be recognized as being legal marriages while under monogamy only one of the unions is so recognized. Often, however, it is difficult to draw a hard and fast line between the two.”[27]

As polygamy in Africa is increasingly subject to legal limitations, a variant form of de facto (as opposed to legal or de jure) polygyny is being practised in urban centres. Although it does not involve multiple (now illegal) formal marriages, the domestic and personal arrangements follow old polygynous patterns. The de facto form of polygyny is found in other parts of the world as well (including some Mormon sects and Muslim families in the United States).[28] In some societies such as the Lovedu of South Africa, or the Nuer of the Sudan, aristocratic women may become female ‘husbands.’ In the Lovedu case, this female husband may take a number of polygamous wives. This is not a lesbian relationship, but a means of legitimately expanding a royal lineage by attaching these wives’ children to it. The relationships are considered polygynous, not polyandrous, because the female husband is in fact assuming masculine gendered political roles.[26]

Religious groups have differing views on the legitimacy of polygyny. It is allowed in Islam and Confucianism. Judaism and Christianity have mentioned practices involving polygyny in the past, however, outright religious acceptance of such practices was not addressed until its rejection in later passages. They do explicitly prohibit polygyny today.
Polyandry is notably more rare than polygyny, though less rare than the figure commonly cited in the Ethnographic Atlas (1980) which listed only those polyandrous societies found in the Himalayan Mountains. More recent studies have found 53 societies outside the 28 found in the Himalayans which practice polyandry.[29] It is most common in egalitarian societies marked by high male mortality or male absenteeism. It is associated with partible paternity, the cultural belief that a child can have more than one father.[30]

The explanation for polyandry in the Himalayan Mountains is related to the scarcity of land; the marriage of all brothers in a family to the same wife (fraternal polyandry) allows family land to remain intact and undivided. If every brother married separately and had children, family land would be split into unsustainable small plots. In Europe, this was prevented through the social practice of impartible inheritance (the dis-inheriting of most siblings, some of whom went on to become celibate monks and priests).[31]

Plural marriage
Group marriage (also known as multi-lateral marriage) is a form of polyamory in which more than two persons form a family unit, with all the members of the group marriage being considered to be married to all the other members of the group marriage, and all members of the marriage share parental responsibility for any children arising from the marriage.[32] No country legally condones group marriages, neither under the law nor as a common law marriage, but historically it has been practiced by some cultures of Polynesia, Asia, Papua New Guinea and the Americas – as well as in some intentional communities and alternative subcultures such as the Oneida Perfectionists in up-state New York. Of the 250 societies reported by the American anthropologist George P. Murdock in 1949, only the Caingang of Brazil had any group marriages at all.[33]

Child marriage
Main article: Child marriage
A child marriage is a marriage where one or both spouses are under the age of 18.[34][35] It is related to child betrothal and teenage pregnancy.

Child marriage was common throughout history, even up until the 1900s in the United States, where in 1880 CE, in the state of Delaware, the age of consent for marriage was 7 years old.[36] Today it is condemned by international human rights organizations.[37][38] Child marriages are often arranged between the families of the future bride and groom, sometimes as soon as the girl is born.[37] However, in the late 1800s in England and the United States, feminist activists began calling for raised age of consent laws, which was eventually handled in the 1920s, having been raised to 16-18.[39]

Child marriages can also occur in the context of marriage by abduction.[37]

In the year 1552 CE, John Somerford and Jane Somerford Brereton were both married at the ages of 3 and 2, respectively. Twelve years later, in 1564, John filed for divorce.[40][41]

While child marriage is observed for both boys and girls, the overwhelming majority of child spouses are girls.[42] In many cases, only one marriage-partner is a child, usually the female, due to the importance placed upon female virginity.[37] Causes of child marriage include poverty, bride price, dowry, laws that allow child marriages, religious and social pressures, regional customs, fear of remaining unmarried, and perceived inability of women to work for money.
Today, child marriages are widespread in parts of the world; being most common in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, with more than half of the girls in some countries in those regions being married before 18.[37] The incidence of child marriage has been falling in most parts of the world. In developed countries child marriage is outlawed or restricted.

Girls who marry before 18 are at greater risk of becoming victims of domestic violence, than those who marry later, especially when they are married to a much older man.[38]

Same-sex and third-gender marriages
Main articles: Same-sex marriage and History of same-sex unions
As noted above, several kinds of same-gendered, non-sexual marriages exist in some lineage-based societies; this section relates to same-gendered sexual unions. Some cultures include third-gender (two-spirit or transgender) individuals, such as the berdache of the Zuni in New Mexico. We’wha, one of the most revered Zuni elders (an Ihamana, spiritual leader) served as an emissary of the Zuni to Washington, where he met President Grover Cleveland. We’wha had a husband who was generally recognized as such.[43]

While it is a relatively new practice to grant same-sex couples the same form of legal marital recognition as commonly granted to mixed-sex couples, there is some history of recorded same-sex unions around the world.[44][45] Ancient Greek same-sex relationships were like modern companionate marriages, unlike their different-sex marriages in which the spouses had few emotional ties, and the husband had freedom to engage in outside sexual liaisons. The Theodosian Code (C. Th. 9.7.3) issued in 438 CE imposed severe penalties or death on same-sex relationships,[46] but the exact intent of the law and its relation to social practice is unclear, as only a few examples of same-sex marriage in that culture exist.[47] Same-sex unions were celebrated in some regions of China, such as Fujian.[48]

Temporary marriages
Several cultures have practiced temporary and conditional marriages. Examples include the Celtic practice of handfasting and fixed-term marriages in the Muslim community. Pre-Islamic Arabs practiced a form of temporary marriage that carries on today in the practice of Nikah Mut’ah, a fixed-term marriage contract. The Islamic prophet Muhammad sanctioned a temporary marriage – sigheh in Iran and muta’a in Iraq – which can provide a legitimizing cover for sex workers.[49] The same forms of temporary marriage have been used in Egypt, Lebanon and Iran to make the donation of a human ova legal for in vitro fertilization; a woman cannot, however, use this kind of marriage to obtain a sperm donation.[50] Muslim controversies related to Nikah Mut’ah have resulted in the practice being confined mostly to Shi’ite communities. The matrilineal Mosuo of China practice what they call “walking marriage”.

Cohabitation
See also: Cohabitation and Common-law marriage
In some jurisdictions cohabitation, in certain circumstances, may constitute a common-law marriage, an unregistered partnership, or otherwise provide the unmarried partners with various rights and responsibilities; and in some countries the laws recognize cohabitation in lieu of institutional marriage for taxation and social security benefits. This is the case, for example, in Australia.[51] Cohabitation may be an option pursued as a form of resistance to traditional institutionalized marriage. However, in this context, some nations reserve the right to define the relationship as marital, or otherwise to regulate the relation, even if the relation has not been registered with the state or a religious institution.[52]
Conversely, institutionalized marriages may not involve cohabitation. In some cases couples living together do not wish to be recognized as married. This may occur because pension or alimony rights are adversely affected; because of taxation considerations; because of immigration issues, or for other reasons. Such marriages have also been increasingly common in Beijing. Guo Jianmei, director of the center for women’s studies at Beijing University, told a Newsday correspondent, “Walking marriages reflect sweeping changes in Chinese society.” A “walking marriage” refers to a type of temporary marriage formed by the Mosuo of China, in which male partners live elsewhere and make nightly visits.[53] A similar arrangement in Saudi Arabia, called misyar marriage, also involves the husband and wife living separately but meeting regularly.

Goodbye, my dear dear pacifier
IMG_6911

During the first weeks of the baby’s life, the sucking reflex is very strong and so many parents resort to the use of a pacifier.How painlessly get rid of itHere are some ideas for you, but they are not universal – each parent has to judge when it is the right moment and which strategy is best for his child.

1. The earlier, the easier

This is the golden rule. After the 4th month, you can start offering a pacifier less often – only when you really need it, and so within a few weeks you will get rid of it. Just do not be tempted to return it when the growth of teeth begins.

2. Do not sleep with soother

My advice is not to teach the baby to sleep with the soother because in most cases they wake up when they drop it, and that means endless night adventures for you and a restless sleep for them.

3. Pacifier removed

Most often works only successfully in children under 12 months of age who are less attached to it. If the child weeps too much and too long for the teat – better think of another strategy.

4. Pacifier is not what it was

The baby is accustomed to a certain kind of feeling the pacifier brings. Change it – it will reduce your interest, and giving up will be easier. You can do this simply by drilling the tip of the teat with a needle.

5. The exclusion method

Notice when and where your child needs at least his soother and start from there. For example, first stop giving it out, gradually restrict your use at home and so until you learn to fall asleep without it.

6. Challenge empathy

Children develop very quickly in every aspect, including emotionally. Experience his empathy by saying that someone else needs more than his teat – such as the weeping baby in a trolley or the little kittens behind the bush. Once she voluntarily gives her – throw it away secretly and every time you ask her to remind him where he is.

 

Important rules:

Do not try to remove the teat when the child is restless due to a teething teeth
Once you remove the teat, do not be tempted to offer it again
Suggest a substitute for the child to relax – a stuffed toy or diaper for example
Be careful not to replace the pacifier with your thumb
If the child understands it and it is difficult without the soother – try to distract it with interesting games or offer small incentive awards for every day without a pacifier
Do not do it forbidding – do not let the child cry for too long about your pacifier, do not poke it with a hot pepper, and do not imagine that a child to whom the pacifier has provided peace and comfort for a long time will forget about it from tomorrow to tomorrow .
Go with patience and understanding – that’s the key to success.

 

I Only Live To Love You- This Song Makes Me Fall In Love Again
3292428344_1_13_7yfPNlKD

I Only Live To Love You- This Song Makes Me Fall In Love Again

By erlymags ( @cely/ @lovern )

The first time I hear this song, my heart was awaken from a very deep refusal to love again. Because in the past I had been a victim of a false love, that is why, I told myself not to fall in love again, but when one day while dining at a fast food center a ver lovely song was played and fortunately I was able to write down the lyrics of the song, yet, at first, I never knew the singer/ composer of the song. I decided to know them through Goggle search and much to my joy for the lyrics I jotted down are all correct hehehehe.
The singer of the song “I Only Live To Love You” Is Cilla Black.

“I Only Live To Love You “

I only live to love you
Love you until forever
Day after day, year after year
For always we will journey together.

I only live to love you
Walk with my dreams beside you
Smile after smile, tear after tear
In shadow or in sunshine my love will guide you.

When there are clouds above
If I have you to love
Why do I care
When you are there?
For when you came my way
There was no yesterday
Only tomorrow with you…
There…

Here is my hand to lead you
Here are my arms that need you
I only live, live for your love
For my love will be your love now and forever.

The lyrics of this song have changed my decision in life. From that day on, I told myself why not give another try. Not all men are liars. There are many good and only few them that hurt. I like the line “For always we will journey together, very nice, so meaningful and it this line touches the deepest chamber of my heart. All of us know how love is felt and how hurt is felt if love is broken. There are only few liars so why should I generalize all men’s approach of love.

The other line that stirs my emotion is when the singer says , “In shadows or in sunshine my love will guide you. Wow, the best line so promising and life fulfilling. This all we like to happen in our love life to have someone with us for better or for worse, for not all the time that life is covered with clouds of tears, but there are so many time life is uncovered with sunshine. Love is truly beautiful. Foremost, the last line indicates substantial impact of love to human lives according to the support of the last line of the song which stated that: “There was no yesterday, only tomorrow with you .” What a promising line that almost breaks the silence of my lonely heart. I told myself to give my life another chance to fall in love again.

I am so much thankful to the composer of the song “I Only Live To Love You” , and it’s very lovely singer with a voice that awakens all souls from a very deep sleep Cilla Black.

Image credit to Skyrock

A Short and Disturbing Look at Sociopaths
images

There are people who don’t care about other people.  They are often said to have no conscience.   They have a peculiar impersonal nature.

Where a normal person can engage in vengeance when someone hurts them, a sociopath does it because s/he can.   They don’t have to benefit, it can cost them, but knowing that somehow they spoiled someone else’s life is what pleases them.

This is a true example.

Margie was dying and tried to get in touch with all of the people from her childhood. It was hard because she had moved from their home city, as had others.

She left many messages on all sorts of social sights searching for persons who had been like family.

When she was young, her best friend had been a girl called Carmen, and Carmen’s elder sister, Esme.

Carmine had seen messages from Margie but couldn’t care less.  When Carmine saw messages left for Esme, she acted.

She emailed Margie acting ever so happy to hear from her but questioned why she was trying to get in touch with Esme.   Carmen told Margie clear lies, lies that Margie should have seen through, but she didn’t.

Margie, so happy to hear from Carmen gushed and bubbled.   Carmen played until Margie told her how Esme had written to her and she cursed her off properly.

Carmen smiled, never answered.

The pleasure Carmen gained by her intervention was far beyond the event.  Carmine felt powerful, as if she ruled the world.  To use Margie meant nothing.  To block Esme’s reconnection with Margie was victory.

This is the hallmark of a sociopath.

Carmen couldn’t care less about other people.  Carmen only cared about manipulating other people.  She couldn’t manipulate her elder sister, who had virtually nothing to do with her, but she could play Margie.

When Margie died, Carmen couldn’t care less.

Margie had been her ‘best friend’ because Margie had been there.  When Margie was not there, she was not a ‘best friend’.   Carmen made no real links with other people. She used people.   Whomever was available.

If Margie hadn’t attempted to contact Esme, Carmen would have continued to ignore her.  But to ‘hurt’ her sister had become so important to her, that she acted.

Once the event was over, Carmen forgot it, moving forward to any other method she could use to hurt her sister or any one else who was on her radar.

The signs that Carmen was a sociopath were not hidden.  Her coldness, her introverted behaviour, her inability to form long lasting friendships,

Carmen takes the blame for nothing.  She lies easily and without the tiniest bit of shame or remorse.  She manipulates those she can and avoids those she can not.

That Carmen could have thwarted Margie’s final attempts to contact Esme is so evil, yet, it means nothing to a sociopath like Carmen

Solar Lamps are Nice Gifts
20140323_095958

If you could not think of a nice gift for occasions like Mother’s Day, birthdays, anniversaries, weddings or fiestas, a rechargeable solar lamp is a best option.

You see, we were thinking of giving away cakes or other food items for my relatives when we attend their fiesta today, but the cakes cost so much. It can go beyond our budget, to think that we will be giving gifts to seven families! They are my sisters, and some my nephews and nieces who have their own families and houses.

It has been the custom here in our place to give something to the household, even any gift or food item, just to show our appreciation for their invitation. But we can always go there without any gift, they just wanted our presence.

Good thing we saw this beautiful solar lamp at a mall. It can be charged by putting it under the sun or sunlight for eight hours; or if there is no sunlight, you can plug it into an electric source through a charger cable that goes with the unit. It costs less than a cake! So we saved a lot, and it would be very useful to them for a long time.

We have so much sunlight in the Philippines, all year round; and there are frequent brownouts or power outages especially during rainy or stormy months, so having a rechargeable solar lamp is a best thing. There is no need to grab for matches, lighters or candles to light the home or rooms of the house. A solar lamp would provide light for some four to five hours!

It is a nice invention; a very useful gadget, even in areas where there is no electricity supply; like in very remote mountains or forest areas. They can have some light at night which children or students can use when making their assignments or studying their lessons at night.

It is also safer to use, unlike candles or lamps that use kerosene for fuel. It is fire hazard when it was accidentally dropped or it is toppled by a person, cats or dogs at home, unlike solar lamp that do not have an open flame. There is a bulb that lights when turned on. Maybe it has a lithium-ion battery that has a longer capacity to give power.

I think the recipients of our gift will be happy about it. They can take it anywhere, even in picnics or overnight swimming as a reserved light source when there’s sudden blackouts.

It is a very useful, nice and affordable gift.