Marriage

[My 2 sids]

I know the social mores thread touched on the idea of IC marriage, but it seems a bit old and although many have read it, few seem to want to respond.  I'm wondering if more people would respond if the question was asked in poll form.

Personally, I like what one person stated on the other thread.  They wrote something along the lines that a 'marriage' would be a ceremony conducted for those who can afford such.  That being said I think a 'marriage' should be different than just people with a long term commitment.  Just as rings signify marroage here in RL, perhaps some kind of token (maybe a tattoo) could be bought (again.. got to have money and want to show off you have another person) in Zalanthas.

[UnderSeven]

I agree whole heartedly, excpet for the token.  It's meaningless, marriage in armageddon as I see it is either political or something rich people do.  It doesn't really have any further meaning.  As far as monogamy and polygomy goes on arm, I think it depends on the culture.  Some arm cultures will view it in different ways.  I spit on anyone who thinks the entire game should view it purely one way or another (you know who you are, take my spit for water is rare!)

[My 2 sids]

I know the social mores thread touched on the idea of IC marriage, but it seems a bit old and although many have read it, few seem to want to respond. I'm wondering if more people would respond if the question was asked in poll form.

Personally, I like what one person stated on the other thread. They wrote something along the lines that a 'marriage' would be a ceremony conducted for those who can afford such. That being said I think a 'marriage' should be different than just people with a long-term commitment. Just as rings signify marriage here in RL, perhaps some kind of token (maybe a tattoo) could be bought (again.. got to have money and want to show off you have another person) in Zalanthas.

[Barzalene]

I wanted to vote for 2 and 3 but went with 2

I voted for 2 as well, but I did like what someone said in the social mores thread, that the commoners would imitate the nobles in their marriage ceremonies. I mean, there has been marriage in game, and unless we choose not to acknowledge it like the hack-n-slash days of mantii and halflings in the cities, we can pretty much say it happens between the wealthy and upper-crust of society.

[EvilRoeSlade]

I wanted to vote for 2 and 3, but went with 3.

[crymerci]

I understand the need to seperate real life social structures from IC practices.  I also understand the need to differentiate between the political marriages of the noble and merchant houses, and the alliances of grubby commoners.

But the more I consider this issue, the less I understand what exactly is wrong with the word "marriage".  Some people never make long-term comittments, and some do. If those that do, want to say they're "married" or "mated" or "partnered" or whatever, I don't see the problem with any of those words.

So yeah.  Option #1.  Also #3, but primarily #1.

[EvilRoeSlade]

But the more I consider this issue, the less I understand what exactly is wrong with the word "marriage".  Some people never make long-term comittments, and some do. If those that do, want to say they're "married" or "mated" or "partnered" or whatever, I don't see the problem with any of those words.

I don't understand whats wrong with the word marriage, I merely sense the wrongness thats innate within it.  :p

Seriously, I only have a problem with marriage ceremonies, whether they resemble RL ceremonies or not.  Only in tribal settings where such practices have been outlined do I condone this.

I also have a problem with commoners marrying nobles or merchant family members.  If you want to sleep your way to the top, have an affair with them on the side of their political marriage.  Marrying them is ridiculous.

Whats wrong with the term marriage, is by definition, it is not what it really seems. Here is a few of the definitions from the source of knowledge I religiously follow, dictionary.com:

mar·riage    ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (mrj)
n.

The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
The state of being married; wedlock.
A common-law marriage.
A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a same-sex marriage.
A wedding.
A close union: "the most successful marriage of beauty and blood in mainstream comics" (Lloyd Rose).
Games. The combination of the king and queen of the same suit, as in pinochle.

So, in most cases in Zalanthas, the 'legal' institution bonding people would probably be the Templarate, as there are no religions. This would probably be similar to Courthouse weddings, as I doubt a Templar would care to devote his time to a gathering of rabble (in the case of commoners) and watch these two dirty peasants vow their love to each other.  I suppose that for Noblity this might be more viable, and probably -does- happen. There would most likely have to be some record and formal bonding of nobility. Especially in the matters of senior nobilty.

But for commoners usually there is little reason or way to go about being formally married, and in low-tech civilizations the dominant gender would just take a consort, and it wouldn't be beyond that. You'd be considered the mate of this person, and they would acknowledge that. Usually sharing a home, and then raising a family. I guess in Zalanthas either male or female could take their mate. But probably the provider and better off would do the deciding. Like a well-off seamstress might meet a man she likes and after some dating or the Zalanthan courting equivalent invite him into her home, and he would be considered her consort. Her companion and confided espoused mate.

I think for the most part commoners wouldn't be married. Or at least not use that term. Marriage implies a formal wedding in front of people, conducted by someone of religion or state. And without religion it would defer to state, which the templarate would have little want or desire to meddle in. Perhaps something to the effect of... a large family gathering, where a man or woman would announce her wish to take so and so as a mate, and then they'd accept or whatever and be done with it.

Usually in harsh, low-technology lands frivilous concerns like a wedding ceremony (if it was even widely done) would probably not be high priority.

Thats just my opinion on the matter.

[Carnage]

I voted no. I've never liked marriage ceremonies. Maybe it comes from all those lame-ass weddings in EverQuest where Killsmasherz the 32 troll shaman would marry Prettydaisyflower the 22 wood elf druid. They'd all get together and all of their little friends would get together and they'd have a GM or guide or something equally lame presiding over the ceremony.

As far as Zalanthas goes, I don't think there's really a 'tradition' for marriage. And considering how poor most Zalanthan commoners are, I don't think they really want to spend valuable food and water money on traditions. It seems more like that one day they've just been together so long it would be assumed a couple is husband/wife.

[To wed or not]

This has been discussed before, many, many times.

I have no problem with bonding ceremonies within the mud. Pairings or groups of bonded people have been happening for eons, I see no reason for people to not seek marriage when it is extremely beneficial for those concerned.

Political affiliation.
Strength in income.
Automatically doubles your circle of friends.
You have someone to vent to or use.
Etc etc etc.


What bothers me about Armageddon pairings is this.  I have yet to see any one PC actually call two people their spouse/wife/husband/mate.

The obnoxiously wealthy man has arrived from the west, surrounded by several women.

Pointing first at the buxom, fiery-haired woman, then to the svelte, blue-eyed woman and finally to the curvy, buck-toothed female, the obnoxiously wealthy man tells you, in sirihish:
    "Have you met my wives? Flora, Fauna and Merriweather."

You think:  Damn...

We bring present day social stigmas onto the mud, many spouses is frowned upon, same sex pairings are bad, whoring is bad, concubining is bad, hell, ANYTHING sexual is bad.

I would -love- to see out of the norm pairings or groupings. I would love to attend a Kuraci wedding where everything from the cake to the wine is spiced with ale and gifts to the couple are highly encouranged to be a knot or two.

I'd love to see two warriors/hunters sitting in the forest somewhere by a camp fire cutting themselves ritualistically to denote they have chosen to be together as partners for life.

Anytime I have had a character who could have more than one mate the already existing mate gave a definate 'No'. That's real life interfering with Armageddon. I just won't have none of that.   :wink:

[crymerci]

I think there are two issues being discussed here: marriage as in a partnership between two or more people, and marriage as in a wedding ceremony.  I think the first would exist but the second would be rare (possible exception for the noble crowd).

[My 2 sids]

Usually in harsh, low-technology lands frivilous concerns like a wedding ceremony (if it was even widely done) would probably not be high priority.

Ok, reguardless about Zen society... I do wish to point out that most societies thoughout the world (throughout history) have had celebrations of marriage of some sort.  On its most basic level... marriage means life.  A continuation of the population.  That is why almost every society has always celebrated in some way.

[Callisto]

Anytime I have had a character who could have more than one mate the already existing mate gave a definite 'No'. That's real life interfering with Armageddon. I just won't have none of that.   :wink:

Why would the pre-existing mate be fine with someone else moving in and taking a cut of the benefits he/she would otherwise have all to him/herself?

Real life interfering with Armageddon, indeed. :roll:

[JollyGreenGiant]

From the documentation on the website:

Nobles do not marry commoners. It is unthinkable, and a monstrous violation of social protocols. Children of such alliances often become servants of the House - since they have been raised within a House, they know its ways, nuances and history better than most, and often these bastard children will rise to positions of status and authority among the other servants. Few will go to work for other Houses, who would suspect that their loyalties would remain with the original House, and that the individual was seeking to spy on the second house. Noble marriages are only in extremely rare cases prompted by romantic considerations; the majority are carefully thought out political or economic alliances planned by the elder members of the house and are accompanied by formal contracts setting out dowries, inheritances, and obligations. One partner, which can be either the male or female member, is assumed to have been subsumed by the other's House, and loses all legal and financial ties to their former House. A noble may have more than one such partner.

So I assume both polygamy and polygyny exist at some level, as well as the underlying institution of marriage. (Side note: the definitions in the poll are backwards.  Polygamy is multiple wives, polygyny is multiple husbands.)

[Angela Christine]

I could get wrong, but I believe the term for one wife with many husbands is polyandry.  

Pretty rare on earth, usually the husbands would be brothers who couldn't afford to each get their own wife so they would share one.

[Jacques]

Pretty rare on earth, usually the husbands would be brothers who couldn't afford to each get their own wife so they would share one.

Heh. And you ladies think having to yell at ONE man to pick up his socks and put the seat down is bad!  :twisted:  :twisted:

I have seen, during my limited (~5 months) time at Arm, some very functioning IC relationships that I could easily call "marriages". In some cases, the terms "husband" and "wife" have been used, in other cases, "mate" is the preferred term. Regardless of what the pairing has been called, it's more or less been a commitment between two people, ICly, to function as a unit - maintain a residence, raise children (if they're having any), and the like. But I'm not aware of anyone who has made this commitment FORMALLY. No ceremony, no outrageous fee to the Templars for registering your love life as a "dead weapon"  :twisted: - just two people deciding that life would be better lived together than apart.

So I guess are you defining "marriage" as the LEGAL entity, or the emotional/spiritual concept? Legally, I think it would probably only exist for the nobility, and maybe the templars (even templars have to breed, right?). I could, however, see the commoners having developed some kind of customs around establishing a long-term pairing.

[creeper386]

So I guess are you defining "marriage" as the LEGAL entity, or the emotional/spiritual concept? Legally, I think it would probably only exist for the nobility, and maybe the templars (even templars have to breed, right?). I could, however, see the commoners having developed some kind of customs around establishing a long-term pairing.

I could be wrong... But aren't templars almost always nobility... Or in the rare case, they are now considered nobility?


Creeper

[crymerci]

Hey...the poll and the post got edited, but the poll didn't get screwed up with extra options and stuff.  Nice.