Posted by Samwise on
URL: https://coalpha.arkian.net/Can-i-join-tp3520491p4240306.html

Well I will try here to say some things.  Yes, we don't have to agree, and I think that my thinking is more similar than different, really.  It's a thoughtful essay, and it's always nice to see men writing.  I feel so often that I don't have sufficient emotional or intellectual perspective to write academically, and I honor the men who do.  The essay strikes me initially as too what...trichotomous (?).  There are great points that I agree with scattered within a cluttered premise that makes it hard to follow for me.  

I do not think that men are 'simple', and do not think it's useful to base a discussion on that premise.  

I have never been married and I am childfree.  So far I am very happy about not being married, and I do not see that ever changing beCAUSE I have never met a woman I wanted to do that with and do not see women or the law changing in any way that would change my perspective.  Finding a woman I feel safe with is the first problem for me.  I like the description of marriage as "Marriage 1.0" and "Marriage 2.0", though I think I would not feel safe (legally or emotionally) in either.  More or less as I understand it Marriage 1.0 is where "a man & woman get married and 'do what men & women do' with each other implicitly agreeing on the terms of being married based on cultural gender-role expectations" and Marriage 2.0 is "a contract based on a vague memory of cultural gender-role expectations along with men's explicit legal liability".  To me marriage 1.0 is 'sentimental' and marriage 2.0 is 'legal'.  It is hard for me to feel safe with both the cultural gender-role expectations AND the laws regarding marriage.

But what do I know...heheheh

And, like I said, it is excellent that Devlin is writing.

Samwise