Some argue that marriage is defined narrowly as only being between a man and a woman, so gays can’t possibly marry. The fact is, though, that the nature of marriage has changed in definition and make-up many times over the centuries. Marriage today isn’t at all like what it was two millennia or even two centuries ago. The changes in marriage have been broad and fundamental, so what are traditionalists really trying to defend? What is “traditional” about modern marriage?
Most of these changes have moved power in marriages away from extended families and to the couples, as well as making women more equal. Here are just a few of the most significant changes in marriage in the West over the past centuries:
- Legalization of divorce
- Criminalization of marital rape (and recognition that the concept even exists)
- Legalization of contraception
- Legalization of interracial marriage
- Recognition of women’s right to own property in a marriage
- Elimination of dowries
- Elimination of parents’ right to choose or reject their children’s mates
- Elimination of childhood marriages and betrothals
- Elimination of polygamy
- Existence of large numbers of unmarried people
- Women not taking the last names of their husbands
- Changing emphasis from money and property to love and personal fulfillment
Most of these reforms directly benefited women. For a long time, marriage was not in any way a real “partnership” between men and women. Men were in control and women were often little more than property. It’s only very, very recently that people in the West began to treat marriage as a partnership between equals where both men and women had the same status in the relationship — and there continue to be many in America who object to even this idea.
Why was it acceptable to make so many reforms in the nature of marriage that benefitted heterosexuals and women, but not acceptable now to make one reform that benefits gays? Is there any reason to think that all of these other reforms were somehow more “minor” or “superficial” than legalizing gay marriage? No — making women equal in marriage rather than property, eliminating polygamy, and allowing people to marry for love are all at least as significant as allowing gay couples to marry, especially since gay marriage is not unheard-of in human history.
