變質的婚姻

　　廣義而論，婚姻是普遍文化。

 

　　何為「普遍文化」？它是世界各地文化所通用的元素、特質或習俗。縱觀歷史，這些指導基本行為的原則與我們人類的生存及繁衍息息相關。舉例來說，每個人都需要吃、喝及成長……我們會撫養孩子成人，讓死者歸於塵土。不同文化或有不同的表現方式，但基本價值是相同的。

 

　　婚姻雖然源遠流長，但過往，婚姻不是單純的男女關係，而且往往與愛情無關。古代的統治者把婚姻視為外交手段。統治者會嫁出他們的女兒或姐妹，來換取和平條約或結盟，婚姻在此是政治上的戰策。當富裕的家庭用相同的方法來擴展他們的政治影響力及鞏固經濟實力，窮農則用婚姻來開枝散葉，加強家庭勞動力。已婚的女性沒甚權利，她跟孩子只被視為丈夫的資產。

 

　　當君主放下權力予民主，家庭式產業轉由市場經濟主導，婚姻亦步向民主。自19世紀末以來，婚姻在西方屢經法律上的轉變，以改善妻子一方的權利。在20世紀，一夫多妻、強迫婚姻，以及整個粗暴的傳統婚嫁習俗大多變成不合法。及後，有些國家更放寬種族及信仰上的婚姻限制，最近，甚至已認可同性婚姻。

 

　　現在，已發展國家的人都可以按意願，自由選擇結婚對象，他們最常以結婚來達致金錢、情感及性慾上的目的。這個重大的社會轉變對婚姻的面貌帶來深遠的影響。最初，戀人在打得火熱時簽下婚書，然後匆忙離婚作結，因為「一夫多妻」會被視為「通姦」，分手後便留下子女及一大堆社會問題。現代人很多會選擇遲婚，甚至不結婚，有些只簡單地「同居」。單以歐洲計，在1975年2005年這30年間，結婚率已下降了三成。少了孩子，已發展國家的人口老化問題愈益嚴重，另一方面，第三世界的國家仍然受古舊的婚姻傳統束縛，人口倍增。

 

　　作為一個女人，我向那些為爭取人類及公民權利、讓我們可以獲得作為妻子的基本尊重及尊嚴的人致以敬意。可是，會否如我們所做的任何事情一樣，再一次，我們向著偏離的方向走遠了？在推進現代化之時，莎士比亞曾寫道：「我們或許因躍進之猛烈而走多於預期所想，並迷失途中……」，現今追尋伴侶的態度就是一例。

 

　　以前，頑皮的孩子會被「藤條炆豬肉」侍候，當打鬧變得不合法，我們容忍的底線隨之降低，最後縱容出一班小霸王，以及一班未懂如何作出貢獻前，只會厭惡、蔑視和索求的激進學生。過往，工人是被剝削的一群；今天，有影響力的工會為達到個人目的，瓦解工廠，癱瘓城市，莫視公眾利益。講求民主的希臘把權力交到人民手中，更多的利益，更多的權利，交出的愈來愈多，而今天，國家卻步入破產。婚姻在以前有政治影響力，現在，「對我而言」是唯一的關注點，我們找的對象要襯得上「我」，要喜歡並愛惜「我」，要給予「我」所有我想要的事物。結果婚姻主張自私、自以為事，並要以自我為中心。

 

　　罪魁禍首之名非扭曲的婚姻觀念莫屬，因為它就是錯誤的態度的源由。想無風無浪地走過情路，便要學會知足常樂的道理，嘗試付出更多並不要強求回報。

 

　　「他不滿足於現在擁有的，他想得到的亦將不足以滿足他」－蘇格拉底。

 

　　（按：中文內容乃翻譯及撮寫版本）

 

Marriage

 

　　Broadly defined, marriage is a cultural universal. 

 

　　What is a “cultural universal” ? It is an element, trait or institution common to all human  cultures worldwide. Throughout history, these guiding principles of basic behaviors relate to the survival and proliferation of our species . For instance, everyone needs to eat, drink and grow.. we raise our children, we bury the dead…The visible manifestation may  vary from culture to culture, the underlying values remain the same.

 

　　Though marriage has ancient roots, it really was not about the relationship between the man and the woman at all, and love had nothing to do with it. Ancient rulers regarded marriage as a means of foreign policy. In return for peace treaties or to secure allies, they would “give away”  daughters and sisters in marriage -  a strategic manoeuvre  within a political context. While wealthy families deployed the same tactic to fortify their political influence and buttress their economic power, poor  peasants used marriage to expand the family labour force. Married women had few rights, they and their children were considered the properties of their husbands.

 

　　As Kings ceded power to democracies and family plots of land gave way to market economies, marriage became more civilized. Since the late 19th century, marriage has undergone gradual legal changes in the west, aimed at improving the rights of the wife. In the 20th century, polygamy, forced marriages, and a whole list of loutish traditional practices became mostly illegal. Later on, some countries even lifted bans on interracial and interfaith marriages, most recently, even  same sex marriage. 

 

　　Today’s individuals in developed nations are free to marry whomever they want, most fashionably, for monetary, emotional and libidinal purposes. Such major social changes have led to far reaching consequences in the change of marriage demographics. Initially, love birds would marry in frenzy, then divorce in haste as the erstwhile “polygamy” became “adultery”, leaving children and loads of social problems behind. Now many people marry late or not at all, some simply “cohabit”. In Europe alone, marriage has dropped  by 30% within 30 years from 1975-2005. With less children, the population in developed nations is ageing fast while the population in third world countries, still bound by old marriage traditions, continues to grow exponentially. 

 

　　As a woman, I salute those who fought for our human and civil rights,  which allow us to enjoy the fundamental respect and dignity of being a wife. But have we, like everything else we do, once again gone too far in the other direction ?  In advocating moderation, Shakespeare wrote, “ We may outrun by violent swiftness, and lose by over-running…”  The modern day spouse seeking attitude would be a case in point.

 

　　Naughty children used to be disciplined by caning . When that became unlawful, we began stretching the limits of toleration so far that we now end up with a generation of little tyrants spoiled rotten by misguided parents, and rebellious students who detest, defy and demand before they learn how to contribute. Workers used to be exploited.  Today’s powerful  unions cripple industries and paralyze cities, sacrificing common good for personal gains. Greece’s democracy championed to give power to their people, more benefit, more rights, more, more and more… the country is now bankrupt. Marriage used to be a political leverage. Today, as ”According to ME”  becomes the only according that matters, we seek someone who is good enough for “ ME”, who will love and adore  “ ME”… who will give “ME” everything I want… the notion of marriage has become completely selfish, self absorbed and self centered…

 

　　From a  totally distorted concept of marriage, a wrong attitude comes to pass, and therein lies the culprit of our woes. For smoother sails ahead, try nurturing contentment -  start by giving more and asking for less in return.

 

　　 “He who is not contented with what he has, would not be contented with what he would like to have” -  Socrates

 

 

 《經濟通》所刊的署名及／或不署名文章，相關內容屬作者個人意見，並不代表《經濟通》立場，《經濟通》所扮演的角色是提供一個自由言論平台。

• 

想要獨家投資理財Tips？即Like etnet 全新Facebook專頁► 立即讚好