= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vladimir_M comments on Taking the awkwardness out of a Prenup - A Game Theoretic solution - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (106)
You're right: http://blogs.forward.com/the-bintel-brief/121028/
This of course comes at the risk of stirring up bad blood between your wife and parents, but since people don't care that much about extended families these days, many men would probably believe it to be worth the price. In any case, it is an interesting Schellingian real-life story.
Women too, presumably?
I was referring to the specific situation from the linked story. But yes, of course, an analogous comment would apply in the reverse case. Though there would be significant differences in more subtle details of the situation, since the relevant customs and rituals don't feature identical expected roles for the sexes. Consider e.g. who is expected to make the marriage proposal, which obviously influences the initial and consequent state of the negotiation (or conflict, as per Schelling). (Even in those unconventional cases where these norms aren't followed, the very fact of deviation from the norm and its acknowledgment have significant consequences.)
For what it's worth, I recently heard or read a piece (i I don't have a cite) claiming that marriage proposals in the old sense are becoming less common.
Instead, marriage is discussed in advance, possibly for months, instead of the man making a surprise offer.
I don't have the exact numbers at hand, but I'm pretty sure that in the overwhelming majority of cases, marriages are still preceded by rituals and customs with greatly different sex roles. For example, quick googling yields this Slate article according to which more than 80% of marriages involve the woman receiving an expensive diamond engagement ring from the man -- which is just one element that indicates fundamental asymmetry in their strategic positions.
Even if more and more marriages deviate from the most standard norm, it still means that the sides typically aren't faced with equivalent strategic situations in the highly ritualized negotiation process, which is relevant for the question of what happens when non-standard approaches are attempted that risk blowing things up by signaling weirdness. But this is a complex topic on which much time could easily be spent.
No so much anymore, in most states of the US. If the proposal is accepted, the ring becomes a part of the couple's community property. If the proposal is rejected, the man gets the ring back (it is legally considered a "conditional gift" in most states, which the prospective fianceé must return if she refuses or breaks off the engagement). Either way, the ring remains the property of the proposer, so it doesn't really cost him anything to propose.
You're right that engagement rings have mostly lost their former economic function as a collateral of commitment. However, despite these legal changes, it's not correct to say that the ring doesn't cost the proposer anything. If the engagement is broken, he'll get it back, but it can't be resold for anything near the original price, and reuse for a subsequent woman is out of the question (well, he could try, but it would be considered an insulting move leading to a near-certain disaster, and if he tried it surreptitiously, the consequences would be even more catastrophic if discovered). Moreover, even as a part of the couple's community property, it's a white elephant asset that will never be sold except in direst desperation, doesn't yield any rent or interest, and just sucks up money for insurance, so for all practical purposes, the man has parted with a significant amount of money by buying it.
You've changed my mind: there is a real cost to the ring. I considered the ring a thing equal in value to its price but didn't think it through enough to realize that after it's bought it only retains much value (as sentimental value to the couple) if the proposal succeeds. Thanks for the links; I had no idea diamonds were so over-priced.
Was it seriously ever any other way? That's hard for me to imagine. A surprise offer? Without the couple ever discussing it before? Even if the man proposes, as is traditional, would someone really propose without talking about it first?
This cry of "was it ever done any other way?" strikes me as historically naive... arranged marriages happened, after all, and still happen. During certain space-time periods I understand it is/was customary to have much younger brides than grooms, in which case it seems more reasonable to surprise rather than discuss (since the groom may not have a great desire for the young bride's opinions in the matter).
In any case, it seems the question should be answered by a historical sociologist...
Well, yes, of course arranged marriages happened, but arranged marriages were typically discussed and planned among the families involved. I'm referring to this idea of marriage proposals in the "old sense", where the groom springs the question on the bride and it's the bride's decision to accept or reject, right then. (Maybe I'm misunderstanding something.)
If we're to believe almost every (American) movie ever to include a marriage proposal, then yes.
(On the other hand, movies can be rather slow to reflect changing cultural norms. I think the "If anyone knows any reason blah blah speak now or forever hold your peace" line is only done in movies now. Still, such cliches had to originally come from somewhere.)
I average going to about 2 weddings a year, and I think most weddings I go to still have it. I'm pretty sure Catholic services still mandate it.
This is false. You may be remembering the questions of intent in the Rite of Catholic Marriage, in which the priest asks both spouses to state their intent to marry. (The consent of spouses, freely spoken, has traditionally established the marriage in Catholic belief.) There is no question asked of the assembly.
Here's an excerpt of this part of the rite, including a link to the whole marriage ceremony:
http://www.catholicweddinghelp.com/topics/text-rite-of-marriage-mass.htm
The current Book of Common Prayer, however (used by Episcopalians and Anglicans), does seem to preserve this language. I think it was originally an English custom in any case.
http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/marriage.pdf
It's probably no surprise that the default movie mode in the United States would be Anglican, not Catholic.
Thanks for the cite
This is probably the piece you meant.
Defeating a dragon usually does the trick. Might be outdated advice, though.