{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_42760/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_42760","id":"gutenberg_42760","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/42760","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Gender & Sexuality Studies","Category: Parenthood & Family Relations","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Marriage"],"text":"THE MYTH IN MARRIAGE\n\n  _by Alice Hubbard_\n\n  _The Roycrofters\n  East Aurora N.Y._\n\n\n\n\n  Copyright, 1912\n  By Alice Hubbard\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n  FOREWORD                          7\n\n  ROMANCE                          13\n\n  THE REVELATION                   19\n\n  FACTS                            21\n\n  AN AWAKENING                     25\n\n  THE NATURAL MARRIAGE             29\n\n  THE SOCIAL MARRIAGE              33\n\n  THE MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE      37\n\n  CONCLUSION                       39\n\n  THE BUSINESS OF MARRIAGE         41\n\n  PRIMITIVE BONDAGE                45\n\n  NATURE'S METHOD                  49\n\n  ECONOMIC FREEDOM                 53\n\n  CITIZENS                         55\n\n  ENFORCED DEPENDENCE              63\n\n  HOMOGENEITY                      71\n\n  ROMANCE                          75\n\n\n\n\nFOREWORD\n\n\nMarriage is a subject of interest to all adults, and at one time in almost\nevery life it is the vision that fills the horizon.\n\nTo many it is a mirage.\n\nTo a few it proves to be the hills from whence cometh their strength. The\nrising sun of romance tips every blade of grass, every leaf and flower and\ntwig, with the mystery and miracle of color and perfume.\n\nThe noonday light reveals truth that the half-light of the dawn could not\nshow.\n\nAnd evening twilight garners all the richness of marriage.\n\nThe purpose of this book is to enlighten by bringing into the light of day\nexperiences that must come into the lives of women and men.\n\n--_Alice Hubbard._\n\n\n\n\nThe Myth in Marriage\n\n\nThere is a time in every man's education when he arrives at the conviction\nthat he must take himself for better, for worse, as his portion; that\nthough the wide universe is full of good, no kernel of nourishing corn can\ncome to him but through his toil bestowed on that plot of ground which is\ngiven to him to till.--_Emerson._\n\n\n\n\nROMANCE\n\n    _The object of love expands and grows before us to eternity, until it\n    includes all that is lovely, and we become all that can\n    love.--Thoreau._\n\n\nMarriage, although a most common incident in life, is understood as little\nas is birth, life and death. People are perpetually ignorant on the\nsubject, and insist upon remaining in this state until the veil of their\ntemple is rent in twain, and their holy of holies has daylight thrown upon\nit.\n\nLove is a sacred mystery whose secret is as yet locked away from mortals.\nWe recognize a few of its manifestations and dream of its power. We\nconnect it in our thoughts with marriage and birth, but we assume its\npresence: we do not bring proof.\n\nLove is spirit, and can not be analyzed nor understood.\n\nThe most that man can apprehend of it is to know its absence or its\npresence. Its most refined manifestations have come to us with the\ndevelopment of intellect.\n\nThere are only a few examples of the manifestation of great love in\nhistory. So rare are the people capable of its expression that the whole\nworld wonders and in awe has said that the Creator is Love.\n\nAnd lovers have been set apart as belonging to the Great Mystery and\nrevered in degree as is the Source of Love.\n\nOne of the phases of this manifestation in people is the desire to give.\nThe lover withholds nothing from his beloved. There is one desire--to give\nall. Thus is the mind expanded until it reaches truth never before seen.\n\nLove is the enlightener of the soul. It is the all-seeing eye that\ndiscovers the highest possibilities in man. Its eternal desire is to\nfulfil these.\n\n\"I can do no ill, because I could not meet the beloved on terms of\nequality if there were any stain upon my soul. My hands and my heart must\nbe clean.\"\n\nLove's longing is to be entirely whole, clean and strong.\n\nLove would never deceive. It is kindred only to truth and good.\n\nAll of life is sacred to the lover, and all life is sacred to him.\n\nThe lover is not so anxious that the beloved shall be perfect, as that she\nherself, he himself, shall be without blemish. Love purifies the lover.\nLove makes the lover clean.\n\nThere is no such thing as unrequited love, for to have loved is all the\ncompensation there is. The soul asks no more.\n\nThere is a sublime dignity in love--a majesty that suggests unlimited\npower.\n\nTo love is an individual experience. The object of the love is only the\nmeans to this end of awakening and purification.\n\nWhen the lover asks aught from the beloved, he has descended from the\nspiritual estate and begins to haggle and barter. Then it is not love, but\nbecomes something to buy and sell with.\n\nLove radiates from the individual, as rays of light from its source.\n\nWhen the lover wants to continue the ecstacy of the experience of\nunselfishness, prolong the forgetfulness of his sordid self, he does what?\nJust the opposite of what will secure for him this Nirvana! He begins to\ndemand. He asks her to be forever near him, she asks him to forever stay,\nall in faith, believing that the soul-awakener is a person, when the\nperson has only reminded the soul of an ideal. For a time this person\nkeeps this ideal living before the soul of the lover.\n\nElbert Hubbard says, \"I love you because you love the things I love.\"\nThere is a trinity in love. Lovers make the soul to see a similar ideal\nwhich both love.\n\nSo long as each asks nothing from the other, makes no demand, this ideal\nmay continue to come before the mind, and remain there while the person is\npresent, and return at the thought of the beloved.\n\n\n\n\nTHE REVELATION\n\n    _The gay enchantment was undone,\n    A gentle wife, but fairy none.--Emerson._\n\n\nThe ecstacy of feeling the presence of the ideal may continue for many\nmeetings and partings, until the lovers believe that each is responsible\nfor the beautiful ideal that is theirs.\n\nThey arrange to live permanently in each other's presence.\n\nBut this living together has induced a thousand conditions that had\nnothing whatever to do with the ecstacy of the soul.\n\nYoung people do not realize how much economics has to do with every-day\nliving until they are face to face with every-day life.\n\nEarning money, the drudgery in housework, the personal habits of the\nindividuals, intimate tastes and prejudices, are all foreign to the\nawakening of ideals in the soul. The beloved, who was once an angel,\nbecomes a wife, a weaver, a worker, a plain human being, subject to the\nshortcomings and ignorance that other human beings have.\n\nAnd the lover, who is also beloved, becomes a husband, an earner of money,\nin competition with other workers, subject to irritation, weariness,\ndiscouragements, human failings.\n\nThe human qualities, the frailties and shortcomings, do not inspire the\nsoul to high ideals. And each looks across the impassable gulf of the\nbreakfast-table and wonders why they \"introduced into their lives a spy.\"\n\n\"Where is the ideal I was to dwell with?\"\n\n\"Where is the ideal that was to abide with me?\"\n\nTheir souls are wrenched in anguish.\n\n\n\n\nFACTS\n\n    _You must stand up straight and put a name upon your\n    actions.--Stevenson._\n\n\nThe business in marriage requires commonsense about ninety-nine per cent.\n\nThere is usually less romance in marriage than in any other relationship\nof life.\n\nBut the general idea concerning marriage is that it is all or nearly all\nromance.\n\nThere is no other business partnership so intimate and complex as that in\nmarriage.\n\nAnd this partnership is entered into, the legal papers are drawn,\nwitnesses to the transaction are called, and a life agreement is made\nwithout thought, discussion or an agreement concerning the business part\nof this partnership.\n\nEmphasis has been placed only upon the love, the part of the contract\nwhich mortals can not control.\n\nThe business part of this contract holds the destinies of the contracting\nparties as no other partnership can. Husband and wife can ruin each\nother's fortunes utterly. No outsider can do this.\n\nWe would consider two men ridiculous who entered into a business\npartnership, discussing with each other only the pleasure they anticipated\nin seeing each other so constantly as they would, working side by side\neach day.\n\nImagine one partner saying to the other, \"With all my worldly goods I thee\nendow,\" and slipping upon his finger a little gold ring. Then for the\nduration of this partnership, the privileged partner giving to him who\nwears the ring what he is inclined, varying as the joy in each other's\npresence waxes or wanes. The idea is silly.\n\nAnd yet a man and a woman may contract to live together, giving little\nserious thought to the business part of such living, until they find that\nmortals can not live on romance, and that the joy of their lives has flown\naway.\n\nEcstacy continued, burns up life, and is not intended except for\ninspiration.\n\nLove may continue with marriage, and it may not. Civilization has drifted\nus into conditions where it is difficult for romance to continue after the\nlovers enter into the business of life together.\n\nMarriage is of universal interest. The weal or woe of the race is involved\nin it.\n\nIt is a natural incident in the lives of lovers; but the marriage of\nlovers, although an incident in love, becomes an event in their lives\nbecause of the business partnership, which phase they did not contemplate.\n\nThe primal purpose in the marriage of lovers is that they may be\nperpetually purified, that they may live constantly their best. To do\nthis they must have the Ideal forever before them.\n\nWhen the business part of marriage shows another \"side\" of their natures,\nthe Ideal may take wings. Then they naturally feel they are cheated. Their\nfirst impulse is to run away from this \"trouble,\" to get back to the Ideal\nbefore it has been effaced.\n\n\n\n\nAN AWAKENING\n\n    _Love, indeed, is light from heaven;\n    A spark of that immortal fire by Allah given.--Byron._\n\n\nThe expressions, \"falling in love,\" and \"making love,\" are terms\nsuggesting something that is impossible.\n\nNo one falls in love. The experience of loving may come when a person has\nevolved where fine perceptions are possible. All living is an awakening\nprocess in which there are many degrees of consciousness. At a certain\nstage in his evolution, a human being is able to see and feel certain\ntruth.\n\nThe imagination is a power which is developed with intellect and fine\nfeeling. The imagination can create a world and people it. In this way,\nideals are perpetually made. Humanity's effort to realize ideals is\nevolution.\n\nWhen man can image a human being that fulfils the highest ideal he can\ncreate, the soul rejoices. Man forgets the imperfect in his ecstacy when\ncontemplating the perfect. And when one human being sees another human\nbeing who reminds him, more or less, of his ideal, he is said to love.\n\nHe does not \"fall\" nor \"make,\" he realizes, he awakens, and sometimes\nre-creates.\n\nIt may often occur that the person who awakens one to this ideal may\nrecall this ideal once, twice, again and yet again. Or this person may\nconstantly recall it, or cease altogether to recall it.\n\nThat man and woman are lovers who constantly keep before each other the\nIdeal.\n\nThey wish to abide together, because together they live their best lives,\ndo their best work, are most kind to their fellow-man, do no wrong, can do\nno wrong. This is commonly accepted today as the basis of marriage. It is\nthis ideal which is vaguely or definitely in the minds of thinking people\nwhen they wish to marry.\n\nThe poet Dante had a wonderful, complete ideal. He saw but twice the woman\nwho reminded him of his Perfect. He wrote in poetry of his Ideal and\ncalled Her by this woman's name.\n\nHis wife, the mother of his children, was another woman.\n\nMany critics say that Dante's love for Beatrice was pure. Probably they\nsay this, because he asked nothing of her. That he never knew Beatrice was\nfortunate, for the two people had very little in common. Dante was a poet\nand dreamer. Beatrice was a woman of the nobility without serious cares\nand responsibilities.\n\n\n\n\nTHE NATURAL MARRIAGE\n\n    _Cell seeks affinity with cell.--Reedy._\n\n\nWhen young people meet on a natural basis our present civilization insists\nthat it must necessarily be followed by a permanent, life-long friendship\nor disgrace.\n\nThe cosmic urge causes a meeting which, if followed by an enforced close\nrelationship, usually has incompatability as a sequence.\n\nNature has one thing forever in mind. Civilization has not counted on\nthis.\n\nA youth and a maiden meet when passion is strong, the will undisciplined\nand judgment undeveloped. Convention says there is but one thing to do\nwhen young people are thus strongly attracted to each other, and that is\nto get the sanction of society (church and state) and make arrangements\nfor a permanent intimacy.\n\nThe youth expects the perpetual beauty, smile and charm of the ballroom,\nreception or parlor. The maiden expects protestation of love, and her\nideals and promises fulfilled.\n\nEach has firmly fixed in the mind an idea of something that has none or\nlittle of the real in it--an idea that is impossible. Yet in it there are\nhope and fond desire somewhere hinted.\n\nThe facts are that a struggle has just begun with some of the unpoetic\nrealities of existence, of which neither has ever before dreamed.\n\nPerhaps the wife must rise early, prepare the breakfast, keep the rooms in\norder. This is work.\n\nThe husband goes to business.\n\nBusiness perplexes.\n\n\"Oh, she is just like other women!\"\n\n\"Oh, he is just a common man!\"\n\nThey complain.\n\nThe cosmic urge has nothing to do with any of this. It has come--and\ngone, perhaps.\n\nThere is left a social situation. These two young people have had\nsomething in common, and possibly only a transitory something.\n\nHow shall they live together when she loves what he hates, and he has\nhopes, ambitions, desires that are nothing to her?\n\n\"He has cheated me!\" \"She has fooled me!\" is their heart-cry.\n\nThe truth, however, is something like this: \"We have been deceived. Nature\nsaid one thing to us, and we confused with it something else and thought\nwhat society said was true. We have been deceived.\"\n\nThere was nothing in the first attraction that made these two understand\nanything about hardships, disagreeable duties, discomforts, weariness,\npain.\n\nThose who are anxious to uphold church authority are saying a good deal\nabout the divorce evil. They bring statistics to show that one out of\nevery twelve marriages results in divorce.\n\nThey have not, however, secured any statistics as to whether the people in\nthe other eleven marriages enjoy what our Constitution affirms to be the\nrights of American citizens: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.\n\nThe Church is talking about a \"cure\" for the divorce evil! One bishop\nearnestly recommends the Jewish anathematization, \"Let neither party ever\nbe spoken to again.\" But how would this remedy the social condition of the\ntwo?\n\nThis is punishment, but not cure. The cause of the trouble is not even\nlooked for by the bishop.\n\n\"Is marriage a failure?\" According to the divorce-courts it is.\n\nThe Church concedes that one-twelfth of all marriages are failures.\n\n\n\n\nTHE SOCIAL MARRIAGE\n\n    _I am not surprised that some make shipwreck, but that any come to\n    port.--Stevenson._\n\n\nA social marriage is based on the idea of a high and lofty friendship, an\nindissoluble partnership, an intimacy of relationship unknown in any other\nphase of existence.\n\nSuch a marriage was not intended by Nature. A new element is introduced\nwhen a social marriage occurs of which Nature had no thought, and we\nshould reckon with this, not without it.\n\nThis new element is the intellect. Nature does not recognize it in the\ncosmic urge. So the meeting of man and woman on an intellectual plane, on\na basis of the sweetest friendship imaginable, is the only condition by\nwhich Nature can endure the social marriage tie--which so often binds,\nimprisons, and makes slaves.\n\nEven at this time man considers that he owns a woman; that he has\npurchased her freedom, her will, her habits, her aspirations, her time,\nher love, her energies, her future, every activity of her life. She is in\nvery truth under a master. And the woman, as well, usually considers this\ntrue.\n\nThe woman thinks, because she is owned, that there are certain rights\nconnected with her husband which she also has. In the majority of cases\nthe wife realizes her inferior strength when might makes right, and the\nhusband is not trusted. He must give an account of himself, morning, noon\nand night; of his money, his letters, his attentions.\n\nThe woman has certain laws which she, too, tries to enforce. He must\nsupport her, with all that the term implies.\n\n\"Didn't he promise to do this on the wedding-day?\" Certainly, yes! So far\nas I know, humanity is one in its nature, and neither male nor female. No\nwoman naturally wants to be owned and possessed. Humanity rebels against\ntyranny; and there is more discord, more heartaches, more wrangling, more\nunhappiness among married people than among the unmarried.\n\nWere it possible for men and women when they marry to realize that they\nown nothing more in \"rights\" after marriage than they did before, and\nwould make no more demands upon each other, marriage even with its present\naccepted meaning would not be a failure.\n\nThe import of marriage, as it is understood today, is on the basis of\nintellectual friendship, a business partnership, mutuality in all\ninterests of life. Few people know this.\n\nWe have mixed methods. Nature makes no compulsory laws in this matter of\nliving together.\n\nSociety has done this. The laws man makes, man must enforce. But what God\nhath joined together, no man can put asunder. What God hath not joined\ntogether, man is not very successful in combining.\n\nWe have demonetized woman, taking away from her the natural strength,\ncourage and independence that belong to the mother; made of her a slave,\nunder which condition she does not thrive.\n\nAnd neither does man thrive in being master, for the chain that holds the\none is fastened to the wrist of the other.\n\nWoman must make herself economically free, find work that exercises her\nbody and her mind, and most of the cause of discord, unrest and\nunhappiness will have disappeared.\n\n\n\n\nTHE MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE\n\n    _Its only end is the principle of existence.--Disraeli._\n\n\nPeople who marry without ideals entering in as part of the contract have\nfew disappointments or troubles.\n\nIf the woman expects the man simply to provide shelter, food, raiment, and\nthe man expects a good cook, housekeeper and valet, and each fulfils his\npart of the expectation, there are few other demands.\n\nTenderness, kindness, attentions are asked for very moderately, and good\nservice brings its own reward. Each understands the situation and has\naccepted this business arrangement with marriage. So there is no\ndisappointment, no heartache. They get out of their marriage all they had\nexpected. They are not guilty of experiment and folly. They have their\nquota of commonsense--and use it. Their ideals are simple and easily\nattained.\n\n\n\n\nCONCLUSION\n\n    _We two have climbed together,\n    Maybe we shall go on yet, side by side.--Schreiner._\n\n\nLovers who marry think more of the Ideal than of all else. And if or when\nthe Ideal ceases to remain in the presence of the husband or the wife,\nthen love is gone. In its place sorrow sits.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nWhatever marriage may have been in the past, it has now two distinct\nphases which should be definitely understood by all people.\n\nI. The business partnership.\n\nII. The spiritual relation.\n\n\n\n\nTHE BUSINESS OF MARRIAGE\n\n    _You are dealing with something far more precious than any plant--the\n    priceless soul of a child.--Burbank._\n\n\nThe civic recognition of marriage does not take direct cognizance of the\nIdeal, or love-phase, of this unilateral contract, although it assumes\nthat love is the motive of the union. The state takes it for granted that\nthe purpose of this union is to perpetuate the race, give to the state\ncitizens. The permanence of the marriage is supposed to be desirable,\nbecause the physical support and welfare of wife and children rests with\nthe husband, unless he become insane, sick or criminal.\n\nThen Charity gives the pauperizing support of a tyrant. Desirable citizens\nare seldom evolved in \"Institutions.\"\n\nOccasionally, a mother is endowed with power to maintain her family alone;\nbut the instances are few.\n\nIn marriage the state obtains the promise of the contracting parties to\nlove, honor and cherish; to love, honor and obey, through sickness,\nthrough health, until death.\n\nHowever, the state is able to enforce but one portion of the promise, \"to\ncherish,\" which, being interpreted, means that the husband must contribute\na certain portion of his income to the woman, provided she has not broken\nthe letter of the law in one respect, and has not deserted nor flagrantly\nquarreled with her husband. If she has been acquiescent, she is still to\nbe \"cherished.\" This alimony, as such tax is sometimes termed, is required\nwhether the wife is mother or not, or is engaged in educating citizens or\nnot. It may be exacted--the letter of the law--although the intent of the\nmarriage may not have been fulfilled.\n\nTacitly, the state recognizes the desirability of love in marriage,\nalthough it has no jurisdiction over it, and can not enforce the keeping\nof this promise by husband or wife.\n\nLoving or not loving is not within the control of mortals.\n\nIt is admitted now by men and women that the laws of all countries of the\nworld were made by men for men. They do not discriminate against women so\nseriously and so unjustly as did Moses, but the civil laws give wife and\nmother no chance for independence.\n\nUntil recently, the promise to obey has been enforced; also, the wife's\npromise to be true to one man and none other. So we have had the prayer\nwhich is international: \"Make our women virtuous and our men brave,\" the\nmeaning of brave being, able to fight man and beast.\n\n\"Virtue\" has been interpreted as being a negation, an indifference to all\nbut husband.\n\nNothing that can transpire in wedlock is considered not virtuous.\n\n\"Oh, Liberty! Liberty! What crimes are committed in thy name!\"\n\nWoman has found submission easier than to assert and obtain the human\nright of independence in the control of her own mind and body.\n\n\"It is a hard world for girls,\" said Martin Luther, five hundred years\nago.\n\nIt is still a hard world for girls and women.\n\nNature is said to love the female more than the male, for she serves Her\nmore devotedly, and Nature has taken care that she shall.\n\n\n\n\nPRIMITIVE BONDAGE\n\n    _Woman pays the first cost on human life.--Schreiner._\n\n\nWhen a woman feels the first grip of her child's dependence upon her, she\nhas forever lost her freedom. If the child dies, a grave shackles her soul\nthrough life. If the child lives, the welfare of that child keeps\nperpetually between her and the sun.\n\nBefore her babe is born, Nature has absorbed the mother's strength and\ncharm that Her one purpose may be accomplished. Man finds it easy to\nneglect woman then. In fact, his honor, pride, fear and loyalty to a\nprinciple, one or all, are his safeguard and the mentor that holds him to\nduty when his wife is absorbed by motherhood.\n\nNature demands all from the mother. She takes possession and uses her so\nthat the woman has no will for the time. She is Nature's, body and soul,\n\"Used by an unseen Power for an unknown end.\"\n\nDoes a woman enter into this prison-house voluntarily?\n\nNever.\n\nNature blindfolds and lures her into it.\n\nBefore civilization developed a hectic super-sentiment in woman, she lived\nas do the animals. Naturally, motherhood was an incident in her life. Her\nchildren early became independent, and she had a comfortable, healthy\nindifference to their welfare after they were able to get a living.\n\nAll the time she was a mother she was economically free. She had had the\nstrength to take care of herself from childhood, and when her child came,\nshe was able to care for both.\n\nThe father of her baby made no demands upon her for service as cook,\nhousekeeper, laundress, valet, lover or friend. He took care of himself\nwholly, and so did she. All they wanted was food and shelter.\n\nBut since man's needs are multiple, the demands upon male and female are\ngreat.\n\n\n\n\nNATURE'S METHOD\n\n    _The more intimately we attach ourselves to Nature, the more she glows\n    with beauty and returns us our affection.--Froebel._\n\n\nNature does not seem to have expected man to get more than a primitive\nliving. She has not changed Her methods at all.\n\nMan has changed. He makes and directs machinery that earns for one man\nwhat fifty men can earn; so that one man is fifty times richer than a\nprimitive man.\n\nNature uses no machinery.\n\nIt takes more than twenty years of the mother's time to develop one\ncitizen. There are no short cuts nor quick methods in woman's special\nwork.\n\nThe mother of a large family has given twenty-five of the best years of\nher life to the work which none but her can do.\n\nShe has given to the state citizens.\n\nThis has cost her all her strength, all her time and the ambitions of a\nquarter of a century.\n\nAs our present civilization is, she has given her economic independence,\nher individual ambitions.\n\nShe pays dearly for the privilege of being mother to citizens. She is\ndependent upon one man for the maintenance of both herself and her\nchildren.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe man, too, is blindfolded by Nature and is led where he knows not.\n\nThe desire to give all of his earnings to the development of citizens may\nnever have been his. He may not know nor care about the welfare and\nperpetuation of the state.\n\nBut Nature has not bound him hand and foot to Her plans. When, or if, his\naffection ceases for this woman who is dependent upon him for food,\nshelter and clothing, he may use his own judgment about the woman's and\nthe children's needs. So long as they escape the attention of the Humane\nSocieties, the family is at his mercy. The woman and her work are\ndependent upon him just the same.\n\nUnwilling money buys poor food, clothing and teaching. It has evolved\nbargain-days and cheap goods.\n\n\n\n\nECONOMIC FREEDOM\n\n    _She considereth a field and buyeth it. With the fruit of her hands\n    she planteth a vineyard.--Solomon._\n\n\nThe wisdom of stateswomen and of statesmen should evolve a sure\nfoundation-fund, whereby mothers shall have a solid financial basis for\ndoing woman's work.\n\nCivilization has placed a ban upon motherhood. There is ever the stigma\nupon it which Moses placed there. It is hard, cruelly hard, to be a mother\nin the United States, this \"land of the free.\"\n\nWe anathematize and practically kill a mother who has not conformed to our\nlaws, irrespective of what Nature has said about it. We take her child\nfrom her, hide it, falsify about it, and then disown the mother if she\ndemands the inherent rights of a mother.\n\nWe talk about the glory of motherhood, but we do not act to the glory of\nmotherhood.\n\nThe business of marriage is to develop citizens. The financial part of\nthis partnership should receive the most careful attention of all people\nwho are to marry. They should realize that they are assuming\nresponsibilities great and unknown to them. They are leaving a simple life\nto enter into one vastly more complex.\n\nWoman is fast evolving a brain. And women are thinking. Brain, not\nsentiment, will be the directing power under which women live. Wisdom and\njudgment will guide them. They will not give the best in their lives to\nthe work of rearing children, without reasonable, business assurance of\nfunds with which to do their work.\n\n\n\n\nCITIZENS\n\n    _It is true that I am an alien.\n    But my son--my son is Themistocles.--Euterpe._\n\n\nA citizen is one who has evolved from a condition where he was content to\nlive alone, care for himself alone, into a state where he desires to live\nwith others, and is interested in the welfare of others.\n\nWomen were the first human beings to qualify as citizens.\n\nTheir care for their children early extended their interest beyond their\nown welfare. From protecting and providing for her immediate family, the\nmother's interests naturally extended first to all children and then to\nall human beings who were in need of care.\n\nWomen are potential mothers, and so are inherent citizens.\n\nWomen are citizens by natural tendency.\n\nMen are citizens by education.\n\nThe desire to co-operate is the natural desire of an evolving, sane\npeople. Supremely selfish people, who care not at all for others, are\neither barbaric or insane.\n\nA city was the result of the citizen instinct.\n\nThe mother's brain was evolved through her desire to benefit her children.\nShe then saw that what was good for her own was good for her neighbor's\nfamily, and for all families. All manufactories, all industries, reforms\nand civic improvements have originated in woman's brain, evolved because\nof the mother-instinct of love.\n\nFrom the city, human interest extended into the state, from the state into\nthe nation. From the limitation of belonging to a nation, we shall\nsometime become citizens of the world.\n\nA stateswoman or statesman is one who is intelligently active in work\nthat materially benefits the citizens of a state or nation.\n\nThe rights of citizenship naturally belong to all people who wish to and\ncan contribute to the welfare of their fellow-man.\n\nFormerly statesmen were businessmen of experience and ability who had\nprescience. They could see what was beneficial to their own interests, and\nfrom this their interest expanded, and they saw what was good for the\nwell-being of many men. They were men, like Benjamin Franklin, who were\nable to project themselves into the lives of others. They were the first\nmonists.\n\nStatesmen had had experience--they had lived. They knew values, what\nserved and what was not desirable. They also knew that no one reaches any\ngoal alone. No man can progress much faster than the rest of his kind.\n\nSo the statesman was a representative man, but a pioneer in progress. His\navocation was to work for his kind. His vocation was his own business,\nwhich he minded very carefully.\n\nAppreciative people saw the benefit to others, and gave the statesman the\nrecognition of honors. This was all he desired or needed. He was not a\npauper, he was not submerged in financial difficulties. The oppressed can\nnot see beyond their own needs--are incapable of generous thoughts or wise\njudgment.\n\nStatesmen were and are strong, successful men. People want for a savior\none who can first save himself.\n\nThere came a time when statesmen, like lawyers, received pay for services\nrendered.\n\nAnd lo, politicians and grafters, plums and taxes!\n\nToday, statesmen are few and are classed as politicians.\n\nAll political offices have a little twig of laurel tied to the door, but\nthe pay-envelope inside is generally what lures men to enter and abide.\n\"The laborer is worthy of his hire,\" they affirm. And he is, provided he\nlabors for the thing for which he was hired.\n\n\"The people\" are willing to pay politicians for piecework, provided the\nquality is right.\n\nWhen we say, \"Children are the greatest asset of the nation,\" everybody\nnods assent to the sentiment, and many applaud.\n\n\"What we do with the children decides what they will do with the nation,\"\nwe add, and there is never a dissenting look or voice.\n\nWe affirm that the greatest work the state can do is to develop citizens.\nPerpetuity of the state is synonymous with perpetuity of the race. This is\nsupposed to be Nature's dearest desire--to perpetuate the race.\n\nSo it should be the dearest desire of statesmen, politicians, to\nperpetuate the state, and the state is the aggregation of its citizens.\n\nWe are in a dense fog with regard to the value of citizens.\n\nWe say that man is all. This is lip-service.\n\nPoliticians are interested in acquiring and holding power, in war\nappliances and armies. They give some assistance in the development and\ncare of vegetables, fruits, trees, and the flora in general. They are also\ninterested in the development of all domesticated animals, the\npreservation of the birds, forests and natural parks, the protection of\nthe fish. They have game-laws which are wise and whose results are\nbeneficial.\n\nAnd the state hires and pays people to take care of all these interests.\nIt also hires and pays people who see that the laws are respected which\nhave been made for the protection and perpetuity of flora and fauna.\n\nBut as yet, lawmakers, politicians, reformers, and influential citizens\nhave not made provision for the development of citizens, except as the\ninstitution of the school system assists in this work.\n\n\n\n\nENFORCED DEPENDENCE\n\n    _Thou givest man bread. Let my aim be to give man himself.--Froebel._\n\n\nThere was a time when women, like statesmen, were economically free. They\nspun and wove, manufactured, planted, harvested, cooked. Land was cheap\nand needs were few. The women gave a part of their time to the state in\nrearing citizens, but they did not give all. They were self-supporting, in\ngreat measure; therefore, self-respecting and capable.\n\nBut women lost their economic independence when industries were taken from\nthe home.\n\nFarming, dairying, spinning, weaving, tailoring, laundering, baking,\ndressmaking, millinery, building, carpentering, are all done on a big\nscale, outside of the home, where the women, because they were mothers,\ncould not follow their industries.\n\nWomen are left with the dependent occupations of working for the state and\nworking for their husbands, for neither of which can they collect money.\n\nHusbands' policy is: Where the treasury is, there will the wives' hearts\nbe also.\n\nThe welfare of the women who give their time--twenty-four hours of the\nday, and for twenty-five or thirty years of their lives, their prime--for\nthe development of citizens has been left to chance.\n\nThe state has made no provision whereby potential citizens shall be\nassured of the proper care.\n\nThe mother's time has been considered of no value, that is, her service is\nnot paid for in money.\n\nIf, in her youth, a woman married a man who was able to make money, she\nmight be assured of food, clothing and shelter for her children unless\nor until Fortune frowned and the property was lost.\n\nAny woman, whose husband dies, gives her time to the care of her children,\nno matter how poorly equipped she may be to earn a living for them in the\nworld. She tries to do her own work, and besides that, what her husband\ndid--maintain the family.\n\nThe state has made no provision for the care of potential citizens whose\nfather has died, thereby cutting off the income which was once theirs.\n\nWe say that the purpose of the home is to develop children, that the home\nis established for children.\n\nThe purpose of the school is to supplement the teaching of the home, and\nthis is to be re-enforced by the influence of the church. The office of\nthe state is to wisely protect the home and safeguard the interests of its\ncitizens. The government is the mentor of the citizens.\n\nThe theory is admitted that the business world is organized and operated\nfor the one purpose of maintaining the home and its adjuncts--school,\nchurch and government. But the fact is, that, except for the taxes which\ngreat business institutions pay, there are very few children taken care of\ndirectly by big businesses.\n\nThe very rich have one, possibly two, rarely three children, and these,\ninstead of being developed for working citizens, often evolve into\nornaments, and sometimes become a nuisance and an expense to the state.\n\nThe mothers who give their time to the care of large families have no\nregular incomes. Their husbands are poor, and contribute to the\ndevelopment of citizens what they can, or will.\n\nThe people who are doing the most important work for the state, for whom\nall business is operated (as tradition sayeth), have no capital, and are\ncarrying on their more or less great work by donations, given at the\ndiscretion of the donor. They can not receive more than their husband's\nincome, and never have that amount.\n\nNo matter how efficient these women may be as mothers, there is no\nrecognition of this excellence, except by a few friends of the family.\n\nNothing has been done to make a large family popular. The trend of the\nwhole course of civilization has been and is to do anything but evolve\ncitizens.\n\nOf course, women are supposed to be too spiritually minded to want\ncompensation in money for work done for love.\n\nHowever, is any great work done that is not done for love of the work? No\none writes, paints, plays, builds, prints, binds books, models in leather\nor clay, raises cattle, fruits, grains, but him who loves his work. There\nis little response in any part of life, other than to love.\n\nAll workers accept the world's custom of using money as a medium of\nexchange for their time and energy--all except mothers and wives. So much\nservice is given for so much money, and so much money for so much service.\n\nWomen are human beings, no more and no less than are men. They are just as\nhuman as men. They love freedom, independence and justice.\n\nThere is no natural reason why they should not have public recognition for\nwork and development.\n\nThe custom of the world is to use money as a medium of exchange or as a\nrepresentation of wealth. Wealth is an accumulation of energy held in\nreserve. People should be very careful to use this reserve advantageously.\nThey are very jealous of expending time and energy unless it counts in\nwealth.\n\nAll people but mothers do this. This is why motherhood has become\nunpopular and a burden. The mother is in economics a pauper, a dependent,\nat the mercy or bounty of one man.\n\nThe first use of a home was to care for children, to protect them. Women\nbuilt the first houses and for this one purpose.\n\nModern houses are made for adults more than for children. They are places\nof luxury. The thought of a nursery is seldom in the minds of the makers\nof houses. The architect does not have for his recurring theme, \"How will\nthis add to the development of citizens?\"\n\nWomen are human beings. They are very much like men. They need\nrecognition.\n\nSelf-preservation is the first law. And women, like men, are selfish. They\noften stifle the instincts of Nature in one direction that they may live\nin the world as it is today.\n\nRapid travel, the opportunity to see and know what there is to be seen and\nknown, lures women just the same as it does men. Independence is just as\ndear to women as it is to men.\n\n\n\n\nHOMOGENEITY\n\n    _What we request of life is that the tools should be given to his hand\n    or hers who can handle them.--Schreiner._\n\n\nWoman is a human being before she is a mother and all the time she is a\nmother. And after her active work of motherhood is finished, she will\nstill be a human being, subject to all the ambitions, hopes, desires and\ninterests that humanity has.\n\nDaughters have inherited tendencies from their fathers as well as from\ntheir mothers, and all daughters have done this from prehistoric times to\nthe present. Sons have belonged to mothers as well as to fathers. The race\nis one.\n\nWomen can not be limited in the expression of this great miracle of life\nwhich stirs her soul, as it stirs man's.\n\nWoman and man are awakening, brain and heart.\n\nWoman must have freedom to work, to think, to find happiness, to express\nherself. She must be accepted as a part of every part of this becoming\nDemocracy. She must be accepted in the world as it is today. She belongs,\nnot to the past, but to this present.\n\nThere is work that she alone can do, and to do this she must be\neconomically free.\n\nThe freedom of woman is the most important of all subjects that statesmen\nand citizens can consider.\n\nPay mothers for the work they do for the state. Give them the opportunity\nfor economic freedom, that they may be self-respecting, and develop on\nequal terms with men.\n\nThe great need of the world is for better women and men--an evolving race.\n\nThere is just one way: we must have evolving mothers.\n\nServile mothers have slave sons and stupid daughters, and sometimes\ncriminal children.\n\nWomen must be free to choose their occupations.\n\nIf they marry, they must recognize the business in marriage and enter into\nthe business partnership with true intelligence.\n\nWith no less intelligence must men understand that the contract in\nmarriage can not be unilateral and bring benefit or happiness to either\nperson, nor can the purpose of marriage be best accomplished.\n\nDemocracy in marriage is the Great Imperative. We would have a democratic\nform of government? Democracy must begin at the foundation of all\ngovernment--the home.\n\n\n\n\nROMANCE\n\n    _We are ministered unto by the moonbeams and the starlight as well as\n    by the god of day._\n\n\nRomance is the color and the perfume of life. It is that which gives charm\nto living. Romance lures us to live. It called us into being, has bound us\nto life, and does not desert us at its close.\n\nAlthough Romance is the most intangible thing in the world, the moonshine\nof living, it is the most real.\n\nIt is the will-o'-the-wisp that has led to all invasions, all discoveries,\nall victories, all heroism, all inventions, all arts, all business, all\nhuman endeavor. Without it there would be no marriage. The human race\nwould cease to be.\n\nOne of the myths in marriage is to assume that the Romance is all, or\nwill continue under all conditions.\n\nBusiness belongs to the realm of fact and deals with tangible substances.\nIt has to do with the practical part of life. It gives us food, clothing,\nshelter. It furnishes us great problems, exercise for body and mind. It is\na great factor in the evolution of man.\n\nOne of the myths in marriage is to assume that business and business\nstruggles do not enter into the lives of lovers. The fact is that business\noccupies much of the time of every honest man and honest woman. It is\nnecessary to life. Without work, romance would cease, the human race would\ndie.\n\nThe ideal and the real are interdependent in all phases of human life.\n\nIn marriage there is a myth that the twain are one flesh. But the two are\ntwo, just as surely as one and one make two, unless neither is worth\ncounting.\n\nIt might not be such folly for a woman to trust her happiness to a man,\nif any man could make any woman happy. But happiness is within the power\nof the individual alone. Nature intended it to be so.\n\nIf a woman were an incompetent, unable to earn or provide for herself, it\nmight be well to leave her finances wholly in the hands of her husband.\n\nBut women who have the right to give children to society are capable of\ntaking care of themselves and financing their personal interests.\n\nMothers should be thus capable.\n\nIn marriage we must recognize the individuality in the partnership, just\nas we must the romance and the facts.\n\nA helpless, dependent, undeveloped, sentimental woman is not an inspirer\nof ideals. The man absorbed and involved in business is not an awakener or\nreminder of the Perfect.\n\nA little time is necessary for the appreciation of the beautiful, the\ncharming, the wonderful in life.\n\nLeisure to think together and work together on things of mutual interest,\nis necessary to marriage, or there can be little love.\n\nWhen lovers are independently dependent upon each other, it is a wonderful\nprivilege to meet.\n\nWhen lovers are economically free, as they were before marriage, there is\nno asking of favors nor demanding rights.\n\nWhen lovers are grateful for the privilege of being together, and meet\nonly when it is a joy to do so, love will abide.\n\nAnd Romance, that lured them to life, and lighted their path to marriage,\nwill ever illumine the way, even unto death.\n\nIf a woman's desire is to seek ease and luxury, and find oblivion, let her\nnot marry, for that is not the easiest way thither. A woman has neither\nnatural nor moral right to involve others in her selfishness.\n\nIf a man wants adoration, comfort, indulgence, cheap service and ease,\nlet him not marry. He probably can get them all with more certainty and\nwith less expense without marrying. A man has neither natural nor moral\nright to marry for these.\n\nMen and women have not evolved far. \"It doth not yet appear what we shall\nbe.\"\n\nHigher ideals will lure humanity on and on to a higher state of\nintelligence, and to better living, to a more refined and nobler justice\nthan we have yet imagined.\n\nMen and women will not long be looking for ease, nor want to have what\nthey do not earn.\n\nWhen love calls, they will respond with intelligence, knowing that this is\nNature's voice, and therefore divine. They will rejoice in the most\nstrenuous exercise of living.\n\nThen with deep joy we can say at the close:\n\n\"To live is glorious. I have lived!\"\n\n\n\n\n  THE MYTH IN MARRIAGE\n  WRITTEN BY ALICE HUBBARD\n  TITLE-PAGE, INITIALS AND\n  ORNAMENTS ESPECIALLY\n  DESIGNED FOR THIS BOOK\n  BY RAYMOND NOTT\n  TYPOGRAPHY BY\n  A. V. INGHAM\n\n  [Illustration]\n\n  PRINTED BY THE ROYCROFTERS\n  AT THE ROYCROFT SHOPS\n  EAST AURORA, NEW YORK\n  MAY, MCMXII","title":"The Myth in Marriage","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":7683}