What is your point? Can you clarify because I fail to see what this has to do with anything.

Thank you Dun.

We're going back five or six generations there. This is in a time where women were considered chattels. Sure in the mid 1800's it was possible to get a divorce but it was only the wealthy that could. In the early to mid 20th century though getting a divorce was considered socially unacceptable. Sure, people could do it but it was frowned upon by the local community and this pressure alone compelled people to stay together. It was only in the later stage of the 20th century that divorce became more prevalent and socially acceptable.

It's very difficult to compare an ancient culture such as ancient Rome to 19th and early 20th century Europe and this is well before the impact of Christianity on the western world. The ancient Romans and Greeks had a totally different culture, morals and values system. This is an era when extra-marital sex was openly practiced. Even bestiality was not frowned upon in those times!

They were literally no better than animals.

Exactly!

Nope no googling. Methinks you're hearing things.

No, it wasn't so much that it was considered unacceptable, it was due to the legal inability for many to prove the legal requirement of grounds for divorce, which was incredibly costly and difficult. No proven grounds=no divorce.
The rate of divorce for example during the Great Depression of the 1930's, was sitting at 489 per 100,000 for men and 572 per 100,000 for women. Hardly 'socially unacceptable'. Still happening, still there. Just not talked about.


The rate climbed after the 1970's due to the introduction of the 'no fault' divorce which dismissed the requirement for people to provide the 'grounds' for divorce and made the procedure open to anyone who wanted it.

That may well have happened with some people. Didn't happen with my great grandmother though... two illegitimate kids with two different fathers... - got married eventually. Don't think she was feeling any great pressure for marriage when she had her kids. I think people feel compelled to stay together for the sake of what people might think now. Much less, but they still do it.


The Romans? I feel a sketch coming on.

I wasn't going to go down this route but SPOT ON!

I can't argue with this. It is exactly right.

The de facto laws in Australia. If two people are cohabiting then in the eyes of the law they are treated as if they are actually married only without the ceremony.

Actually it's not assumed after 6 months. It can be as little as 24 hours.

Well as marriage is a relationship under law the only thing that matters is what the law says it is.

http://britishexpats.com/forum/showp...&postcount=151



Oh please. You can prove to have 'two (2) people living together on a genuine domestic basis in a relationship based on intimacy, trust and personal commitment to each other', in 24 hours?

Between you and burbage I'm not sure who talks the bigger load of crap!

That's a non statement Dean, isn't it, really? Because if I marry, then I am fully aware of what the law says it is, aren't I? And if people marry not understanding that, then they're stupid.

Anyway, let's get back to the porn.

That was far more interesting.

And there's a massive problem. People are entering into marriage with the expectation of getting divorced.

Porn, porn, porn, porn...