Chapter 23 Chapter Sixteen Married People (Part 1)-1

Chapter 16 Married People (Part 1) Marriage is the destiny given to women by social tradition.It is still the case now. Most of the women are about to get married, some are already married, some plan to get married, and some are distressed because they are not married.The celibate woman is interpreted and defined in relation to marriage, whether she is frustrated, rebellious, or indifferent to the institution of marriage.Therefore, we must conduct this research through marital analysis. The economic evolution of women's situation is constantly shaking the institution of marriage: it is becoming a voluntary, free union of two separate persons.The obligations of the Contracting Parties are both personal and mutual.Tonghao is a breach of contract for both parties; divorce can be reached by both parties under the same conditions.Woman is no longer confined to the reproductive function, which has largely lost its natural servile character, and has come to be seen as a voluntary function; moreover, it is no longer in conflict with productive labor, since in many cases the mother's maternity leave wages are borne by the state or by the employer.In the Soviet Union, marriage was for a while based on a personal contract of absolute freedom for the couple, but it seems that it is now a state-imposed obligation on both of them.Which of these trends will prevail in tomorrow's world depends on the overall structure of society, but the male guardianship of women will disappear anyway.Still, from a feminist point of view, we live in a time of transition.Only a part of the female population participates in productive activities, and even they are members of a society that retains ancient forms and stale values.Modern marriage can only be known in terms of the past because it tends in some ways to be immortal.

Marriage has always been two completely different things for men and women.The sexes are necessary to each other, but this necessity never creates a reciprocal status between them.As we have seen, women have never formed a caste, exchanged, entered into contracts with the caste of men equally.A man is an independent and complete person in society.He is seen above all as a producer, whose existence is justified by the work he does for the group.We have seen that fettering a woman's reproductive and domestic roles is the reason why she is not guaranteed equal dignity.Of course men need her; in some groups, single men who cannot manage their own lives become homeless; in agricultural societies, farmers need to work with women; Most men are useful; man wishes to have a regular sex life and to have offspring, and the nation needs him to contribute to its immortality.But the man does not appeal directly to the woman herself, it is the men's group that makes each member realize himself as husband and father.The woman is united as a slave or servant in a family dominated by her father and brothers, and she is always married to other men at the discretion of some men.In primitive societies, patrilineal tribes, clans, treat woman almost as a thing: she is included among the things that the two groups agree to exchange.The situation did not improve much when marriage took the form of a contract in its evolution.If a woman had a dowry or an inheritance, she seemed to have citizenship, and a human being, but the dowry and inheritance kept her in servitude to her family.For a long time, the marriage contract was made between the father-in-law and the son-in-law, not between the wife and the husband, and only widows enjoyed economic independence.The maiden's free choice is always severely restricted, and celibacy (not to mention the few cases in which it has a sacred character) reduces her to the status of a parasite and a pariah.Marriage was the only means of support for her, and the only reason to justify her existence.There are two reasons why she must marry.

The first reason is that she has to provide the society with children.There was no such thing as a direct state custody of a woman, as in Sparta and to some extent under the Nazis, requiring her only to be a mother.However, even in primitive societies where the father's reproductive function is unknown, women are required to have a husband, so the second reason for marriage is that women are also responsible for satisfying the man's sexual requirements and taking care of the housework for him.These duties that society imposes on woman are seen as a service she renders to her spouse:

In return, he should give her a gift, marry her, or support her.Through his agency, society repays the debt of the woman it has handed over to him.The rights which the wife acquires by fulfilling her duties are expressed in the duties which the man must undertake. He cannot break the marriage contract at will, and only after the decision of the social authorities can he abandon his wife or divorce her.Even then, the husband sometimes paid her a compensation: a practice that was popular even in Egypt under the pharaoh Bocchoris and is known in America today as alimony.Polygamy has been openly tolerated to varying degrees:

A man could sleep with slaves, concubines, mistresses, and prostitutes, but he had to respect certain privileges of legal wives.If she was abused or humiliated, she had the right (which was more or less explicitly guaranteed) to return to her mother's family and initiate separation or divorce on her own. Therefore, marriage is both a burden and a benefit to both parties.But there is no symmetry in the situation of men and women.For girls, marriage is the only means of social integration, and if no one wants to marry them, they are simply useless from a social point of view.That's why mothers were always keen to arrange their marriages.In the middle-class families of the last century, engagements to their marriages were hardly ever discussed with them.Through pre-arranged "visits", they are presented to potential suitors.Zola wrote about this custom in Les Plages:

"It's blown, it's all blown!" said Mrs. Josselin, slumped in her chair.Mr. Josselin said only "Ah!" "But," continued Mrs. Yosselin, screaming, "you don't seem to understand. Let me tell you, the marriage has failed again, and this is the seventh time." "Listen," she continued, starting to attack her daughter. "How did you mess up this marriage?" Bertha understood that it was her time to speak. "I don't know, Mom," she murmured under her breath. "A vice-governor," went on her mother, "not yet thirty, with a bright future! A man who can give you his salary every month;

Be steady; this is the most important thing... Have you done stupid things like the last few times? " "No, mother, certainly not." "While you were dancing with him, you slipped into the little parlor." Bertha said, a little bewildered, "Yeah, Mom - we were just alone together when he tried to touch me and he put his arms around me, tight like this. I was terrified at the time, Pushed him and he crashed into the furniture." Mother interrupted her and said angrily, "Shove him on the furniture?! You bitch, how dare you push him!" "But, mother, he put my arms around me."

"Did he? He put his arms around you, you figured it out! We send these fools to boarding school! Say, what did they teach you!" Ah, is it kissing behind the door?Would you honestly tell your parents about this?You're pushing people over the furniture, and you're ruining all chances of getting married! " She put on an air of lecturing, and went on: "This is the last time, and I don't care anymore, you are stupid, my baby. Since you are unlucky, you should know that you have to catch the man in other ways. That is to say, be kind in your attitude, tender in your eyes, Forget about your side, allow little intimacy, as if not paying attention. In a word, you're going to get the husband... What bothers me is that she doesn't do it too badly when she wants to. Alas! Don't Cried and looked at me like I was the man who proposed to you. Look, throw your fan down like this, when he picks it up, he will touch your fingers... Bend a little, don't be too straight Well, men don't like planks, don't let them overdo it like a fool. There's no hope for a man who overdoes it, my darling."

The whole evening, the girl listened obediently to these angry words, but her heart was heavy, pressed tightly by fear and shame... In this case the girl seems to be absolutely passive; she is married, married off by her parents, while the boys marry, take wives.What they are looking for in marriage is the extension and validation of their existence, not the mere right to exist.This is their voluntary responsibility.So they can weigh pros and cons like Greek and medieval satirists.For them, marriage is a way of life, not a predestined destiny.They have every right to choose to live a celibate life, and some marry late or not at all.

After marriage, a woman has her own rights in the world, and the law guarantees that she will not be violated by a man's willful behavior, but she has become his vassal.In this joint enterprise, he is the head of the economy, so he is the one who represents the enterprise from the point of view of society.She takes his surname; she belongs to his religion, his class, his circle; she joins his family, becomes his "half."No matter where his job is transferred or where he decides to live, she must follow suit.Somehow she must decisively break with her past and cling to her husband's world.She must dedicate to him her person, her virginity, and the absolute devotion required.So, she lost some of the legal rights that belonged to an unmarried woman.Roman law placed wives under the authority of the husband as locofilioe [children], equivalent to daughters. In the early 19th century, the conservative writer Bonnard declared that a wife is to her husband what a child is to a mother. French law before 1942 required wives to obey their husbands.Now, law and custom still accord great authority to the husband, as the marital situation itself implies.

Since the husband is a productive laborer, he is a person who goes beyond the interests of the family and faces the interests of the society. While building a collective future, he creates his own future through cooperation, so he is the embodiment of transcendence.And woman is destined to perpetuate the species and to take care of the family - that is to say, inherently.In fact, every human existence includes both transcendence and immanence; in order to develop forward, every existence must continue, because it can only move towards the future when it is united with the past, and it can only move forward if it communicates with other existences. Affirm yourself.These two factors, continuation and development, are implicit in any activity of life, and for a man marriage makes the happy synthesis of the two more likely.He experienced change and progress throughout his professional and political career, feeling himself expanded in time and in the world.When he tires of this wandering, he returns home, to a fixed place, an anchorage in the world.He recuperates at home in the evenings while his wife runs the house and cares for the children, keeping the things she has saved from the past.But her job is simply to continue and nurture life in a nutshell.She perpetuates the species without change, guarantees the steady rhythm of daily life and the continuity of the family, and keeps the doors locked.However, it is impossible for her to directly affect the future or the world. Only through her husband as an intermediary can she go beyond herself and extend to social groups. Today's marriage still basically retains this traditional form.First, it is far more tyrannical when it is imposed on girls than it is on young men.There are still many social classes where women have no other way out but to marry.Among the peasants, an unmarried woman is a pariah, the servant of her father, brother, or brother-in-law, with whom she can hardly go to town.Marriage made her the slave of the man, but it also made her the master of the house.In some sections of the middle class, girls are still unable to earn a living.She can only live a parasitic life in her father's house, or in some kind of low status in a stranger's house.Even if she is more emancipated, she prefers marriage to career because of the economic advantages of men: she tends to find a husband who is superior to her, or hopes that he will achieve faster and greater success than she does. It is still agreed that making love (as we have seen) is a service to man; he gets his pleasure, so he owes her a certain reward.The woman's body is something he has acquired; for her he is capital, which she has a right to use.She may also sometimes bring a dowry, or, often, do some domestic work: housekeeping and child-rearing.In either case, she was entitled to maintenance, and traditional morality even encouraged her to do so.She was naturally attracted by this easy road, not to mention that the occupations faced by women are often annoying and the wages are meager.In conclusion, marriage is a more profitable occupation than many others. Moreover, social customs do not allow unmarried women to have sexual freedom.In France, adultery by a wife is still considered illegal, although the law does not prohibit a woman from falling in love freely. Even so, if she wants to have a lover, she must first marry.Even now, many well-behaved middle-class young women marry "for freedom."In the United States, many young women have been sexually free, but their actual experience is a bit like the experience of girls described by Malinowski in "Sex Lives of Savages", and they engage in some unscrupulous sex in the "bachelor's house". Too important sexual activity.It should be seen that they will be married later when they are fully regarded as men.In America, a single woman is seen more by society as a dysfunctional person than in France, even though she can make a living for herself.If she is to achieve her full human dignity, to earn her full rights, she must wear a wedding ring.Only a married woman is respectable as a mother; an unmarried mother offends public opinion, and her children are a serious hindrance to her life. For all these reasons, a considerable number of adolescent girls, whether European or American, when asked their future plans, will invariably answer: "I want to get married." Marriage was his main plan.Financial success would bring him a kind of adult status.Such success may imply marriage, especially for peasants; but it may also exclude marriage.Modern life is less stable and more turbulent than it was in the past, making the obligation of marriage especially heavy on young men.On the other hand, the benefits of marriage have also diminished, since his board and lodging problems are easily resolved, and because he is usually sexually satisfied.Marriage undoubtedly provides certain material and sexual conveniences: it frees the individual from solitude, gives him family and children, fixes him firmly in space and time; it definitively realizes his existence.But despite this, on the whole, men ask for less than women get.We can say that the father did not marry his daughter as much as he dumped her.When a girl seeks a husband, she is not prepared to respond to male demands, but to create male demands. Arranged marriages were not a thing of the past; the custom was maintained throughout the property-owning bourgeoisie. Around Napoleon's tomb, at the opera, at seaside balls, at tea parties, the beautiful candidate, with neatly combed hair and new gowns, timidly displayed her graceful figure and elegant speech.Her parents nagged, "I've had enough of you picking and choosing, so make up your mind. It's your sister's turn next time." As an spinster, the chances will dwindle.She was rarely proposed: she was almost as free of choice as a Bedouin girl who was exchanged for a flock of sheep.As Colette puts it: "A girl who is unlucky or in a favorable position ... can only keep silent and hold on to it when the time comes, thank God!" Things were not so blatant in the upper classes, where young men could meet under the watchful eyes of their mothers.The more liberated girls have more opportunities to go out, they can go to school or engage in occupations that can be in contact with men. From 1945 to 1947, Mrs. Ripley conducted a survey on the problem of spouse selection among the Belgian middle class.Her findings: Arranged marriages, which were frequent before 1945, have all but disappeared; some marriages are negotiated by priests or by correspondence.Among the engaged people, 48% got engaged through social contact; 22% got engaged through studying and working together; 30% got married due to personal relationship and personal contacts;According to various responses, money plays a leading role in 30% to 70% of marriages.Among the respondents, 48% said that parents are eager to let their daughters get married; 17% said that parents want to keep their daughters by their side.36% of girls are eager to get married; 38% want to get married; 26% would rather not get married than have a bad marriage.It is generally believed that girls expect marriage to increase their freedom.Most say girls are more active than young men in choosing a mate and taking related initiatives. Although there is no similar survey material in France, the situation of the middle class is similar, and corresponding conclusions will undoubtedly be drawn.There have traditionally been more arranged marriages in France than in any other country, and clubs specializing in such matters are still prevalent.Marriage notices occupy a lot of space in newspapers.In France as in America, mothers, old friends, and women cynically teach young women the art of "catching" their husbands as flypaper catches flies; it is "fishing" or "hunting" that requires great skill: "Don't set your goals too high or too low; be realistic and not romantic; be coquettish but dignified; don't ask too much and not too little." Suspicious.Mrs. Ripley reports what a young Belgian said: "There is nothing more annoying to a man than to feel that he is being pursued, that a woman is trying to hook him." This temptation to them.A girl's choices are usually very limited, and it cannot be completely free unless she is also free not to marry.Her decisions are often characterized by calculation, disgust, and resignation rather than enthusiasm.If a man is clearly desirable in areas such as health and status, she will accept him, love or not. However, although girls want to get married, they are often afraid of getting married.Marriage brings her far more benefits than men, so she is more eager to marry than men.But it also means a greater sacrifice on her part, not least because it implies a more decisive break with the past.We have seen that many adolescent girls are distressed at the thought of leaving their parents' home.This anxiety was heightened by the approach of the wedding.This is a moment that triggers many neuroses.This may also occur in young men who are afraid of imminent new obligations; but it occurs more generally in girls for the reasons already discussed, which are important during this critical period of transition.I may here briefly quote an example from Stekel, in which a girl from a good family was treated by him for severe neurotic symptoms. She suffered from vomiting, took morphine every night, had frequent fits of tantrums, refused to shower and was always in her room.She is engaged, and she says she loves her fiancé very much and has committed herself to him.But then she admitted that she didn't feel any pleasure and felt sick at the thought of his kisses.She adores her mother, yet feels she doesn't get enough love.She couldn't bear the thought of getting married and leaving home, so she fell ill and offended her fiancé.She claims that she intends to give up the idea of ​​marriage altogether and stay at home forever, like a child.Her mother insisted that she marry, but she committed suicide a week before the wedding. In other cases, girls who have been ill for a long time feign despair at not being able to marry the man they "love" actually use their illness to avoid marrying him.As soon as the engagement was broken off, she was completely cured.The fear of marriage was sometimes caused by early traumatic sexual experiences, and more often it was her fear that her virginity would be discovered.But often it is a girl's strong attachment to family and home that makes the thought of committing herself to a stranger unbearable.Some girls decide to get married because it is a must, because it is the only sensible thing to do, because they want to live a normal life as a wife and mother.Many of them still carry deep feelings of distaste that will make their newlyweds difficult and even permanently hinder the attainment of a happy balance. In this way, marriage is not always based on love, as Freud pointed out: "It can be said that the husband is only a substitute for the loved man, not the man himself." Incidentally, it is implicit in the very nature of the institution of marriage, an institution whose purpose is to make the economic and sexual union of men and women serve the interests of society, not to secure their personal happiness.In a patriarchal system, as in Muslims today, marriage is decided by the parents, and the couple may not even meet each other before marriage.From a social point of view, there is no doubt that life events can be based on fantasies about emotional and sexual urges.Montaigne said: Because of this careful arrangement, desires are usually less indulgent; they are more restrained and duller.Love hates it most when people are not bound by their own relationships, but by other relationships.Love plays only a small part in intimacy arranged and maintained under another name, as is the case with marriage.Coitus and property are certainly as important in marriage as hard work and beauty, or more important than them.No matter what men may say, they don't marry for themselves.They are also or more married for their offspring and families. Since it is the man who is "marrying" the woman, he is more likely to choose, especially if there are many proposals.But since sex is a service assigned to a woman from which she benefits, it is only natural to ignore her personal right to choose.Marriage was not intended to give her the liberty of a man; but since without liberty there is no love, no individuality, she can only renounce love for a particular individual in order to secure herself lifelong protection by a male.I have heard a pious mother say to her daughter: "Love is a vulgar emotion that only men have, and serious women do not know what love is." This statement was clarified in a simple form by Hegel. He believed that as These two relations of mother and wife, woman, are primarily universal rather than individual.So he thinks it's not about this [individual] husband for her, but about husbands in general, children in general.These relations of hers rest not on personal sentiments, but on the universal; thus, unlike men, her individual desires lead to her ethical impurity. That is to say, the woman is not concerned with establishing a relationship with the individuality of her chosen mate, but only with the fulfillment of the feminine function according to its universality; she must obtain sexual pleasure in a specific form, not in an individual one.As for her sexual fate, there are two main consequences: first, she does not have any freedom to engage in extramarital sexual activities; sexual intercourse then becomes an institution, and the desire and satisfaction of both sexes are subordinated to the interests of society; The transcendence of universality makes him a laborer and a citizen, so that he can enjoy the pleasures of chance before and outside of marriage.A man can be justified in other ways in any situation; a woman can only be vindicated by being a woman in a world that defines women primarily as women.Second, we have seen that, biologically speaking, the connection between universality and individuality is different in males and females: the former, while fulfilling his species' tasks as husband and progenitor, undoubtedly At least some kind of pleasure is obtained; on the contrary, the reproductive function of women is often separated from the pleasure of sexual impulse.So while marriage confers an ethical status on a woman's sex life, it actually seeks to suppress it. This sexual frustration of women is cautiously acknowledged by men.As we have seen, they rely on an optimistic philosophy of "manifestation" and it is easy for a woman to suffer: it is her destiny.The incantations of the Bible further strengthened their belief in this practical point of view.The painful burden of pregnancy (which is the heavy price a woman pays for fleeting, uncertain pleasure) has even become the butt of many jokes. "5 minutes of pleasure, 9 months of pain", "easy in the past, difficult to come out"-formed a ridiculous contrast.But there is a sadism to this philosophy.Many men like to let women suffer without giving it a thought to change the situation.So it's not surprising that men feel little guilt about denying their mates sexual pleasure.They even find it beneficial not to give their spouse the temptation of desire and the enjoyment of independence. Montaigne also expresses this idea with an interesting cynicism.He considered it tantamount to incest to indulge in sensual pleasures in "this sacred, revered thing for parenthood"; and insisted that he had never seen a marriage more infused with beauty and lust more troublesome or more likely to fail. "Marriage is a sacred union, and any pleasure should be limited, serious, with a sense of dignity." Indeed, if the husband arouses the woman's sensuality, he will make it appear in general form, since he was not chosen as an individual; he will make the wife always ready to find pleasure in another's arms.Montaigne agrees, but he admits quite frankly that masculine considerations put women in a disadvantageous position: "We want them to be healthy, vigorous, plump, chaste, we want them all—that is to say, I hope they are warm and cold." Proudhon is less frank: he thinks it is a "righteous" practice to exclude love from marriage; "all sexual speech is inappropriate, even in engagement between those who are married or married; it damages family ties, love of work and social obligations fulfilled.” In the 19th century, however, the perception of the middle class changed.Some people vigorously defend and maintain the institution of marriage, on the other hand, the development of individualism makes the simple suppression of women's rights impossible.St. Joseph Fourier, George Sand, and all the Romantics, cried out for the right to love.The question arises of combining personal affections with marriage, which hitherto had been nonchalantly excluded.Thus the vague concept of "marriage love" was invented, the miraculous fruit of traditional marriages with a certain profit-making purpose.Balzac expressed the completely illogical views of the conservative middle class.He concedes that in principle marriage and love are two entirely different things, but considers it repulsive to equate a respectable institution with a simple transaction in which women are treated as a thing.Thus he came to many fragmented conclusions in The Physiology of Marriage.He said that marriage is a contract most men enter into to legitimize reproduction, and that love is an absurdity in this contract.He also speaks of the "perfect congruence of the two," the "happiness" of a man's adherence to "honor and prim routine."Moreover, he encouraged obedience to the "mysterious laws of nature which make the flowers of affection bloom," demanded "true love," and asserted that a man's lust for his wife, so cultivated, would never abate. Balzac goes on to explain the science of marriage.But as we shall soon see, Balzac believed that the problem for a husband was not to be loved, but to avoid being cheated.So he should not hesitate to make his wife uneducated, weak and stupid, only in this way can he maintain his honor.If there is any meaning to these vague views, it seems that the purpose of a man's marriage is to seek some kind of benefit, the pleasure he obtains is impersonal, and later he arouses his wife's love according to a certain procedure.But can Balzac honestly believe that when love does not predominate, lovemaking arouses love and not disgust?In fact, he cynically avoids the issue in various discussions.He fails to recognize the fact that there are no neutral emotions, and that without love tension and ennui cannot arouse tender emotions but only resentment, impatience, and hostility. Reconciling marriage and love is tourdeforce [it takes some effort], and it is very difficult to succeed without the help of the gods.This is the conclusion that Kierkegaard came to after many twists and turns.Love is spontaneous, he says, and marriage is a decision; however, erotic tendencies can arise from a decision to marry or to marry.Paradoxically, something so mysterious that it can only be explained by the action of the gods takes place by reflection and decision, all at the same time.That said, falling in love does not equate to marriage, and it's hard to see how love can become an obligation.But this contradiction did not depress Kierkegaard.He admits that "rumination is the angel that destroys spontaneity," but he adds that decision is a new spontaneity based on ethical principles, a way that both "can open the way for erotic tendencies" and make this Tend to avoid all dangerous "religious ideas."A real husband, he said, "is a wonder."As for the wife, reason does not belong to her, she does not "ruminate"; "she passes from the immediacy of love to the immediacy of religion."Expressed plainly, this means that a man in love decides to marry because of a belief in God that will ensure the harmony of affection and duty; at the same time a woman in love will wish to marry.I once knew an old Catholic woman who naively believed that "amazing accidents happen in the sacraments."She claims that when a newlywed says "I do" at the altar, they feel a miraculous surge of love.Kierkegaard fully conceded that there should be a pre-existing "inclination," but he also considered it a miracle that such an inclination persisted throughout life. But in France [the end of the century] the orators and dramatists did not believe so much in the efficacy of the sacraments, and wanted to promote marital happiness in a more purely human way.More daring than Balzac, they believed in the possibility of combining sexual impulse with legitimate love.Marcel Prevot exhorts a young husband to treat his wife like a mistress and paints eloquently the joys of married life.Bernstein is a dramatist who specializes in legitimate love: the husband appears to be a magnanimous and sensible man compared with the amoral, lying, lascivious, furtive, wayward wife; He is a lover with a strong body and a skilled lovemaking.In the fight against adultery fiction, there have been many pro-marriage romance novels.Even Colette succumbs to this moralizing tide, determined in "The Innocent Slut," after describing the misadventures of a young wife being clumsily devirginized, to make her familiar in the arms of her husband. Sexual pleasure. In a novel by Martin Morris, a young wife learns from her lover the art of making love, and in turn lets her husband learn from her. For other reasons, Americans today (who are both respectful of marriage and individualistic) are going the extra mile to integrate sex and marriage in varying degrees.Many books have been published on the subject of married life in an attempt to teach husbands and wives to adjust to each other, and men in particular to learn to maintain a happy harmony with their wives.Psychoanalysts and doctors played the role of "marriage counselors"; they generally believed that women had a right to sexual pleasure and that men should know the proper techniques.But, as we have seen, sexual pleasure is not just a matter of skill.Even if a young man is familiar with the marriage manual, it may not make his new wife love him.She needs to respond to the whole psychological situation.And traditional marriage is far from creating optimal conditions for arousing and developing women's sexual impulses. In the past, in the matriarchal community, girls were not required to be virgins when they married.And, for some mysterious reason, it was even customary for her to be stripped of her virginity before marriage.Remnants of this ancient charter can still be seen in certain rural areas of France.There is no need to remain chaste before marriage.Sometimes those girls who have lost their way, that is, unwed mothers, find husbands even more easily than other girls.On the other hand, in circles that recognize women's liberation, girls do have the same sexual freedom as boys.但是父权的伦理观念专横地要求，未婚妻在交给丈夫时必须是处女。他想明确证实她没有带来外人的种子；他想独享对这即将属于他的肉体的所有权。处女贞操具有道德的、宗教的和神秘的价值，这一价值在今天仍被普遍承认。在法国的一些地方，新郎的朋友们等候在洞房的门后，又唱又笑，直到丈夫得意洋洋地走出来，把有血迹的床单拿给他们看； 或者父母可以在第二天早晨拿给邻居们看。有些新婚之夜的习俗虽不这么粗俗，却很流行。 由于这些习俗强调一定要把人的性生活下流地分为社会的礼仪和动物的功能，它们给色情文学和近乎色情的故事提供了灵感。一种人道主义的道德观念，会要求所有的生活体验都具有人的含义，都被注入自由的精神。在真正讲道德的性关系中，有一种欲望和快感的自由表现，或至少在性交当中进行一种旨在恢复自由的动人斗争。但是，只有在承认对方是一个个别的人（asanindividual）时，这在爱情中或欲望中才可以实现。如果性生活不应当被个人赎救，而应当被上帝或社会释罪，那么两个性伙伴的关系就只能是一种动物关系。完全可以理解，有健全理智的已婚女人讨厌谈及肉体的体验：她们将这些体验贬为好色之举。由于同样的原因，人们在婚宴上会听到淫荡的笑声。将庄严的礼仪加在具有野蛮现实的动物功能之上，这真是荒唐到了令人作呕的地步。婚礼表明了它的普遍的抽象意义：一个男人和一个女人，在众目腹腔之下，根据象征性的仪式结合在一起；但在不为外人所见的婚床上，他们都仅仅是个具体的、单个的个人，大家全都看不到他们的拥抱。柯莱特13岁时作为客人参加了一个农民的婚礼，当一位朋友带她去看洞房时，她大惑不解： 原来这就是新婚夫妇的洞房啊！这挂着帐幔的床，又高又窄，这用羽毛作垫的床，堆放着鹅绒枕头，这床将是散发着汗味、烟味、牲口味、烹调味的一天的终点……年轻夫妇很快就会呆在这里。对此我没有想过。他们将躺在这厚厚的羽毛床上……他们将进行那种我似懂非懂的斗争。关于这种事，我从母亲的直言和农村生活那里知道得太多而又太少了。然后会怎样呢？我被这洞房，这我从未想到过的床给吓坏了。 小女孩幼稚而痛苦地感到，在隆重的婚礼与具有动物神秘性的带帐幔的大床之间，形成了强烈对比。婚礼中的淫秽下流场面，很少出现在女人不具独立个性的文明中，如东方民族、希腊和罗马；动物功能似乎和社会礼仪一样一般化，非个性化。但在当代西方，男人和女人被看做独立的个人，而参加婚礼的人们之所以嗤嗤地傻笑，是因为这一特定的男人和这一特定的女人，即将完全作为个人来体验这一被礼仪和鲜花所掩饰的行为，并使之完成。的确，在隆重的葬礼与凋敝的坟墓之间存在着极为强烈的对比。但死者人士以后不会苏醒；而新娘在发现市长签发的正式证书和教堂的琴声许诺给她的真正体验，既完全属于个人私事又具有庄严隆重的性质时，却感到无比惊讶。 我们并非只有在笑剧和轻松喜剧中才能看到年轻女人在新婚之夜，含着眼泪逃回家找母亲时的情景。在精神病学的书籍中，这类病例俯拾即是，我自己就听说过许多这种事：有关的女孩子们是在非常谨慎的情况下被培养大的，由于没有受过性教育，突如其来的性行为使她们难以应付。女孩子们有时认为，接吻就是性交的全部表现，斯特克尔谈到一个新娘，她由于丈夫在蜜月旅行时的完全正常的行为，而认为他得了精神病。有的女孩子甚至可能与一个女同性恋者结婚，生活多年而从不怀疑有什么不对头的地方。