Marriage and Morals

Rating:
Summary: A Curious Book
Review: At first blush it looked like Russell wrote this book after having an extra-marital affair!

It's perhaps one of the greatest ironies with homosapiens that while they themselves will not always avoid adultry, they will never tolerate it when it's commited by their partner.

Even then the proposition that infidelity in marriage, since it cant be elliminated, should be tolerated is not a feasible solution not only from purely moral view point but also when human character is viewed in the light of evolutionary biology - men will not tolerate it because they will end up investing in others' offspring, and women because they will loose social and material resources to raise theirs.

Our capacity to form moral judgement (as on pre- , post-marital sex) developed much later than when we developed the strategies for reproductive success. It remains this constant struggle between our morality and our nature that will continue to trouble all those who concern themselves to give, or have, an explicit answer.

Perhaps the answer is in that immortal line of Forester (_African Queen_): "Nature, Mr. Allnut, is what we were put on this earth to rise above."

That aside, despite being written eighty years ago it's still a good book especially for readers from oriental part of this world.

Read it if you have not read on this topic.

Rating:
Summary: Marriage & Morals
Review: I found this book very well-written and full of information about the history of marriage, sexual ethics, and morals. Bertrand, in his usual style, examines the social problems of his time and why they exist. This book was written in 1929, but is still logical and modern in thinking. Bertrand wittily and cynically speaks out against the restrictive dogmas of sex and love: ?It would seem that it is only with the introduction of the patriarchal system that men came to desire virginity in their brides. Where the matrilineal system exists young women sow their wild oats as freely as young men, but this could not be tolerated when it became of great importance to persuade women that all intercourse outside of marriage is wicked.? I strongly recommend this book for anyone doing a research paper on love, marriage, or sexual ethics. If you?re looking for something to make you think, it?s also a great book. I give it four out of five stars.

Rating:
Summary: An Objective Criticism of Conventional Sexual Morality
Review: In this, one of his most brilliant works, Lord Russell educates the reader about the evils of traditional sexual morals.

He explains how conventional views on sex have had a harmful and detrimental effect on the individual, and on society at large.

According to Russell, the taboos on pre-marital and extra-marital sex, which were promoted by several different religious institutions, including the Church, as well as by a countless number of moralizing zealots, are totally unjustified. Moreover, as he points out, they do not take into account the practical realities of life.

It is indeed tragic that Russell (who died in 1970) did not live to see the full fledged effects of the Sexual Liberation movement, which began in the 1960s.

The taboo on pre-marital sex has been dispensed with in most Western countries, though extra-marital affairs are not yet fully acceptable, and are branded as acts of 'infidelity'.

A superb read for anyone with more than a passing interest in matters of sexuality.

Rating:
Summary: Provocative
Review: It's hard not to cheer when you realize Russell wrote so forward-thinking a piece in the late '20s. Its ideas are still being debated today, especially in light of the recent trend toward opting out of conventional, legally bound marriages in Western countries. As a married man myself, I found Russell's condemnation of conventional sexual morality quite convincing. He doesn't advocate immature hedonism, nor does he pardon all infidelity. He actually favors marriage when children are involved. He simply rocks the foundation of marriage on Christian asceticism ('fornication is sin') and the need for certain paternity. He gives an anthropological & historical perspective on the issue that is broader than anything you're likely to hear in current debates.

My only complaint with this otherwise provocative & well-reasoned work is that some of his commentary borders on anti-Catholic. I'm not Catholic myself, but I couldn't help but wonder whether some of his persistent jabs at the Church weren't motivated by a prejudice common at that time. That isn't to say he doesn't critique Protestant morality as well, but he seems to take inordinate glee in poking the Vatican.

Rating:
Summary: An old book, but surprisingly still interesting
Review: This book was originally published in 1929 so in many ways it is inevitably dated. But in many ways it is still fresh, and despite all the talk about "new morality", the controversies in his day still rage today. (This is the book that got Lord Russell in so much trouble at City College of New York) What is unique about this book that it addresses some of the dilemmas of domestic life. Dilemmas that are real yet apparently other writers don't have the courage to face.

This book deserves to be in the library of every serious thinker.