Board of Aldermen

Materialism is a rough subject. Being that I have never lived or have extensive experience with other cultures, it is difficult to reach a conclusion that does not seem biased. Our society has developed far different from third world countries (3WC). There are several items that we purchase today as citizens that we feel are necessary. I own a ’94 Jeep. It is not life or death for me though. I consider myself a non-materialistic American; I don’t buy a whole lot, just clothes, food, maybe a few “wants,” but not nearly like some of my friends. If I am non materialistic, then why would I own such a car? Our society demands it. In 3WC, people walk miles to their wells everyday while I sit in the comfort of a home, that doesn’t quite seem fair to me. So what should I do? There are not really many options here, the reason why is that for me to be a successful (the American dream and possible future discussion topic?) person in the workplace and at home, I must cave in to exhibiting a materialism compared to 3WC.

Another point I’d like to make is with the lady that began this all. Is money that crucial in a marriage? Considering I’m not married, I lack experience in some areas of importances, but it was my understanding that couples should disregard all outside effects and base their marriage on love. I think the area she should be blaming the divorce on is the individualistic attitude of society. America teaches individualism; being yourself is so engrained into us that some people (obviously, not everyone is prone to this) can disregard the best course of action for the group. I think that’s why divorce rates are sky high, people have lost the sense of teamwork. Decisions should never be based on what is best for you, but best for the situation at hand.

Concerning your second point - the lady's remark:
Although I'd prefer otherwise, we cannot simply suggest the optative and say people should marry for non-material reasons. We've (I mean America here) somehow got it into our heads (due largely to some very romantic brits) that love is and should be the only foundation of marriage. If we look across the historical landscape, that proves to be the exception rather than the defining rule. In many cultures and eras (and here's where my laziness neglects to provide textual evidence), marriages are engineered to improve the physical quality of life (and let's not make any crude remarks about sex here; kitty i'm looking in your cyberdirection) through pooling incomes and resources.
Moreover, I do agree with what you're getting at towards the end of the post. Modern studies are showing the highest cause for divorce is due to financial reasons. That is, consumerism and materialism and jonesing are significant contributions to the rupturing of marriage. Although we may not be able to rid marriage entirely of its consumptive/ financial/material constraints, it is, to a certain degree, inherent in the institution.

hey shadowfax, no framing the flatline for crimes it hasn't committed. or at least doesn't remember committing. so move them digiretinas on. this cat...is clean. also, good point. forgot there was (and probably still is) a time and place when the whole "being able to stand each other" wasn't a factor.