Chinese Women, Asian Women, Online Dating & Things Chinese and Asian
Panda, a common typing and binding worker in State Grid for 21 years. Own a bachelor degree of Chinese Language and Literature, and a certificate of teaching Chinese. She is pursuing a Master of Chinese Classical Literature in HuBei University, and studying the novels of Ming & Qing dynasties.
Articles :
Views :
Comments :
Create Time :
This Blog's Articles
Index of Blogs
Index Blog Articles

The New Marriage Law and Its Effect on the High Divorce Rate in China    

By Panda
6718 Views | 12 Comments | 6/1/2012 10:23:32 PM

When the kernel of marriage becomes weakening...

When it comes to divorce, must understand the nature of marriage. Marriage is not born between men and women, it is the two sides reached a contract in order to better support future generations. But from the animal, male is inclined slightly polygamous, meaning that monogamy marriage is inconsistent with the human instinct of mankind, wanted to reinforce a marriage requires both sides to increase investment, at the same time increasing the cost of withdrawal of marriage, the divorce cost.

Traditionally, maintenance and guarantee the rights of women, mean stability and harmony in the family. For men, they need marriage to be determined their future generations, while the woman longing for marriage, means that there is a man willing to take her and her descendants. Therefore, sex is the gift women for men, and marriage is the gift men for women; from the Victorian era began, the patriarchal family is so, father hands daughter, and her virginity to her groom in return for bride-price and the groom's commitment to his daughter.

Now, growth rate in China is one of the main reasons for divorce cost reduction, including time costs, energy costs, such as cost, reputation, social opinion costs, including both divorce and in the actions of divorce proceedings to be too simplified, which, with the new interpretation of Chinese marriage law has a direct relationship. In romantic love of France, if one of the spouses for divorce must be separated for more than three years, unless there is a serious fault, generally within six months of the marriage shall not be divorced; if a joint application for divorce after six months, to 3 months consideration period. In Germany and Switzerland, did not recognize confer divorce, even if both parties are willing to divorce are subject to court review agrees, and demands that the parties may only apply for more than one year non-contentious divorce of separation if divorce is party apply for litigation, the required separation more than three years. In the United Kingdom, if the divorce between the two sides, from the date of the declaration for the first time after nine months of soul-searching consideration period, can apply for divorce again; and for action for divorce, separation is required for two years, if the defendant does not agree with divorce, separation for five years in a row before the prosecution is required. Apply for divorce in China is "have something ready while waiting ", divorce has no limit on the day after her marriage, flash marriage, short marriage was common. In addition, even if the divorce only is litigation, the parties just need separated two years.

On the economic costs of divorce, many women of other countries can get alimony until the remarriage after a divorce, because of the perfection of the credit system in many other countries, the woman asked for child support is also very easy. For example in Japan, mortgage buyers accompanied by life, divorce, the woman can get 70% real estate, this "unfair" law, effectively constrain Japanese family stability. And in recent years a new revised Japanese marriage, wife lodged a complaint of divorce will obtain half of the husband's pension.

But the new interpretation of the new marriage law of China, is actually emptied a man to a woman “ Gifts ” Kernel, let marriage become a dispensable, lack of security, there is no sense of security does not mean that surely promises of things. In other words, men's gift is really just a box, no substantive content. For example, you always thought you were 50% equity partner, now the new interpretation suddenly tells you, you only have 50% option of wage-earners, and may be laid off at any time. One can imagine that men will be more willing to get married, because of marriage, divorce for him without loss; and for disadvantaged women, they will maintain a wait-and-see attitude to marriage, would prefer not to marriage and bear, because marriage does not mean any protection.

More puzzling is that this is carried out under the banner of equality between men and women in. Should human society is gender equality, or should the male strong female weak to act their respective roles? I prefer the latter. Female reproductive value declining with growth, aging, marriage history, while men are basic not affected, physiological constraints could not be achieved if men and women on a basis of equality of rights, required obligations equality of men and women, is actually the total inequality.

A marriage law, far-reaching impacts, but modification again and again. Anomie increase, will inevitably lead to social instability. Pass on the principal contradiction in society to small family, will inevitably lead to instability in the marriage. I can understand that kind of pain older parents bought the marriage house for his son, but be claimed by daughter-in-law flash marriage. But the stop-gap approach will not solve the underlying problem. For girls, is same to married men owned houses, original ownership of the right become residence of the right, causing the girls prefer empty handed men who can't afford to buy a house strike out together, or simply of a girl leans on a moneybags.

All in all, I do not care of the judicial interpretation of the law, it took empty the contents of marriage, reduced divorce costs, made the gender status of the Matthew effect, strong becomes stronger, weak becomes weaker, rising divorce rates. At the same time, also makes same-sex competition the Matthew effect, strong becomes stronger, weak becomes weaker, most of the efforts to safeguard the rights and interests of women to reduce, therefore women are more inclined to look for new protection, not conducive to the stability of marriage. More likely to happen is that of the new interpretation of the equivalent encourage women's participation in men's competition, last butch women pervade the whole of society, stimulus women grab cash in disguise so that two genders are always competitive and beware of the antithesis of each other, is not conducive to family harmony and social stability.



Copyright owned jointly by Author and CyberCupid Co., Ltd. Breach of copyright will be prosecuted.
(Showing 1 to 10 of 12) 1 2 More...
#2012-06-02 06:26:52 by kalzorch @kalzorch

I agree that marriage is basically a protection for women, yet behold the number of otherwise-intelligent women who decide to live with a man without marriage. This gives the man everything he wants, at no cost in commitment.

#2012-06-02 21:38:58 by JohnAbbot @JohnAbbot

Cao Hui, I appreciate where you're coming from here, and I agree that in the distant past marriage has been for the protection and security of the woman, but I'm not convinced at all that is the way it should be going forward. Personally I would favour marital laws that are entirely asexual. Whatever rights the partners have, they should have equally. And the laws should be minimal. Women are in most parts of the world fast gaining equality. China may be lagging slightly behind right now, but as in almost all things she will no doubt leap forward and catch up before we know it.

People should be getting married because the love each other, treasure each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together, unfettered by financial obligations or legal obligations other than those that exist between all members of society. Criminal laws should apply - they can't beat one another, or defraud one another or otherwise commit crimes against each other. But generally they should be free to make their own arrangements according to their unique needs.

In that case, those couples who were truly meant for each other will have good marriages which will last forever. Those couples who are not meant for each other will have marriages that do not last and they will go their separate ways. And that is the way it should be.

It only matters how easy a marriage can be terminated if it isn't meant to last, and if a marriage isn't meant to last the faster it can be ended the better, so in that respect I think the Chinese fast and easy divorce between consenting adults who both want out makes a world of sense. If marriage is made a prison, then everyone will want to escape.

#2012-06-02 23:16:57 by panda2009 @panda2009

People should be getting married because the love each other, treasure each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together, unfettered by financial obligations or legal obligations other than those that exist between all members of society.
John, If you said above that is tenable, we absolutely needn't marriage. People love each other, treasure each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together who can live together without marriage.

#2012-06-02 23:46:48 by anonymous3730 @anonymous3730

If a man can get everything he wants just by living with a woman and no legal commitment...why get married at all? Just have fun and sex, right? Is marriage an outdated pre-21st century concept now? Should it be abolished altogether? I don't think society would collapse. People would just have a greater number of short-term with and have sex for about 3-6 months...maybe for a year...and then move on to the next person. I think the number of children would diminish because having kids restricts personal freedom and increases debt...this would be good for the planet because of all the overpopulation. Win win scenario for all?

#2012-06-03 12:54:10 by JohnAbbot @JohnAbbot

Marriage is a means of signifying to a partner that you mean to commit for life and you want your partner to commit too. It adds a layer of security that most people desire. So it has a purpose, but it should not be turned into a jail cell where escape is difficult. I do not think marriage is necessary and I know several couples who have lived together for many years without marrying, and so long as that suits them, so be it. The institution of marriage must either evolve to suit the times or it will become extinct, and modern times demand that it be less rigid and more fair and equal for both sides.

#2012-06-03 14:42:23 by panda2009 @panda2009

Marriage is a means of signifying to a partner that you mean to commit for life and you want your partner to commit too. It adds a layer of security that most people desire.

That's right. Just like vegetarian diet most of the time and not up to people's tastes, humans eat them only for their health.

#2012-06-04 03:34:16 by happyscorpio @happyscorpio

Family is the basic cell of our society. It was and it will be. Kids need to have a stable environment. I see already too many mentaly handicapped cause of the lack of a present father and mother. Keyword: self-confidence !! So, who´s life plan is to have wife and kids should take all necessary legal acts. Means marriage etc. If somebody does not want to have this "burden" . . . OK! Don´t "produce" kids and be a free bird.

#2012-06-04 06:47:20 by lotusmaster @lotusmaster

Great blog! We have to remember that marrying who you "love" is relatively new. Even in America 200 years ago you married who your parents told you to. Love is situational and not a very good reason to have children. Many people fall in love and their physiology is so incompatible that they need doctor and timers and body heat monitors just to procreate. This is why men of old had wives and concubines. Much like other pack animals on this planet, alpha females make the best offspring but are the worst mothers. This is why the omega female raises the kids.
Anyway let me ask you, how new is this law? My good friend is a female married in Guangdong. She owned three houses and a car before marriage. Her husband owned nothing and lived with his parents. As I understand it because she owned everything before she can not loose what she owned before the marriage in a divorce. Is that true?

#2012-06-04 12:07:55 by evahuihan @evahuihan

man who doesnt cherish marriage and irresponsible for their wife and kids should never been born

#2012-06-04 21:39:25 by davidd @davidd

What is this, someone wants to have Marriage catch up with the times? Should Marriage be, easy come easy go? Like it should sex before Marriage, then marry the one you love,and all should be equal, and fair. :)

(Showing 1 to 10 of 12) 1 2 More...
To respond to another member's comment type @ followed by their name before your comment, like this: @username Then leave a space. Ask Panda a Question : Click here...