Angry with Myself

dmauro

I love how the lines in this show you are working through the pain. I really like this

euehfgh

Oh the things history has to teach us if only we bothered to study it properly! For years I've been feverishly working to reconstruct the indigenous, pre-Christian religion and culture of the European peoples, and in doing so I've learned that, lo and behold, our forebearers had numerous traditional customs and mores which existed PRECISELY to save woman just like you from being abused and taken advantage of just like you described. Foremost among them, you were never EVER supposed to have sex until you were married. Moreover, to ensure that you wouldn't be raped, kidnapped or whatever by a boy you were dating, and to ensure that you would only end up marrying a man who could be trusted to take good care of you, there were various other rules which were supposed to be followed during the courtship and marriage process. I've included below a list which includes the rules which were historically supposed to be followed during courtship and marriage, together with a few other pieces of advice on marriage which modern people's experience has shown to be true. In the interest of full disclosure, no I didn't write the following list just to post it in this comment. It's from a book I've written on the subject of native European religion and culture, but I'm not posting it here just to advertise my book. I'm posting it here because the things in the list are meant SPECIFICALLY to save women like you from being abused/exploited/taken-advantage-of just like you described. I realize you might be past the age at which the pieces of wisdom in the following list can benefit you personally. However, I thought you might find the wisdom I've gleaned from studying history, more interesting than just a simple, half assed comment such as "It's sure terrible that men treated you that way." or something of that nature.



NOTES ON COURTSHIP AND MARRIAGE:

#1 - An unwed woman should be guarded by her father:

10: It is fine if a young man and young woman meet of their own accord, and it is also fine if their meeting is arranged by their parents. It is fine if their meeting be arranged by the parents of the young man but not by the parents of the young woman, with the young woman acting alone and on her own behalf. Likewise, it is also fine if their meeting be arranged by the parents of the young woman but not by the parents of the young man, with the young man acting alone and on his own behalf. However, whenever the young man and young woman meet, there is one rule which should be followed more than any other, and that is that until they are married, the young man and young woman should never meet save in the company of the young woman's father.
11: If the young woman's father be not available to chaperon her, or in the rare case that he himself abuses her, then at the very least, she should only meet the young man when she is in the company of other blood relatives of hers. In general, the more of them there are, the more closely related they are to her by blood, and the more of them are men, the safer the young woman will be. Now, when I speak of people being related by blood, I do not only mean to refer to people being close family members. I also mean to refer to people being of similar racial ancestry. You see, two children born to the same mother but different fathers, whose fathers were both of the same race as the mother, will tend to have more in common genetically will than two random persons of that race.
12: Thus they will each have a greater interest in ensuring one-another's welfare than an average stranger of the same race would have in ensuring the welfare of either of them. However, if a woman bears one child to a man of her own race, and also bears another child to a man of a different race, then the mixed race child will often have less in common genetically with the mono-racial child than will an average stranger who is wholly of the mono-racial child's own race. Thus said stranger will actually have a greater interest in ensuring the welfare of the mono-racial child than will the mono-racial child's half sibling who is mixed-race.
13: Therefore when evaluating how closely related two people are by blood, one needs to consider not only their recent ancestry, but also their distant ancestry from ages long past. Now, because a marriageable young man and marriageable young woman should generally not meet one another save in the presence of the young woman's father, therefore the best place for them to meet is generally at the home of the young woman's father, so that he, and perhaps other members of the young woman's family, can adequately chaperon the two of them. Now, if the young woman be guarded by her father or by her other relatives, not only will that protect the young woman from being raped, it will also protect the young man from being accused of raping the young woman if he didn't actually do it.
14: You see, it sometimes happens that a young woman voluntarily but secretly performs the sexual act with a young man, and becomes pregnant as a consequence, but that when her parents learn of it, they fly into a great rage such that the young woman fears that she will be punished severely for her actions. In such a case, the young woman will often falsely claim that someone or other, either the father of her child or else another man, performed the sexual act upon her forcibly and against her will. This lie she tells in order to avoid punishment. Although it is not common for women to claim to have been raped when they know perfectly well that they weren't, when a woman does so lie, it is generally in the sort of case I have just described.
15: However, if an unwed woman does not meet any man not related to her by blood unless she be at the time guarded by her father, or by other close blood relations of hers, then any man who might wish to rape her will be far less likely to find an opportunity to do so than he would otherwise be. Moreover, if the young woman be so guarded, then even if she be perfectly willing to perform the sexual act with one man or another, she too will be far less likely to find an opportunity to do so than she would otherwise be.
16: Thus the young woman will be far less likely than she otherwise would be, to fall pregnant before being formally wed. Thus she will be far less likely to have an incentive either to falsely accuse the father of her child of raping her, in order to save herself from punishment, or to falsely accuse a second man of raping her, in order to save both herself and her lover from punishment. Moreover, suppose an unwed woman be so guarded but tries her best to thwart whomever guards her, and is determined to perform the sexual act with one man or another even though it be against the wishes of her guardians.
17: In that case, at least the young woman's guardians, being attentive to her behavior and whereabouts, will be better positioned than they otherwise would be, to recognize that the young woman is determined to perform the sexual act with whomever-it-is. Consequently, if she then voluntarily performs the sexual act with whomever-it-is, and becomes pregnant as a consequence, and then afterward attempts to lie and claim that the sexual act was forced upon her by this or that person, her guardians will be less likely to be deceived by her than they otherwise would be.
18: Thus for an unwed woman to never meet a man save when she is guarded by her father and/or other close blood relations, not only protects her from being raped, but also protects any suitors of hers, and even men who have nothing at all to do with her, from being accused of raping her if they didn't.



#2 - To meet young men, a young woman should accompany her father:

19: Now then, how best may a marriageable young woman be initially introduced to marriageable young men? The answer is for her to accompany her father whenever he trades and does business with other men. You see, since the young woman's father is a man, most of the people with whom he will associate outside of his own family, will also be men. Moreover, many of the men with whom he associates, will also bring their sons with them as they go about their activities, so that their sons can aid them in their work.
20: Thus the young woman's father will naturally be meeting many other men and their sons as well anyway, with or without the young woman. Moreover, if the young woman's father permits her to accompany him in his dealings with other men, this permits her to be seen by many marriageable young men. Moreover, because she is not going alone but is instead accompanying her father, therefore her father will be available to protect her. Therefore this provides the young woman a safe means of being discovered by marriageable young men.
21: Then if any marriageable young man takes a liking to her, he may come to her father's house to visit her, so that they may become better acquainted with one another. However, as I aforementioned, they should not be permitted to visit save in the presence of the young woman's father, or at least her other blood relatives. Moreover, while accompanying her father in his dealings with other men, it is best if the young woman perform as many as possible of the same sorts of services which her mother normally performs for the young woman's father, save only those of a sexual nature.
22: In other words, while accompanying her father in his dealings with other men, the young woman should strive to do her father's cooking, cleaning, washing, sewing and so forth, or whatever other work of a feminine nature is applicable. This accomplishes two purposes. First, it reimburses the father for the trouble of allowing his daughter to accompany him, which could otherwise be rather burdensome for him. Second, it allows the young woman to display her womanly skills to potential suitors.



#3 - Exaggerating your worth to your future spouse, may curse your marriage:

23: Now, I would also suggest that it is probably best that no man who seeks a wife, do anything to make himself appear a better potential husband to her than he will actually be; and likewise that it is probably best that no woman who seeks a husband, do anything to make herself appear a better potential wife to him than she will actually be. The reason for this is simply that if a woman weds a man, mistakenly thinking him to be a better potential husband than he actually is, she is bound to eventually learn the truth about him.
24: Then she will be disappointed, and will likely be inclined to divorce him. So also if a man weds a woman, mistakenly thinking her to be a better potential wife than she actually is, he is bound to eventually learn the truth about her. Then he also will be disappointed, and so will likely be inclined to divorce her. In contrast, if a man and woman wed one another, each knowing full well the sort of person they are marrying, then neither will later discover the other to be less good of a spouse than they had expected. Thus neither will be inclined to divorce the other.



#4 - For a couple to wed, three must agree:

25: Now then, under what conditions is it acceptable for a man and a woman to wed? First, the marriage must be by the free and full consent of the bride, and the groom, and also the bride's father. If any of these three object to the marriage, then the couple should not be wed. The reason why the marriage must have the consent of both the bride and the groom is to ensure that each is marrying someone to whom they will enjoy living together in marriage. Moreover, the reason why the bride's father must also consent to the marriage, is that women are inherently vulnerable in marriage.
26: For one thing, women gain the capacity to procreate, and are thus meant to marry, at quite young ages, and at those ages can not possibly be expected to have the wisdom or experience required for them to choose their husbands wisely. Also, although women tend to have much keener instincts and better intuition than do men, they in general have less capacity for logical, rational thought. Thus it is more difficult for them to acquire wisdom with age than it is for men to do so. Moreover, in marriage, the wife tends to be economically dependent on her husband, but the husband does not tend to be economically dependent on his wife.
27: For that reason it is often most difficult for the wife to abandon her husband, and tends to be much easier for the husband to abandon his wife, and this also renders a woman inherently vulnerable in marriage. Thus for those three reasons, when a woman reaches marriageable age, she must be protected from marrying a man who will not be a good husband to her. Moreover, a woman's father is the ideal person to protect her in that regard. For one thing, women are strong in instinct and in subconscious intuition, but weak in logic and reason.
28: In contrast, men are weak in instinct and in subconscious intuition, but strong in logic and reason. Thus when a father and daughter both evaluate a potential suitor of the daughter's, each will evaluate him from a different perspective. Moreover, the daughter's perspective will have wisdom, rooted in innate instincts, which the father lacks. However at the same time, the father's perspective will also have wisdom, rooted in logic, reason and experience, which the daughter lacks. Thus together the father and daughter can evaluate a suitor of the daughter's more fully than either could alone.
29: For another thing, the father is older than the daughter, and so has had more time to acquire wisdom and experience. Thus he can all the better compensate for his daughter's poor capacity for logic and reason, and also for her having not had much time to gain wisdom through age and experience. In contrast, a woman's wisdom generally arises not out of old age or experience, but instead merely out of innate instincts which she generally acquires as soon as she gains the capacity to procreate. Thus a woman does not need to be very old in order to possess her sort of wisdom, whereas as man generally needs to be quite old in order to possess his sort of wisdom.
30: It is for this reason that although the daughter should not marry without her father's permission, she does not require her mother's permission to marry. Once the daughter gains the capacity to procreate, she will tend to have the same wisdom as her mother, because both women will gain their wisdom from the same instincts. However, the daughter will not have the lived experience of the father, and moreover, neither the daughter nor her mother will have the father's ability to learn from lived experience by means of logic and reason.
31: Moreover, the father, being a man, will tend to be more familiar with how men think than will either the daughter or the mother, and thus for that reason also will be able to judge a potential suitor from a perspective which neither the daughter nor her mother will possess. Moreover, the father, being a close blood relative of the daughter, will also tend to have a strong desire to ensure her future happiness and welfare. It is for these reasons that a woman generally should not be wed without the permission of her father.
32: Moreover, if a woman's father be unavailable to give his opinion of a proposed marriage of his daughter, or does not have her best interests at heart, then the responsibility should be given to another male blood relative of the daughter's, also older than her, such as an older brother, or an uncle or grandfather or the like. By these means a woman may be protected from entering into a bad marriage. Now, why does the man not require the permission of his father to marry, even though the woman requires the permission of her father to do the same?
33: The answer is that men are less vulnerable to bad marriages, and so do not require as much protection. It is certainly all well and good if a young man seeks the advice of his father, his mother, his aunts and uncles, and all manner of other old and wise persons, regarding whom he ought to wed. However, men generally marry at older ages than women do, and have a greater capacity for logic and reason. Thus when a man marries, he generally does not suffer from the naivete of youth to the same degree that a woman generally suffers from it when she marries.
34: Moreover, because in marriage, the man does not tend to be economically dependent on the woman, whereas the woman does tend to be economically dependent on the man, therefore it is much easier for a husband to abandon his wife, than for a wife to abandon her husband. Therefore a man can much more easily leave a bad marriage in which he finds himself, than a woman can leave a bad marriage in which she finds herself. Therefore although a man's happiness in marriage is no less desirable than is a woman's happiness in marriage, the man is simply less vulnerable, and so does not require the same protection.
35: Now, one might protest that a father might wish to artificially delay the age at which his daughter married, so that he might have time to sire more children himself before being obliged to spend his time and other resources caring for his grandchildren instead. No doubt there are men who would, for precisely that selfish reason, seek to restrain their daughters from marrying. However, for the reasons I've described this far, it is much better both for one's family line, and also for one's people as a whole, if one's children begin producing offspring at the youngest ages they are capable of.
36: Therefore if a man be wise and moral, then when his daughter gains the capacity to procreate, he will not seek to prevent her from producing offspring until a later date, but will instead devote himself to helping his daughter find an appropriate man for her to produce offspring with.



#5 - A woman should be a virgin to qualify for marriage:

37: Now, it is generally the case that if a woman performs the sexual act with one man and then becomes separated from him, she will likewise become separated from any other man with whom she later performs the sexual act. If she performs the sexual act with one man who abandons her without cause, she will do the same with another man who will abandon her without cause. If she performs the sexual act with one man and then drives him away by her bad nature, she will do the same with another man and then drive him away by her bad nature.
38: If she performs the sexual act with one man and then abandons him without cause, she will do the same with another man and then divorce him without cause. If she performs the sexual act with one man who drives her away by his bad nature, she will do the same with another man who drives her away by his bad nature. If she performs the sexual act with one man and then betrays him by secretly performing the sexual act with a second man while pretending to be faithfully wed to the first, she will performs the sexual act with another man and betray him in the same manner.
39: For this reason, it is generally the case that a woman should not be married unless she has never before engaged in the sexual act with anyone. Thus before a woman is married, her vagina should be inspected by a knowledgeable person to see if her hymen is still intact. If it is, then this strongly suggests that she has never before engaged in the sexual act. Now, I must qualify that recommendation with certain caveats. First, it sometimes happens that a woman's hymen becomes broken or torn before she is married, for reasons which are in no way her own fault.
40: It may happen that someone forces a young woman to partake in a sexual act against her will, and in doing so, damages her hymen. For example, although in general children tend to be similar to their parents, it does sometimes happen that a perfectly responsible young woman is born to most irresponsible parents. It may then be the case that her parents divorce when she is a small child, and that her mother remarries. Then, once the young woman reaches reproductive age, it may happen that her mother's new husband forces the young woman to engage in the sexual act with him against her will.
41: Thus her hymen may be broken by something for which she is in no way culpable, and which she had no means to avoid. Of course, even women who are robbed of their virginity forcibly and against their wills, often unintentionally facilitate the crime through their own foolishness and irresponsibility. Therefore if a woman has her virginity taken from her forcibly and against her will before she is married, even that can still speak ill of her, depending on the circumstances under which she was robbed of her virginity.
42: However, there are nonetheless various ways in which a young, unmarried woman can be robbed of her virginity without being in any way at fault for her loss of it. Moreover, I have also heard it said that some young women accidentally break or tear their hymens while doing entirely innocuous activities such as climbing, riding bicycles, or other activities which can unintentionally stretch their genitals. Moreover, I have also heard it said that occasionally, a young woman's hymen is not broken or torn even when she does engage in the sexual act.
43: Therefore I do not believe that a young woman should automatically be denied marriage merely because her hymen has already been damaged, nor that she should automatically be granted marriage merely because her hymen has not yet been damaged. On the contrary, I believe one should always learn as much as possible about a potential bride, and about her family, in order to judge said bride's moral character, rather than judging her merely by the condition of her hymen.
44: Also, there is something which I am not aware was ever done historically, but which seems as though it might be good. That is that if the hymen of a young woman becomes damaged before the young woman is married, and it occurs for a reason which is in no way the young woman's fault, then any and all who are in a position to know how the young woman's hymen became damaged, should write a certificate explaining how the young woman's hymen became damaged and why the young woman herself was not at fault for it.
45: Then they should each write their names upon the certificate so that they may be sought out as witnesses to the manner in which the young woman's hymen became damaged. Then they should give the certificate to the young woman. Then if at some point in the future, the same woman desires to wed a man, but said man, finding that the woman's hymen is damaged, therefore fears that she is sexually promiscuous and so is hesitant to wed her, said woman may present the certificate to her desired spouse, and it may allay his suspicions.
46: Moreover, if the woman's desired spouse wishes, he may perhaps go and speak to the persons who have signed their names on the certificate, and they may then testify to the manner in which the woman's hymen became damaged, so that the man's suspicions may be further allayed.



#6 - The groom should give the bride a golden torc:

47: Here I mean to describe the proper manner for a couple to wed. To start with, in order for a couple to wed, the groom should present the bride with a torc of pure gold, as a sign of his devotion to her. If you don't know what a torc is, it's a horseshoe shaped piece of metal meant to be worn around one's neck. Why should the groom be obliged to present the bride with such a gift? Well, for one thing, gold is quite a valuable material, and one needs a relatively large amount of gold to produce a torc.
48: Thus a golden torc is a piece of jewelry which, if necessary, may be sold for a rather large amount of money. This ensures that if after marrying his bride, the groom either abandons her without good cause, or else dies, his bride will have something which she may sell for a rather large sum of money. That gives the bride a means of financially supporting herself and her children for a while in the event that she is suddenly bereft of her spouse. Of course, the money which an abandoned or widowed wife receives from selling a golden torc will not last her forever.
49: However, if a wife who is either widowed or else abandoned by her husband, has at her disposal an item which she can sell for a large amount of money, then that helps her to more easily adjust to her new life without her husband available to care for her or for her children. In other words, she can use the money she gains from selling her gold torc, to buy food and clothing for herself and her children, until she either remarries, or else establishes herself in some trade or another which will enable her to financially support herself and her children.
50: Moreover, she may also use some of the money to buy tools and materials with which to carry on a trade, or to otherwise establish herself in said trade. Alternatively, she might use some of the money to buy an apprenticeship for one of her children, so that said child may learn a skilled trade and so no longer be financially dependent on its mother. There are innumerable ways in which having such a financial reserve may help a woman to survive the loss of her husband.
51: Also, if the groom buys the golden torc with his own money, that then proves that he has the means and willingness to provide for the financial wellbeing of his bride and her future children. Alternatively, if his family buys the torc for him, that means that his family has the means and willingness to provide for the financial wellbeing of the bride and her future children. I don't believe it makes much difference whether the groom buys the torc with his own money, or if his family buys it with their money.
52: After all, if the bride is to bear children to the groom, then those children will be part of the bloodline of the groom's family, and so they will have a natural incentive to provide for the material needs of those children, even if the groom himself is unable to do so. Also, by providing his bride with such a valuable gift, the groom demonstrates that he is willing to invest in the bride's future financial welfare.
53: Also, since the torc is made as a single, solid piece of gold, rather than of numerous small pieces linked together, therefore it does not lend itself to being spent little by little. Were the gold to be fashioned into an ordinary necklace, made of numerous small rings, it would be all too tempting for either the bride or groom to break off a little ring every now and then, and trade it for one thing or another. However, since the torc is made as a single, solid piece of gold, and is therefore inconvenient to sell in small pieces, that helps to ensure that the torc will be saved until such a time as its monetary value is truly needed.
54: Also, I would strongly suggest that a man should not marry if he owes any debts at the time. Moreover, if the golden torc which the groom provides to his bride is bought by the groom's family rather than by the groom himself, then the groom's family should also be free of any debts. The reason for this is that if one is only able to afford a valuable golden torc because one has borrowed money and has not repaid it yet, that undermines the entire purpose of the golden torc.
55: If a man enters into a marriage while owing a sum of money to someone, then rather than providing for his bride's future financial welfare, he is burdening her with a future financial obligation which she was not responsible for incurring. Also, if the groom's family is to provide for the bride's financial welfare, but the groom's family is indebted, then their debts may also interfere with their ability to provide for the bride's financial welfare.
56: Also, if neither the groom nor his family has bought the torc with money which they themselves have earned honestly, through their own hard-work, skill and industry, then the torc offers no proof of the ability of either the groom or his family to provide for the financial wellbeing of anyone. Moreover, one generally does not much appreciate a valuable item which one has not earned honestly, than one appreciates a valuable item which one has earned honestly.
57: Therefore if neither the groom nor his family has bought the torc with money which they themselves have earned honestly, then the torc is also no proof of anyone being committed to the bride's future financial wellbeing. For that reason, I would strongly argue that a man should not wed if he owes any debts whatsoever. Even if a man's debts have been forgiven, I would argue that he should still not be allowed to wed until he has gone back and repaid his debts anyway.
58: Only if a man owes a debt to his own family of birth, and it is said family which forgives the debt, should the man be free of any obligation to repay it. Likewise if the groom's family provides him with the golden torc for him to provide to his bride, but the groom's family is indebted, the couple should not wed until the groom's family have repaid their debts. Even if the debts of the groom's family are forgiven, the couple still should not wed until the groom's family have repaid their debts.
59: If the groom's family will not repay their debts, then the groom should either repay the cost of the torc to his family, or else return the torc to them and procure a different torc himself. Then if the groom is able to give the golden torc to his bride while being free of any debts, it may be good for the couple to wed, despite the condition of the groom's family. Now, there must surely be some minimum amount of gold which the torc should contain in order for it to properly serve its role.
60: Unfortunately, I know of no historical source stating exactly how much gold a groom ought to give his bride to ensure that she and her children will be provided for in the event that he leaves them. Therefore I can't state conclusively just how much gold the torc ought to contain. However, the smallest gold torc I have ever heard of, contained roughly 273 grams of gold, so that may be the minimum amount of gold required to render the gold torc acceptable as a gift from the groom to the bride, to properly seal their wedding.
61: Note that the troy ounce, which is the standard unit of measurement of precious metals today, is currently defined as 31.10348 grams. In contrast, the avoirdupois ounce, which is used in trade of most other goods, is currently defined as 28.34952 grams. If the tradition of grooms giving gold torcs to their brides upon their marriages to them, ever becomes common once again, experience will no doubt reveal just what is the minimum acceptable amount of gold.
62: Now, during later periods, it was common for a groom to seal his union with his bride, not with a golden torc, but rather with some other form of payment, such as land, cattle, slaves, or simply gold coinage. However, I would argue that none of those sorts of payment is as good a means of sealing a marriage, as is a gold torc. You see, cattle and slaves are highly perishable. They can readily die if not adequately cared for, and if not adequately guarded, may also depart of their own accord and never return.
63: Thus neither cattle nor slaves are as sure a means of keeping a financial reserve, as is a golden torc. Land is perhaps a bit better. However, if one is obliged to flee one's home, one can not take one's land with one's self. Thus land is easily seized by powerful foes. Gold coins are perhaps a bit better. However, in my opinion, gold coins lend themselves a bit too well to being traded away little by little in exchange for various things. In contrast, a gold torc need not be fed or clothed or housed.
64: Thus it will not expire for want of care. The torc also will not wander away of its own accord, and so need not be guarded as closely as must cattle or slaves, although of course there will always be some risk of a golden torc being stolen. Moreover, if the couple is ever obliged to flee, the wife may wear the torc easily about her neck wherever she goes, and so will not be obliged to leave it behind. Thus the torc can not be seized by a powerful foe as easily as could a plot of land. Moreover, since the gold torc is all one solid piece, it will not lend itself to being frittered away little by little as will a purse of gold coins.
65: Of course, it is not enough that the bride merely receive a golden torc to ensure her future financial wellbeing. Of course the groom will need some source of income in order to sustain his bride and future children. Therefore of course either the couple must possess sufficient land to farm, or else the groom must carry on some skilled trade, or something of that nature, and if the bride carries on a skilled trade as well, that is also good.
66: The purpose of the golden torc is not to provide for the material needs of either the bride, or the groom, or their future children, for the rest of their lives. The couple will of course require some other means of providing for their own material needs and for those of their future children. The purpose of the golden torc is merely so that the wife may forever have on hand a financial reserve which may see her through the hardships of adjusting to life without her husband, in the event that her husband either abandons her without good cause, or else dies.
67: Moreover, the golden torc is a more advantageous form of financial reserve than would be many other things, because it requires no effort to keep it from expiring. Thus the wife may freely devote herself wholly to other tasks required to provide for the needs of her children, her husband and herself, without any fear that her golden torc will lose its value for want of some care and attention from her. Now, of all the customs which I can discern in the history of our people, in which a groom was obliged to give a gift to his bride in order to seal their union, the giving of the golden torc appears to have been the oldest.
68: Indeed, it dates from such an ancient time that I know of no surviving record which specifically describes it or makes reference to it, and I have only become aware of that ancient custom by examining various surviving, seemingly related elements of the traditions and mythology of the European peoples, and then projecting them backward in time to their most probable common origin. However, because there are various elements in the surviving traditions and mythology of the European peoples which appear to point to that custom having once existed, and because there appears to be such great wisdom in it, I would argue that it must surely have existed among our people at one time, and that would still be quite a good custom to follow.



#7 - The groom should go to his wedding fully armed:

69: Also, the groom should go to his wedding fully armed, with weapons of whatever sort are useful in the wars of the time. In ancient times, the groom was required to go to his wedding armed with a spear, a shield and a sword. The spear and shield were the predominant military weapons of the time. As for the sword, in war it served as a secondary weapon to the spear, and in civilian life it was the predominate weapon of personal defense.
70: Thus by going to his wedding armed both with the predominate weapons of war and also with the predominate weapon of personal defense, the groom demonstrated that he had the means to defend his future wife and children, and his people as a whole, by force of arms from whomever might threaten them. Now, it must be understood that the spear, shield and sword which the groom was required to bear at his wedding, were not merely ceremonial. Rather, they were the real weapons which a man would actually carry on a military campaign in that period of history.
71: Today, spears, shields and swords have long been rendered obsolete as weapons. Therefore for a groom to go to his wedding armed with such weapons today, does not demonstrate as it would have in ancient times, that he has adequate means to defend his future wife and children, and his people as a whole, by force of arms. Therefore today those weapons are no longer sufficient. However, today the place of the spear has been taken by the rifle, the place of the sword has been taken by the pistol, and the place of the shield has been taken by the tactical flashlights which are often used in conjunction with firearms.
72: Therefore I propose that today when one of our men marries, he should go to his wedding armed with a rifle, a pistol, ample ammunition for both, and perhaps also one of those tactical flashlights which is often used in conjunction with a firearm. Thus a groom of today may demonstrate the same things which a groom in ancient times demonstrated by bearing a spear, a shield and a sword.



#8 - The bride and groom should exchange cherished heirlooms:

73: Now, there's another interesting tradition of which I've learned, and this one comes from Viking age Scandinavia. This tradition is that, when the bride and groom were married, they would present to one another swords which they had retrieved from tombs of their ancestors. In other words, the groom would present to his bride, a sword which he had retrieved from the tomb of one of his ancestors, and the bride would present to her groom, a sword which she had retrieved from the tomb of one of her ancestors.
74: The groom was meant to keep the sword of the bride's family, and the bride was meant to keep the sword of the groom's family, both to pass down to the couple's future descendants. Moreover, the bride and groom were also obliged to give one another promissory rings, which each was then to wear as a token of their union, and the rings would be exchanged, hanging from the hilts of the ancestral swords. Now, the spear, shield and sword which I previously mentioned that a groom was in ancient times obliged to bear at his wedding, were the groom's own personal weapons, which he himself was meant to bear and wield in defense of himself, his wife, his children, and his people as a whole.
75: However, the ancestral swords exchanged by the bride and groom in the tradition I just described, were not personal weapons of either the bride or the groom. Rather, they were ancestral heirlooms which not possessed by either the bride or the groom until shortly before they were exchanged in the wedding ceremony. Moreover, the purpose of exchanging them seems to have had nothing to do with the practical utility of the swords as weapons, and instead seems to have had everything to do with the sentimental value they held to those who exchanged them.
76: You see, one imagines that a man would be much less inclined to leave his wife, if his wife had possession of something which held great sentimental value to him. Likewise, one imagines that a woman would be much less inclined to leave her husband, if her husband had possession of something which held great sentimental value to her. As for why swords were specifically chosen as the family heirlooms to be exchanged, I have to assume that the reason why is that weapons in general tend to acquire great symbolic importance over time; and moreover, that swords, being such ancient weapons and generally being so deeply personal to their owners, have an especially strong tendency to acquire great symbolic importance over time.
77: As for the rings, they seem to have served a purely symbolic role. Now, I don't think it would be a good idea for a bride and groom in modern times to be obliged to exchange any weapons which are their own personal weapons. You see, people who bear weapons, tend to have preferences for certain sorts of weapons over others. Thus everyone tends to procure the sorts of weapons which he or she favors, and thus everyone tends to favor his or her own weapons over those of other persons.
78: Thus one imagines that many people would be reluctant to, upon marriage, trade their own weapon for a weapon given to them by their spouse. After all, their own weapon will likely be one which they have chosen due to a specific preference for that specific type of weapon. In contrast, whatever weapon they receive from their spouse, will not be one which they have so chosen, and so will not suit them as well. Thus I do not believe a bride and groom should be obliged to exchange any weapons which belonged to them personally.
79: However, as I previously mentioned, the swords which were exchanged were not personal weapons of the couple being married, and were not intended to become their personal weapons either. Rather, as I said, they were ancestral heirlooms, and the value in exchanging them lay not in the swords' utility as weapons, but rather in the sentimental value they held to those who exchanged them, because it was that sentimental value which helped bind the newlywed couple all the more strongly together.
80: Therefore although I would not suggest that a couple being wed today should be obliged to trade their own personal weapons with one another, given that most people will find their own personal weapons more to their liking than those of another person, I would nonetheless suggest that when a young man and woman are married, each should, if possible, present the other with some family heirloom holding great sentimental value to them.
81: In other words, the groom should, if possible, receive from his family some ancestral heirloom which holds great sentimental value to him, and should then present it to his bride. Likewise, the bride should, if possible, receive from her family some ancestral heirloom which holds great sentimental value to her, and should then present it to her groom. Thus the couple will be disinclined to separate, because each will hold part of the other's soul, contained within the ancestral heirlooms which are exchanged.



#9 - A costly wedding bodes ill, and a cheap wedding bodes well:

82: Now, a curious tendency which has been noted, is that the more money is spent on a couple's wedding ceremony, the more likely it is that the couple will later divorce. It should not be too difficult to imagine why that is the case. You see, while the care one takes in selecting one's future spouse is of the utmost importance, and so also are the plans one makes for living with one's future spouse once one is wed to them, the actual wedding ceremony itself, aside from the customs I have here described, which are valuable for the reasons I've described, is a frivolous luxury.
83: Even the taking of the wedding vows does not in and of itself have much meaning. After all, one can easily take the vows and then not abide by them, and one can just as easily abide by the vows without having taken them. Moreover, the spending of a large sum of money on a frivolous luxury, is naturally indicative of foolishness, shortsightedness, a lack of self-restraint, and a general tendency to behave irresponsibly. Moreover, one has to expect that people possessing those traits would tend not to be especially competent at maintaining a healthy relationship with their spouses.
84: Moreover, an unwillingness to spend a large sum of money on a frivolous luxury is naturally indicative of the opposite traits, namely wisdom, farsightedness, high self-restraint, and a general tendency to behave responsibly. Moreover, one has to expect that people possessing those traits would tend to be especially competent at maintaining a healthy relationship with their spouses. Thus it is no wonder that the more money is spent on a couple's wedding, the more likely the couple is to divorce, and that the less money is spent on a couple's wedding, the less likely the couple is to divorce.



#10 - A wedding with few guests bodes ill, but one with many guests bodes well:

85: Another curious tendency which has been noted, is that the more guests are present at a couple's wedding, the less likely the couple is to divorce, and the fewer guests are present at a couple's wedding, the more likely the couple is to divorce. It is also not to difficult to imagine why this should be the case either. You see, if someone invites many guests to their wedding, that likely indicates that that person has many friends. Moreover, if someone has many friends, then that likely indicates that that person tends to like other people, and is also easy for other people to like.
86: Thus if the bride and groom each invite a large number of guests to their wedding, then that suggests that both the bride and the groom tend to like other people, and also tend to be easy people for others to like. Moreover, if the bride and groom both tend to like other people, and also tend to be easy for others to like, then of course one expects that they would tend to like one another quite well, and so would be unlikely to divorce. In contrast, if someone invites few guests to their wedding, that likely indicates that that person has few friends.
87: Moreover, if someone has few friends, that likely indicates that that person tends to dislike other people, and is also difficult for other people to like. Thus if the bride and groom each invite only a small number of guests to their wedding, then that suggests that both the bride and the groom tend to dislike other people, and also tend to be difficult for others to like. Moreover, if the bride and groom both tend to dislike other people, and also tend to be difficult for others to like, then of course one expects that they would tend to find one another quite difficult to like, and so would be quite likely to divorce.
88: Moreover, one also imagines that if a married couple has a large number of friends and family members to whom they are quite close, they would therefore have a large number of people who could help them endure whatever hardships and troubles may beset their marriage. Thus it is no wonder that the more guests are present at a wedding, the less likely the couple is to divorce, and the fewer guests are present at a wedding, the more likely the couple is to divorce.

euehfgh

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention the other reason why I was posting that list in my comment. It's because if by chance you have a daughter who is dating guys or who will probably start dating guys within the next few years, the pieces of wisdom in that list could potentially be of great benefit to her.