What's the Point of Marriage? Part 5: To Meet Basic Human Needs

by Kathleen Quiring on January 12, 2010

Marriage has all kinds of romantic and spiritual functions. I’ve tried to explore them in my previous four posts. But it also has some practical functions. The practical ones are the ones I’m focusing on today.

Ultimately, if nothing else, I believe God invented marriage to take care of some essential human needs.

Basically, I believe marriage is meant to guarantee that every human being who chooses to be married has a partner to care for his or her needs for the rest of his or her life. It hasn’t always worked that way, to be sure, but I believe that’s what it’s meant to do.

The conjunction of male and female means that the unique gifts/strengths/abilities of each sex are available for meeting the needs of daily life. Marriage between a man and woman increases the number of talents and abilities to draw from more than any other relationship because it combines the strengths of both genders. And I really believe that each sex has unique strengths to offer.

When thinking this through, at one point I actually concluded that marriage is primarily designed for the benefit of women. I have since reconsidered, and decided that it was made for both sexes equally, but I still concede that marriage is pretty important for women.

Marriage was designed in part as insurance that each woman gets properly taken care of.

Here’s how I thought about it. I figured God must have been able to foresee that because he made men physically bigger and stronger, and designed women’s bodies to bear children (thereby making them more vulnerable, especially when pregnant), that men would abuse and exploit women. And he was right: they have, and they do.  Men quickly began to wield all social and economic power, too. So God decided, “Every woman should have a husband to protect and defend her, and her offspring, against other men. Each man must commit himself to only one woman, and not go around impregnating all kinds of women and then abandoning them. He must take care of her, and all the children she produces, for life.”

See, the difficulty with creating women to bear the children is that it makes them intrinsically tied to their offspring, and thus more susceptible to neglect and abuse, unlike men. A man can technically walk away from the relationship the moment he has impregnated a woman and never look back. A woman at least has to bring the child to term, and then feed the baby from her own body. So God said, “No way – you’re sticking around, gentlemen. ONE WOMAN AND THAT’S IT – FOR LIFE. So make it good.”

So he came up with marriage, to serve that practical function.

(Unfortunately, lots of men decided to take lots of wives anyway. And even within monogamous marriages men have abused and exploited women horribly throughout history. But the principle behind it makes sense).

But then I later came to understand that women are just as necessary for men as men are for women. God created women to save men, too. After all, he called Eve Adam’s ezer kenegdo. That’s the Hebrew term used in Genesis 2 – the term that has been lamely translated as “helper” or “helpmeet” in most English translations. According to Hebrew scholar Robert Alter, though, ezer kenegdo is better translated as “sustainer beside him” or something to that effect.[i] In fact, ezer is often used in the Old Testament to describe God when he saves his people. You know that verse, “I lift my eyes to the hills – where does my help come from? My help comes from the Lord, the Maker of heaven and earth”?  (Ps. 121:1-2, emphasis added). The word that’s translated as help here is the same word for Eve – ezer.

That’s what Eve is to Adam. His ezer. His lifesaver. His help in times of desperate need.

And what did Eve save Adam from?

I personally think she saved him from isolation. And that’s what all of us women do: we rescue men from eternal isolation.

I mean that on a deeper level than just the literal. Sure, Adam was literally alone at first, and so when God made Eve she saved him from physical solitude. But I think it’s more than that, too. I think that if God had populated the earth with thousands or millions of Adams, the problem would still be there. Men would remain isolated, because they don’t have the gift of relationship that women have.

Men tend to be much more violent, reserved, self-absorbed, and territorial. They’re not nearly as good at empathizing, bonding, nurturing, sharing, reading people’s emotions, or expressing themselves as women are. I’m not just listing stereotypes, I’m repeating what I learned in Psychology 101. Women are much better at all of these things. Guys, in general, suck at connecting.

This is clear from history: men have almost always had the majority of the power in most human communities and civilization, and as a result have flooded human history with violence. Men stab and blow each other up because they can’t connect. They can’t get outside their own egos. I truly believe that as women gain influence in societies, they bring with them their powers of empathy and connectedness, and this is a good thing. These qualities help civilizations get along. Men need women to help them not kill each other so much.

I’ve heard it said, “Behind every successful man there is a woman.” I deeply believe that this is true. Often it is a wife, although it doesn’t necessarily have to be – it could be a mother or sister.  Every successful man must have a woman somewhere who made him who he is.  Without wives, mothers and sisters, men would not be able to come out of their caverns of self-absorption and learn to love.

I believe that this is true of mankind in general but also on an individual level. Most men need women to help them connect with other members of the human species. I know my husband needs me for this purpose.

I once read that statistically, that if an elderly woman loses her husband, she can usually go on living for many more years if she is physically healthy. But when an old man loses his wife, he usually dies shortly thereafter. He has lost his link to humanity and thus expires.

I’m not saying by any means that woman’s only gift to humanity is her relational powers, nor that a man’s only contribution to a marriage is his strength in beating off violent offenders.  But I think that these are some of the practical reasons God instituted marriage. Eve’s ability to nurture and empathize rescues Adam from his self-imposed isolation, and Adam’s bodily strength protects his physically vulnerable wife.*

Men need women and women need men. That’s why God created marriage – to enable men and women to rescue one another, from man’s violence and from eternal isolation.

This is my theory, anyway. What do you think?

What am I forgetting? How else do husbands and wives or men and women save one another? How else does each of the sexes contribute to the cohesion, health and success of the human species? How else does marriage serve a practical function? Also, is there a better way of describing Eve’s strength than ”gift of relationship” or “relational powers?” I sense that these terms are lame.


[i] Eldredge, John and Stasi. Captivating: Unveiling the Mystery of a Woman’s Soul. Nashville: Nelson, 2005. 31.

*I’m also not saying that every woman and every man has these gender-specific gifts, or at least not in equal share. But in general, women are better at the one thing and men are better at the other.

{ 14 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Susanne January 12, 2010 at 1:20 pm

I definitely think it’s important to highlight that there are general differences between men and women, and that this is good. I often felt, going through university in the social sciences, that some people advocating equality between the sexes (which I, too, totally support) felt that they needed to prove the sameness of men and women. To me, asserting equality means celebrating our differences and seperate gifts (in your example, ability to protect vs ability to connect), and demonstrating how both are valuable and complimentary. It is also interesting to look at the differences in how men and women needed each other in the past compared to in present time. In the past there was a greater physical need for each other (women needed men to support them and men needed women to keep the house and kids), which I’ve read may have contributed to the lower seperation rates. (Well, that and the social taboo against divorce…). Now men and women can technically live and survive on their own. However, people still choose to marry despite those needs being less, because there are still so many benefits to pairing up 1 woman and 1 man.

Reply

2 Alisa Bowman January 13, 2010 at 10:26 am

There are many people out there who get all in a huff when you cast generalizations about men and women being different. But, for the most part, we just are. The socialization part is so true. Without me, my husband would never have a conversation. Maybe he’d be happier, though? No. No. No. Just kidding. And without him my house would be overrun with stinkbugs and other creatures.

Reply

3 Mrs. Levine January 13, 2010 at 9:35 pm

Like all things, I think my feelings on this goes in waves. At the moment I’m finding it most useful to think that me and my husband are basically the same and the ways we express things are different. But sometimes I think we are totally different creatures and that maybe that’s a good thing and that maybe that’s a bad thing. All good to think about even if we’re never right, always right, or sometimes right about the similarities and differences with the sexes.

That wasn’t the reason I was posting, though. I wanted to ask . . . are you still going to take time off to work on your book? Just wanted to say that I will faithfully stick with you if you want to take that break because I’m really excited to see the book! Good luck with it!!

Reply

4 Elizabeth January 14, 2010 at 8:24 am

I’ve read that the relatively recent phenomenon of “guyland” (this extended adolescence of guys through their 20s) is related to guys not marrying until they’re older. Without the domesticating (I’m sure there’s a better word) influence of a wife, these guys are perpetually engaged in the rollicking and rowdy world of drinking and carousing. It’s not until they are forced to step outside of their selfish ways and feel the pressure to support a family that they become men. (Note that I think this is applying to women more as well.)

Reply

5 Perpetually Torn January 20, 2010 at 4:13 pm

I like your points on marriage… but I think the reason for any relationship is for validation. You can walk to the moon and back, move mountains, rule the world – and I don’t think any of that matters unless you have someone to share it with or at least to brag about it with (key word here is ‘with’)… that person makes your life valid, they give you a reason for being.

I think people now a days take that for granted because they have so many other outlets to share their accomplishments, failures, or feelings with… but at the end of the day, when facebook, twitter and blogs are shut off, friends go home and parents/siblings leave… life can be very lonely without someone there to give your life meaning.

Reply

6 Adventure-Some Matthew January 22, 2010 at 2:01 pm

I know that part of the reason I married my wife is because she complimented me so well. She is strong in some of the places I am weak (like communication) and vice versa. She also pushes me to be better (which might be more ME), either through encouragement to help me grow or compliments to make me want to continue on.

Specifics to the genders? There’s the nurturing aspect of women (generally speaking). Without that care, how many men would go through life sick and injured? Similarly, men are able to care for their wives when they are sick; to provide their strength when needed.

Um… opening jars and reaching things on the top shelves… :D (Meant in a playful tone!)

Reply

7 noname January 29, 2010 at 12:20 am

“When thinking this through, at one point I actually concluded that marriage is primarily designed for the benefit of women. I have since reconsidered, and decided that it was made for both sexes equally, but I still concede that marriage is pretty important for women.”

Marriage is an institution to keep women from having to seek a life of prostitution!

For men it is totally pointless, Married men have no legal rights, only legal obligations, While he is OBLIGATED to provide financially even in divorce she has no legal obligations whatsoever to the man. It has nothing to do with religious obligations because a marriage license is a Legal Contract.
You don’t have to be Married to be in love, and you don’t have to be married to make a baby, and despite the numerous lies told on this front after releasing his semen men have no enforceable parental rights.
Whether to give birth or abort, how it is raised, how it is named, There are cases where fathers gain custody, but as a rule if the woman wants her baby and she is not a mass murderer the courts will award her custody, A man only has financial obligations and until recently and currently in some provinces still a child born in a marriage but not of the married father is still the responsibility of the married man.

This is just my opinion, but I could be wrong however I know I am not because I have witnessed this first hand. >=0 So your quote about marriage being designed for the benefit of the woman you are bang on.

Somewhat HAPPILY divorced.

Reply

8 Kathleen Quiring January 29, 2010 at 2:57 pm

Wow. It sounds like you’ve had some negative experiences with marriage. I’m terribly sorry to hear that.

I should be clear that I’m not really concerned with legal marriage. When I talk about marriage, I’m not talking about the state-enforced institution, but rather the spiritual covenant made before God and witnesses. Most people in this country enter into both at the same time, making their marriage both legally and religiously binding, but I remain convinced that they are two distinct unions. You can be married in the eyes of the state but not in God’s and vice versa. And my main concern here is the spiritual union.

I have no doubt that the state-enforced institution is messed up. I’m sorry to hear that you’ve been so hurt and damaged by the laws that be.

Reply

9 Kathleen Quiring January 12, 2010 at 2:35 pm

Yes, you point to something that I forgot to mention in the post: that the overall need for these things has diminished radically in recent generations. Well, in industrialized countries, at least. They were much more important in the past. And yet, people are choosing to get married anyways for other valuable reasons. Thanks for noticing that, Susanne!

Reply

10 Molly W January 12, 2010 at 4:53 pm

Not to be a stick in the mud, but I see the other side too. People (in industrialized countries) no longer need to consider so many practical notions about marriage and this leads toward (what you’ve written about before) people marrying for romanticized and idealized ideas instead of practical realities.

I’m glad there are more people out there wanting to accept that “different, but equal” really does seem to relate to the genders. If men and women all could be capable of the exact same things than God could have just stopped at creating men and made it androgynous and capable of asexual reproduction. I like to think of it that a man and woman are supposed to equally fill a big circle that is made up of different traits and abilities and whether those abilities are traditionally prescribed to the masculine and feminine the eventual completion of the circle is what is important.

Reply

11 Elizabeth January 14, 2010 at 8:29 am

Oh, and speaking of the age of marriage, I wonder if you know anything about the history of it? I thought that nowadays our society must be waiting for marriage the longest, and yet I think I heard that this average age (which I believe is 25 for F, 27 for M) has been hit before (perhaps during the Great Depression?). I wonder if this didn’t happen until Enlightenment/Industrialization, or if it possibly occurred before that and is a cyclical thing? I’m tempted to think of marrying late as a recent trend, but really I haven’t done the research to know.

This could probably be a whole separate post though :)

Reply

12 Kathleen Quiring January 14, 2010 at 8:39 am

Man, I can never completely decide on the gender issue either. Are we the same or are we fundamentally different? I waver all the time, too.

Oh man. I took about a two-day break to work on my book and then returned to blogging. I keep having ideas for my blog and writing for it rather than for my book. I’m trying to balance both but it’s hard. Thanks so much for your encouragement and support, Mrs. Levine! You are too kind!

Reply

13 Mrs. Levine January 14, 2010 at 2:18 pm

I am totally with you! Blogging is like crack for the writer or something. I have a novel that I’m working on, but I can only get about an hour in before I start churning out blog ideas, wanting to check it, wanting to get those new little tidbits going. I think it must be the immediacy of getting it out into the world so quickly. I don’t know, but it certainly has an ADD effect on me when it comes to my concentration level for other types of writing. If you find a trick to switching between the two please give me a shout.

Reply

14 Molly W January 20, 2010 at 1:06 am

Though I can’t site specifics right now, history has shown that while women usually married young (to take advantage of fertility) it was very typical for men not to marry until their 30′s and for a long time marriage to older men was more advantageous because they were more likely to be past the raucous days of their youth, be settled in jobs/income, have already inherited property or have been discharged from active military service. In pre-industrialized countries you really did need for a man to settled in his career or trade before he became a really viable candidate.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post:

</