Getting Married · Chapter
Does It Matter? explained
Shaw counters the complacent argument that because most couples get on well, marriage law is fine.
What happens
Shaw counters the complacent argument that because most couples get on well, marriage law is fine. He compares it to a magistrate ignoring burglary or a fireman ignoring a fire until it's their own house. He insists that the comfort of the majority does not justify exposing the unlucky or sensitive to intolerable wrongs, and that contentment under a flawed law is no excuse—just as slaves' comfort does not justify slavery. He concludes by focusing on the 'pence' of marriage's evils, letting the 'pounds' (crimes and diseases) speak for themselves.
Themes in this chapter
Hypocrisy and Social Pretense
Shaw attacks the complacent view that marriage law is fine because most couples are comfortable, likening it to a lazy magistrate or sleepy fireman ignoring dangers until personally affected.
Critique of Marriage as an Institution
Shaw argues that the marriage law is inherently flawed, and that the comfort of the majority does not justify condemning others to 'intolerable wrongs' or accepting a system akin to slavery.
Key passages
“After all, seeing that most couples get on very well together, does it matter so much?”
Since most married couples are happy, why worry about marriage law?
Shaw presents the common-sense objection he then demolishes.
“Slaves are very often much more comfortable both in body and mind than fully responsible free men. That does not excuse anybody for embracing slavery.”
Slaves can be more comfortable than free men, but that doesn't justify choosing slavery.
Shaw uses the analogy of slavery to argue that comfort under a bad system is no justification for accepting it.
“I am content, in this matter of the evils of our marriage law, to take care of the pence and let the pounds take care of themselves.”
I will focus on the small, everyday evils of marriage law; the big crimes and diseases will naturally draw attention.
Shaw explains his method: addressing minor injustices rather than only the most dramatic harms.