A first marriage following the man is forty, and the girl not under thirtyfive, nor over the age at which her menses cease, is often fraught with evil for the husband is (or ought to be) unused to close intimacy with woman and for that reason knows not her nature. He is becoming selfish and frequently egotistic, and is likely to become a domestic tyrant. The wife can be changed and usually unfitted to coalesce in an ideal union of wedlock.
Besides, certain muscles and other areas have undergone a big change, in order that if she bears a kid there is pretty much danger attending the parturition. Again, if a vintage man marries a young woman or a young man an old woman, it is generally for money, or a home, or some other selfish motive. The disproportion within their ages fre quently leads younger person to illicit amours by the one also to the tortures of jealousy in the other.
Besides the con stitutions of children caused by the marathi matrimony of an old man with a woman will often partake of their paternal feebleness. If two aged persons who've passed age procreating choose to marry for his or her mutual society, comfort, or help, as they float down the blast of time, I could see no objections. According to the laws of ancient Sparta whenever a young woman married an aged and impotent man she was allowed to select a male adjunct to the family in a few other countries similar privileges were granted.
Inside our own country there are no such laws, however the practice may also be the same. Ill-assorted marriages, whether existing in disproportionate ages or not, are bids for clandestine concubinage, and the reality of it should be impressed upon the minds of the young of both sexes. While it is certainly the duty of young people to ask parental advice and weigh it with all reasonable consideration, they still have an inalienable liberty of preference whom they will marry. and since their life-long weal may depend on what wisely they choose, the selection ought to be wisely made.