The fact is I am in my third marriage and I do not believe in divorce. But I was half the problem I guarantee you. More than half the problem. I couldn't negotiate with the other women.

Many women cut back what had to be done at home by redefining what the house the marriage and sometimes what the child needs. One woman described a fairly common pattern: I do my half. I do half of his half and the rest doesn't get done.

The sum and substance of female education in America as in England is training women to consider marriage as the sole object in life and to pretend that they do not think so.

I'm not that big a fan of marriage as an institution and I don't know why women need to have children to be seen as complete human beings.

If marriage can be redefined so that it no longer means a man and a woman but two men or two women why stop there? Why not allow three men or a woman and two men to constitute a marriage?

The state's interest in marriage is stability. Generally speaking polygamy does not work for stability. Inherent in the whole polygamous movement is a deep and abiding misogyny and denigration of women. So polygamy is objectionable on lots of grounds.

We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage.

I've exchanged messages and photos of an explicit nature with about six women over the last three years. For the most part these communications took place before my marriage though some have sadly took place after. To be clear I have never met any of these women or had physical relationships at any time.

Marriage encourages the men and women who together create life to unite in a bond for the protection of children.

French novels generally treat of the relations of women to the world and to lovers after marriage consequently there is a great deal in French novels about adultery about improper relations between the sexes about many things which the English public would not allow.