Welcome to an insightfulinterview with Professor Marcia Zug, a distinguished family lawprofessor at the University of South Carolina School of Law.

 Professor Zug, whoseacademic background is nothing short of impressive with degrees fromDartmouth College and Yale Law School, has made noteworthycontributions to the domains of family law, immigration law, andAmerican Indian law.

Her previous work, BuyingA Bride, delved into the fascinating history of mail order marriagesin the United States and received acclaim from reputable publicationssuch as The New Yorker, The Atlantic, and The Times LiterarySupplement. Professor Zug's expertise extends to various academicjournals, including the Yale Law Journal, UC Davis Law Review, andQueen's University Law Review, where she has published many articles.

Professor Zug's researchis predominantly centered on the convergence of family law andimmigration law, tackling crucial matters such as VAWA's mail-orderbride amendments and the division of immigrant parents from theirAmerican citizen children. Her astute observations have beenhighlighted in distinguished media outlets such as The AssociatedPress, CNN.com, The Guardian, and BBC Radio.

Besides her academicaccomplishments, Professor Zug provides counsel to nationalorganizations such as The Women's Refugee Commission, The NationalIndian Child Welfare Association, and The Southern Poverty LawCenter, regarding legal issues that affect Native American andimmigrant families.

Her expertise has earnedher invitations to speak at renowned universities across the country,including Duke Law School, Wharton Business School, and WashingtonUniversity, St. Louis.

Her forthcoming book,You’ll Do: a History of Marrying for Reasons Other Than Love, willbe available on January 9th, 2024. 

Norm: Good day Marciaand thanks for taking part in our interview.

How important isresearch to your writing process, and what sources do you use foryour research in writing You’ll Do: a History of Marrying forReasons Other Than Love?

Marcia: Hi Norm. Thank youso much for this opportunity to talk about You’ll Do.

The book was fun to writein part because it required so much research into the differentnon-love reasons people marry.

The stories I uncoveredwere fascinating and one of the hardest parts of writing the book waschoosing what to include and what to edit out.

Given my legal background,it is perhaps not surprising that a lot of my research focuses oncase law, including many sensational and controversial trials, but Ialso used many non-legal sources such as newspapers, magazines,letters, advertisements and movies and even songs.

Norm: Can you shareyour personal motivation and journey that led you to exploreunromantic reasons for marrying throughout history and write You’llDo: a History of Marrying for Reasons Other Than Love?

Marcia: For as long as Ican remember, my family has told the story of my great Aunt Rosie’smarriage.

In the late 1930s, Rosie,a young Jewish woman, traveled into Nazi Europe to marry a man shehad never met and save him from the concentration camps.

After they married, thetwo fell in love, but they didn’t marry for love and because ofthat story, I have always been interested in the non-love reasonsthat people marry.

You’ll Doresulted from that interest.

Norm: In your book, youmention that poor young women were encouraged to marry aged Civil Warveterans for lifetime pensions during the Great Depression. 

Could you provide someexamples or stories that illustrate this phenomenon?

Marcia: Many of the womenyou mentioned became famous as some of the last surviving Civil Warwidows.

These women were younggirls during the Depression and married elderly Civil War veteransfor their pensions.

The men knew well thatthese women were marrying them for their pensions, and manyspecifically cited eligibility for a widow’s pension as a reason tomarry them.

One story recounted in thebook is that of Helen Viola Jackson, the last official Civil Warwidow.

When Jackson wasseventeen, she married a ninety-three-year-old Civil War veterannamed James Bolin.

Jackson met Bolin when herfather sent her over to help with Bolin’s chores.

Bolin lacked the money topay for Jackson’s help, but he offered to marry her instead.

Recognizing that thismight be the only way for her to keep her family’s farm, she agreedto the marriage. 

Norm: How has theAmerican perception of marriage evolved over time, and how does itcompare to other cultures and societies?

Marcia: I think one of thebiggest changes regarding the perception of marriage, and one whichis repeatedly highlighted in the book, is the change in how modernAmericans view marrying for reasons other than love.

Historically, marrying forthe economic, political or social benefits of marriage was acceptedand expected.

In fact, marrying for lovewas often frowned upon as complicating marriage negotiations.Overtime, this view of marriage changed and today, marrying fornon-love reasons is essentially taboo.

America is also far fromalone in this aversion to marrying for reasons other than love.

Most Western societieshave experienced a similar change and often cite the love match asone of the important differences between “modern” societies andthose labeled backwards or repressive.

You’ll Dohighlights both that it is a misperception that Americans only marryfor love while also questioning whether the distrust of the non-lovematch is justified.

Norm: Can you shedlight on how marriage has been used as a tool for influence andpower, particularly regarding women's role in shaping their husband'schoices?

Marcia: Historically,marriage was touted as the way women would influence men’s choicesand, thus, the way women would exert political power.

This argument was alsoused to deny women the vote. Male politicians argued women didn’tneed the vote, because they would vote through their influence overtheir husbands.

This was a terrible way ofprotecting women’s rights and interests.

However, marriage couldgive women political power and many of the first female politicianswere politicians’ widows who ran on a platform of continuing theirhusband’s political legacies.

Notably, men also usedmarriage to gain political power, most often by aligning themselveswith their wives’ politically powerful family.

As everyone who has seenthe musicial Hamilton knows, Hamilton’s interest in Eliza was atleast as much about connecting him to the powerful Schuyler family asit was about love.

Norm: Were there anysurprising or lesser-known historical events or stories that youuncovered during your research for the book that shed light on theunromantic reasons for marrying?

Marcia: I think thechapter people find the most surprising is the chapter on marryingfor criminal benefits.

People are familiar withmarrying for money or government benefits.

However, marrying forcriminal defense seems so antithetical to the love match that manypeople are surprised to find out that not only is there a longhistory of such marriages, but that they still occur today.

The most obvious modernexample is child marriage. Although sex with children is criminalizedin every state, marriage provides a loophole to these prohibitionsand, sadly, some people continue to take advantage of this maritalexception.

Norm: In today'scontext, do you believe that society still relies on marriage toaddress certain societal ills, and if so, how does it manifest itselfin contemporary times?

Marcia: I do, but I alsohave deep concerns about that fact. Today, nearly all the historicreasons people entered non-love matches are still relevant.

The most obvious one isusing marriage to combat economic inequality. Historically, womenmarried for money because they had few options for earning their ownincome.

Marriage was how womenwere expected to provide for themselves.

Today, women (at leasttheoretically) have the same economic opportunities as men. However,economic equality between men and women has not been reached.

Men continue to out earnwomen and the gender wage gap remains a significant problem. For manywomen facing economic uncertainty, marriage remains their besteconomic option. 

Norm: Where can ourreaders find out more about you and You’ll Do: a History ofMarrying for Reasons Other Than Love?

Marcia: The book will beout in January and available through bookstores and Amazon and otheronline booksellers.

I will do readings inseveral cities and hopefully readers interested in learning more willhave an opportunity to come to a reading at their local bookstore. 

Norm: What is next forProfessor Marcia Zug?

Marcia: I guess it’stime to think about the next book. Perhaps that one will be aboutdivorce. I am very interested in the growing movement to eliminate nofault divorce and make it harder for people to end their marriages. 

Norm: As we concludeour interview, how do you see the field or topic you've written aboutgrowing in the future, and what do you think are the most importantquestions or challenges that will need to be addressed?

Marcia: I guess thatdepends on whether we continue to link valuable benefits to marriageor whether we remove these benefits and make marriage an institutionpurely based on love. 

Since the 1970s, marriagerates in the United States have declined significantly. Some peopleview this as a problem, while others view it as progress.

I think the future ofmarriage depends on which view you hold. If the decline in marriageis worrisome, then the government should continue doing everything inits power to incentivize marriage and that inevitably means linkingrights and benefits to marriage.

If, on the other hand,marriage is an outdated and increasingly irrelevant institution then,the government should find a different mechanism for distributing therights and benefits that have traditionally been linked to marriage.

Norm: Thanks once again and good luck with all of your endeavors