Welcome to an insightful interview with Professor Marcia Zug, a distinguished family law professor at the University of South Carolina School of Law.

 Professor Zug, whose academic background is nothing short of impressive with degrees from Dartmouth College and Yale Law School, has made noteworthy contributions to the domains of family law, immigration law, and American Indian law.

Her previous work, Buying A Bride, delved into the fascinating history of mail order marriages in the United States and received acclaim from reputable publications such as The New Yorker, The Atlantic, and The Times Literary Supplement. Professor Zug's expertise extends to various academic journals, including the Yale Law Journal, UC Davis Law Review, and Queen's University Law Review, where she has published many articles.

Professor Zug's research is predominantly centered on the convergence of family law and immigration law, tackling crucial matters such as VAWA's mail-order bride amendments and the division of immigrant parents from their American citizen children. Her astute observations have been highlighted in distinguished media outlets such as The Associated Press, CNN.com, The Guardian, and BBC Radio.

Besides her academic accomplishments, Professor Zug provides counsel to national organizations such as The Women's Refugee Commission, The National Indian Child Welfare Association, and The Southern Poverty Law Center, regarding legal issues that affect Native American and immigrant families.

Her expertise has earned her invitations to speak at renowned universities across the country, including Duke Law School, Wharton Business School, and Washington University, St. Louis.

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

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

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

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

The book was fun to write in part because it required so much research into the different non-love reasons people marry.

The stories I uncovered were fascinating and one of the hardest parts of writing the book was choosing what to include and what to edit out.

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

Norm: Can you share your personal motivation and journey that led you to explore unromantic reasons for marrying throughout history and write You’ll Do: a History of Marrying for Reasons Other Than Love?

Marcia: For as long as I can remember, my family has told the story of my great Aunt Rosie’s marriage.

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

After they married, the two fell in love, but they didn’t marry for love and because of that story, I have always been interested in the non-love reasons that people marry.

You’ll Do resulted from that interest.

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

Could you provide some examples or stories that illustrate this phenomenon?

Marcia: Many of the women you mentioned became famous as some of the last surviving Civil War widows.

These women were young girls during the Depression and married elderly Civil War veterans for their pensions.

The men knew well that these women were marrying them for their pensions, and many specifically cited eligibility for a widow’s pension as a reason to marry them.

One story recounted in the book is that of Helen Viola Jackson, the last official Civil War widow.

When Jackson was seventeen, she married a ninety-three-year-old Civil War veteran named James Bolin.

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

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

Recognizing that this might be the only way for her to keep her family’s farm, she agreed to the marriage. 

Norm: How has the American perception of marriage evolved over time, and how does it compare to other cultures and societies?

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

Historically, marrying for the economic, political or social benefits of marriage was accepted and expected.

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

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

Most Western societies have experienced a similar change and often cite the love match as one of the important differences between “modern” societies and those labeled backwards or repressive.

You’ll Do highlights both that it is a misperception that Americans only marry for love while also questioning whether the distrust of the non-love match is justified.

Norm: Can you shed light on how marriage has been used as a tool for influence and power, particularly regarding women's role in shaping their husband's choices?

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

This argument was also used to deny women the vote. Male politicians argued women didn’t need the vote, because they would vote through their influence over their husbands.

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

However, marriage could give women political power and many of the first female politicians were politicians’ widows who ran on a platform of continuing their husband’s political legacies.

Notably, men also used marriage to gain political power, most often by aligning themselves with their wives’ politically powerful family.

As everyone who has seen the musicial Hamilton knows, Hamilton’s interest in Eliza was at least as much about connecting him to the powerful Schuyler family as it was about love.

Norm: Were there any surprising or lesser-known historical events or stories that you uncovered during your research for the book that shed light on the unromantic reasons for marrying?

Marcia: I think the chapter people find the most surprising is the chapter on marrying for criminal benefits.

People are familiar with marrying for money or government benefits.

However, marrying for criminal defense seems so antithetical to the love match that many people are surprised to find out that not only is there a long history of such marriages, but that they still occur today.

The most obvious modern example is child marriage. Although sex with children is criminalized in every state, marriage provides a loophole to these prohibitions and, sadly, some people continue to take advantage of this marital exception.

Norm: In today's context, do you believe that society still relies on marriage to address certain societal ills, and if so, how does it manifest itself in contemporary times?

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

The most obvious one is using marriage to combat economic inequality. Historically, women married for money because they had few options for earning their own income.

Marriage was how women were expected to provide for themselves.

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

Men continue to out earn women and the gender wage gap remains a significant problem. For many women facing economic uncertainty, marriage remains their best economic option. 

Norm: Where can our readers find out more about you and You’ll Do: a History of Marrying for Reasons Other Than Love?

Marcia: The book will be out in January and available through bookstores and Amazon and other online booksellers.

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

Norm: What is next for Professor Marcia Zug?

Marcia: I guess it’s time to think about the next book. Perhaps that one will be about divorce. I am very interested in the growing movement to eliminate no fault divorce and make it harder for people to end their marriages. 

Norm: As we conclude our interview, how do you see the field or topic you've written about growing in the future, and what do you think are the most important questions or challenges that will need to be addressed?

Marcia: I guess that depends on whether we continue to link valuable benefits to marriage or whether we remove these benefits and make marriage an institution purely based on love. 

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

I think the future of marriage depends on which view you hold. If the decline in marriage is worrisome, then the government should continue doing everything in its power to incentivize marriage and that inevitably means linking rights 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 the rights and benefits that have traditionally been linked to marriage.

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