The Nineteenth Century, Middle-Class Woman's Adherence to the
             Marriage is essentially a socio-cultural structure: it is defined according to prevailing norms in society and culture for gender and family. Thus women and men entering into the institution of marriage do not create it anew; they agree to embrace the ideals and standards of what is already a socially defined and thus legitimate relationship. Historically, the definitions of marriage have been mainly functional; marriage has been regarded as a means to procreation, an economic agreement, an important method of linking families, and, as the basis of another social structure: the 'home'. Technically, all these functions of marriage do not require the husband and wife to share an emotional relationship. Indeed, historically, love and marriage have not always been synonymous concepts. It was not until the late nineteenth century that a new ideal emerged - that of the "companionate marriage" - which proposed mutual affection between spouses and emotional satisfaction as necessary requirements of marriage. This developed against the backdrop of the "separate spheres" ideology, in which gender roles were clearly differentiated: wives and husbands had distinct and usually conflicting priorities. "Women practiced virtue at home in their domestic, reproductive, and maternal activities" and were raised to be loving, pious and compassionate, while "men worked in the marketplace, and took part in representative politics," and so were allowed to be ruthlessly ambitious, insensitive and authoritative (Smith, 182). It would seem fair to posit then, that the ideas of companionate marriage had a greater value for or were more immediately appealing to nineteenth century women, than men. Three articles that explore this idea are "Conflicting Expectations in British Matrimony: The Failed Companionate Marriage of Effie Gray and John ...