Immanuel Kant in a categorical imperative wrote: “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end.”

Note that he doesn’t set up “means,” utility or the exchange of material value as a binary opposition against his concept of humanity. I think either gender will find it more humane, and fulfilling when they mutually treat each other as an end. To me, this means there’s a genuine mutual positive psychological appraisal of each other, which survives independent of utility. It doesn’t mean though that utility is bad, unnecessary or harmful.

The truth is that marriage is the most transactional of all sex relationships, and the cost is in proportion to one’s wealth.

Marriage is like a credit card, except you don’t get the full bill (in proportion to your wealth), until you’re dead or divorced.