Single File by Susan Deitz

DEAR SUSAN: Last year, I mentioned marriage to a woman I'd been seeing and said there would have to be a prenuptial agreement because I'd been married before. She agreed to that. I mentioned it again recently and had my attorney draw up the papers. I paid to have her attorney interpret the document, but it didn't turn out well. She didn't like the terms and moved out. Now she won't let me see her son, whom I care for very much. What's my next step? — Troy C., Long Island, N.Y.

DEAR TROY: A giant step … backward. The updated golden rule — the guy with the gold rules — is the spirit of today's prenup, and because it's entwined with heartstrings, it's risky business. Because you have a material advantage, you're the king, but if you don't want to be forever exiled from your true love and her son, you'd be wise to contact your queen and meet to review the offending document — together! (As it should have been done before the legal killjoys were brought in.) The usual procedure is to confer and agree prior to legalities. First, you and your beloved settle on mutually acceptable terms. Then and only then are the legal eagles invited in. After all, it's you two who go home to the marriage; it's you two who must trust each other and feel secure for the future (especially because there's a young child involved). The goal here is harmony, not fiscal domination. Go to the phone and call her. Now.

DEAR SUSAN: You recently wrote, "Real freedom is quiet, confident, womanly, gentle, soft-spoken." While I understand that what you're trying to get across is that aggression and male bashing are not the answer, that sentence is far too close to a line from a ladies etiquette book from the 19th century for my comfort. As a woman, no, as a human being, I do not wish to be told how to speak or behave.

Of course, the hateful responses of some so-called "feminists" betray feelings of resentment and low self-esteem and therefore backfire. However, it is not necessary to be quiet, gentle or soft-spoken to be a proper and free woman. Women, like all people, are individuals with unique personalities. There is no one right way to be. It is exactly that assumption — that if we all followed the proper line and behaved appropriately, all gender issues would be healed — that has impeded the progress of all women (and men!). Isn't it about time we threw out that assumption and moved on? Maybe if we focused more on ourselves as individual human beings rather than identifying with the groups "women" and "men," everyone could find a new — and truer — experience of freedom. Thank you for your time and all your wonderful articles. — Kate W., Peoria, Ill.

DEAR KATE: Kate, dear reader, your thoughts are duly noted and appreciated, but as it turns out, you're preaching to the choir! The uniqueness of the individual is my life's work, a vision affirmed by the ongoing and unstoppable revolution toward singleness. It is a global shift that is changing national laws, answering populations that are no longer willing to be constrained by institutions that have gone stale and unresponsive. (Now I'm the one preaching to the choir, eh?) We're most definitely on the same page, Kate, and I, for one, am happy to be there. But as for my description of true freedom, well, it's far from 19th-century wisdom. As I see the woman of the 21st century, she is indeed quiet and confident. Gentle and soft-spoken. But ever ready and prepared to assert at the right time. She is no shrinking violet, no repressed voice that dare not speak. Far from it. As a fan, you of all people should know this. Still, I suppose it bears repeating. And so it goes.

Write to Susan Deitz in care of this newspaper. She will answer all letters that come with a self-addressed, stamped envelope. Or you may e-mail her at info@creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.