With half the marriages ending in divorce, can we still call it a sacred bond? Or is it "just a piece of paper?" Is living together a way to test a relationship? Or a way to avoid responsibilities?
Gina: The biggest mistake young women have been making since the advent of women's lib is living with a man before marrying him. In many cases, the man drags his feet on the subject of marriage and refuses to propose. It's the old saw about buying the cow when the milk is free.
In the meantime, the poor woman's biological clock is ticking away, and if she can finally persuade the selfish guy to marry her, it may be too late for her to conceive. It could take thousands of dollars and indescribable pain for the victim to get pregnant, and even then it might not work.
What has women's lib gotten the hapless female?
The ability to pay half the check on a dinner date, the right to stand on the bus while men are sitting, the privilege to pop the question and get turned down, the destiny to stay unmarried for life and to never know the joy of having a baby or the security and respectability that come from having a husband.
Timothy: I'm very upset about your remark that "nobody has to get married anymore. There's no stigma to living together or even having children without marriage." You need a reality check!
An army of educated professionals such as sociologists, psychiatrists, social workers, law enforcement agents, prison officials, AIDS workers and ministers can present a woefully sad picture of the results of your ignorant line of thinking.
A high percentage of male children of single parents, lacking a father figure, turn to gangs for male structure, leading to a life of drugs and crime.
Children having babies is the primary cause of poverty. The responsibility of raising these children is left to an overwhelmed social services system that was put in place for real needs, not the products of a casual sexual lifestyle. The illegitimate birth rate in Detroit is 82 percent, a statistic that a majority of American find appalling.
Any you think there's "no stigma" attached to this? Get real.
(Whoa! There are couples who live together who are every bit as committed to raising their children together as any married couple. To lump them in with lowlifes who breed and leave is grossly unfair.)
Ashley: That "little piece of paper" is anything but meaningless. It's a legally binding contract. It's an easy contract to make but a hard one to break. And that's a good thing.
If a couple is just living together, it's too easy to split if they have a fight. All one of them has to do is find a new place to live, pack up his or her stuff, call the mover and the relationship is over. It's like it never happened.
Married couples don't have that luxury. If they want to split up, it's going to cost them time and money. The lawyers and the state are going to get involved. That's a huge incentive for couples to work out their problems.
Did you live with someone? Did it lead to marriage? Did it strengthen the relationship or ruin it? Send your tale, along with your questions and problems to cheryllavin@aol.com. And check out my blog www.talesfromthefront.com. To find out more about Cheryl Lavin, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM
|
 |
Comments
|
6 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
1. I have a lot of trouble with Gina's comments. Women gained a great deal more than she presents with an increased awareness of our potential. And to describe the cohabiting woman as a "victim" is appalling. Those women who live with a man just hoping that eventually he will marry her are not the liberated, but the foolish, still stuck in the old mentality of "I can never be truly a woman without a -husband- - child- -family-." (fill in the blanks.) The security and respectability that comes with having a husband! Secuirity and respectability must come from within. 2. That said, I do agree that children should be born/adopted into a stable situation, which may not include marriage and which can include some singles, but emphatically not the cliche teen/disadvantaged/unwanted pregnancies. While children should never be damned for the acts of those who created them, there should still be a stigma to a pregnancy that will provide little but disadvantages, ignorance, instability, and pain. 3. Marriage is far more than a piece of paper. For most, it does make them think twice before flouncing out over little things and for them it provides a special bond. There are those that maintain a stable relationship without a formal bond, and if that works for them, they have made a commitment that must be respected. All too often, those who say "it's just a piece of paper" have one eye on the door.
Comment: #1
Posted by: julia
Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:48 AM
|
|
|
|
Gina's rhetorical qustion "what has women's lib gotten the hapless female?" makes the rest of her comments complete drivel. No woman should see herself as hapless. Women's lib gave me the choice to get married and I married a man who wanted a women who could take care of herself. It also gave me the ability to make money on my own without having to depend on my husband - which gives me equal bargaining power at home. My husband does not control the purse strings and, therefore, he does not control me. Was that work giving up my seat on the bus, paying my own way, and holding open my own door so I could walk through it? You betcha!!
Comment: #2
Posted by: sndelder
Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:16 PM
|
|
|
|
Julia, I was with you until you got to the part about how "some stigma" should be attached to some single moms. For persons living in poverty, their children are going to have a hard enough time as it is, whether the parents are married or not. I think single parenthood is definitely superior to married parents who are abusive or whatever, and that kind of thing runs through all income levels.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Madelyn
Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:38 PM
|
|
|
|
What has women's lib gotten us? Lets see, in the 1940s if your husband hit you, you were expected to not "antagonize him" now you can leave him. And further, you will often get the children when you do (no longer the expectation of kids staying with the better provider but with the better nurturer). Of course you may also be better educated (women's lib no longer meant you went to college for something to do while waiting to get married) and you may hold a better job (recognition that you need a real paycheck, just as a man does and not "lipstick money").
Women's lib has meant that some unhappy marriages never took place; people don't get married just to get the milk. The restrictive enviroment I grew up in meant there were many married & divorced within 2 years. They wanted to have sex, and they had to marry first If they'd just gone ahead and done it, they wouldn't have had to leave the marriage contracts to get away from the abuse or neglect.
That said, I do think if you spend longer that two years in a relationship without discussing marriage, you need to cut your losses. And women need to be clear about what they want. If you expect a ring within 3 years and you don't get it, you have only yourself to blame if you stay, waiting, and it never arrives.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Mich
Mon Mar 1, 2010 10:33 AM
|
|
|
|
I have many issues with the why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free comment. I have been living with my fiance for 4 years. I think that living together first strengthened our relationship. Because we could walk out the door at any time no string attached I think we work harder to make our relationship work. We strive to take care of each other and ourselves. We felt so sure in our bond and our love that last year we adopted a child together. Together we are saving for college for her and trying to give her the best example of what healthy relationships and love should look like. We strive to treat eachother with dignity and respect. I believe that the main reason we worked so hard on our relationship is because we knew it was easy for the other person to leave if they were not happy. Through our lack of official commitment we created a bond that is strong enough that we are now sure that when we get married it is going to be the only time. We worked through our issues because we didnt have to and rather because we wanted to. So my opinion on the subject of buying the cow... take him or her home first and make sure you can live in the same pasture...then buy the cow.
Comment: #5
Posted by: Corina
Wed Mar 3, 2010 7:07 AM
|
|
|
|
Per Gina's post: poor pathetic delusional female. Obviously she thinks her only purpose in this lifetime is to find a provider to take care of her so that she can have "respect". Moron.
Other people have previously commented on her question "What has women's lib gotten the hapless female?" and have already answered suitably. My comments...
"The ability to pay half the check on a dinner date" - a lot better than the insinuation that we should "put out" in reciprocation.
"the right to stand on the bus while men are sitting" - some men have health issues, and I don't have a broken leg.
"the privilege to pop the question and get turned down" - that's the same risk men take.
"the destiny to stay unmarried for life and to never know the joy of having a baby" - What makes Gina think that every single woman in the world wants, much less needs, to have babies? Being unmarried means you are your director, and you don't have to ask anyone for their permission to do what you want with the money that YOU earned.
"or the security and respectability that come from having a husband."- riduclous. She's living in the '40s. I married at the age of 40, and my husband, an electrical engineer, later ran into job problems, changing careers (now working on a masters to become a high school math teacher) and thank god I have the education and career to support us. Do I have security? Only that that I have provided for not only me but him, too. Do I have respect? Yes, but it doesn't come from being married. I have had respect (or perhaps Gina meant self-respect, and that's a whole other can of worms) since I have established my career for myself, long BEFORE I got married. When I met my husband we both owned our own places, our own cars, and had established careers. I was looking for a PARTNER, not a sugar daddy.
Comment: #6
Posted by: Lisa
Thu Mar 4, 2010 10:33 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
