I would also be leary of cohabitation at this point. More and more laws are being put on the books in different states or are being set by precedent that dictate how cohabitation would end. In short, you will soon have to have a divorce for living together. In fact, many family law firms are starting to really push the idea of "living together" contracts. These are mostly set up for people to protect themselves and their interests. Keep in mind, if you are the monied partner in a cohabitory relationship and you split up, in many states, the nonmonied partner can sue you for palimony and only needs to establish evidence of an "implied" contract for the court to order the award. Male or female, its always the one with the money who gets screwed.
So, yes, a ban on all government-recognized marriages is what I propose. It seems to me we may be evolving there on our own. The marriage rate in the U.S. has decreased 10-fold between 1960 and 2000 (U.S. Census). A study by Rutgers also showed that young men are far less likely to propose marriage now than ever before. Staying single really is the way to go, and I'm glad to see both sexes are finally coming to this realization. IMO, a cohabitory or marital relationship should now be approached as a financial issue, almost like a corporate merger. Can you mutually benefit from the arrangement? If not, in today's environment where marriage and divorce are more easily attained than escaping a bad cell phone contract, individuals will be better served to protect their assets and not allow their emotions to get the better of them
Last time I checked there were still lots of people on this planet. If they're really concerned about keeping their population up, they could let more people immigrate instead of telling women they need to breed
Most folks take marriage as a mandatory social construct -- many think they essentially have no choice, except to remain alone. But most people enter their relationships assuming that "marriage" means the same thing to everyone.
I would love to see what happened if people had to separately negotiate their expectations and contributions to the relationship when they commenced it. Not just the money, of course!
What if people had to separately negotiate the terms of their sexual relationship -- any commitment to exclusivity, for example; their roles in keeping their living space, like cleaning, routine maintenance and renovations; their roles in childbearing and childcare.
I think if people started sitting down to work these things out, they would be shocked how much the two partners took for granted -- and how different their preconceived notions were.
I was also reading a study not long ago about Japanese women that were returning to Japan after attending high school and college in the States and were refusing to date Japanese men, particularly those men that had stayed and come to adulthood in Japan.
The reasons given were that in the US they had learnt independence as women and a semblence of egalitarianism, and simply weren't prepared to take what they saw as a step back to the traditional roles for women in Japanese society; those that they were being expected of them by these men.
I have to wonder if these aren't related.
Now, as to the governmental recognition of marriage. Personally I agree with the others above that stated that the government should stay out of the recognition of marriage. However, while it IS involved, I am going to fight my heart out to get the same government benefits for my relationships that straight get.
No comments:
Post a Comment