From: THAHARA@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu
Subject: Re: Marriage and related issues - My view; A different attitude
Organization: Yale University
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 13:16:44 EDT

In article <1992Apr14.155833.6804@news.nd.edu>
dkulkarn@mozart.helios.nd.edu (Dinesh Kulkarni) writes:
 
>
>In article <1992Apr13.214406.6962@uoft02.utoledo.edu> grx0751@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>>
>>	Partners contributing unequally to the family environment (how this is
>>	so by the simple fact of being a bread-winner is, see above), YET
>>	getting equal say while taking decisions is equality in your opinion?
>>
>>
>> PS:	If anybody else wishes to follow up, please do so without any name
>>	calling and with civility. Tell me where I am wrong and why.
>
>Here's my objection to the attitude displayed above:
>
>	Marriage IMO SHOULD NOT be treated as a partnership firm or a joint
>stock company with votes (or say) pro-rated to your contribution. The commercial
>attitude might create wonderful economies (does it really? but anyway) but
>it is not a good basis for marriage. Here's my view:
>
>	Marriage is a non-pro-rated partnership in which the contributors
>do what it takes to have a successful family (should be a mutually agreeable
>state of affairs). If I can earn all the money required (or bulk of it)
>and also help in domestic chores, I will do so w/o reducing my partner's
>say. Reciprocally, I would also expect to have a say (substantial but not
>exact - divide by 2 style in any case) even if my wife is earning more
>or is doing more otherwise. This, I believe is real commitment. Of course,
>one partner should not carry on all the burden because the other partner is
>a work-shirker. In short, the approach should be - this is what we want,
>this is what it takes to do it, this is what I can do and this is what
>you can do. The say you get is by virtue of being my partner and not because
>you have contributed X dollars (or Rupees) or Y hours of work.
 
HEAR HEAR!  My sentiments exactly!  This was exactly what I was trying to drive
 at in my earlier response on this topic.  The additional reason for this kind
of approach is that marriage involves too many intangible contributions from bo
th partners.  In the course of a lifetime, there are many unpredictable events
that may change the relative contributions of each partner.  It is very
impractical to have well-set "job descriptions" for husband and wife ;
impossible to quantify the "amount" of work done and equally impossible to have
 a corresponding "quid pro quo" in the influencing of decisions.  Also, IMO,
both partners and the entire family stand to gain if the spouses enjoy an
equal (or approximately equal) status in the relationship.
 
>Maybe, I am not qualified to talk about the practicality of this approach
>since I am not married. But this is my attitude anyway.
 
Well, I can tell you about my own experience, since I am married.  My wife and
I have adopted the same attitude that you have described.  We do practice the
principle of equality of status.  She has as much say as I do about everything.
Over the last 5 years of our marriage, our incomes have varied from me making m
ore to she making more than me.  Our relative contributions to housework and
other tasks fluctuate wildly from 100 - 0 % to 0 - 100%.  Neither of us keeps a
 tally of any
 
 
 
 
 
>Dinesh