From: THAHARA@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu
Subject: Re: Marriage and related issues - continued..
Organization: Yale University
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 17:08:28 EDT

I was in the process of writing a response on this topic when the article
got accidentally posted prematurely :  As I was saying........
 
 
>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.
 
DINESH :
>>Maybe, I am not qualified to talk about the practicality of this approach
>>since I am not married. But this is my attitude anyway.
>
HARSH :
>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 ..........
 
 contd.....Neither of us keeps a tally of the amounts of work done by us.  The
attitude is "Ask not what your spouse does for you but what you can do for the
spouse and the family".  If both partners are sincere with each other, (and
this is absolutely necessary in a marriage in any case), then this results
in the most efficient method of distributing responsibilities.  For example,
every evening, when we return from work, whoever comes home first starts the
cooking.  There are periods when one spouse is very busy at work, at that time
100% of the housework gets done by the other person for weeks at a stretch and
vice versa.  Nobody is doing anybody a favour; we are just doing the work that
"needs to be done" as Dinesh puts it.  The system has worked extremely well
for us and neither of us has any regrets.  So Dinesh, I can give you at least
one example of the practicality of your approach.  The beauty of this approach
is that ultimately measured on a lifelong timescale, the contributions probably
equally distributed between the two.  However, this is not a necessary
condition for us to give each other equal say in our decisions.
 
I would just like to respond to one more point mentioned by the original
poster.  He correctly mentions that both husband and wife get moral and
emotional support from each other.  I had never disputed that in my earlier
article.  However, the point I wanted to make is that in the partnership
of marriage, when both individuals need each other's support so much, it is
crucial that they see each other as equals and not as superior and inferior.
Somehow, it is much harder to get the same kind of support from one's superior
or inferior than it is from one's equal.  This is my strong belief, based on
my own experiences and observation of other marriages where spouses have
different kinds of relationships.  Almost invariably, where the spouses have a
superior-inferior relationship, they tend to go to their other peers (usually
other people of the same sex) rather than their own spouses for support.
Also, I think that true enjoyment of companionship with each other is also much
more facilitated when both partners treat each other as equals.
 
Harsh Thaker
 
PS: This discussion is getting way to long, and I do not wish to continue it
on the bulletin board.  Iff anyone wishes to continue it with me, then please
use e-mail.
>
>>Dinesh