The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1929-11-11
LOUe Needs
Security to
Lice, GrO7e
BY MARTHA LEE


Sinclair Lewis, one of the most
famous of modern novelists, gave
talk the other night in Indian
apoliS that. knocked quite few
modern theories for a cooked hat.
| She had been in Russia lately.
! AS you know, Russia is supposedly
the most modern, the most liber-
tine nation on earth. In other
words, the morals of the people are
supposed to be the most loose. Con-
ventions, as recognized by the rest
of the world, are supposed to be
the least burdensome.
And yet, after having spent some
time in Russia, where husband is
gotten rid of as easily as he is &C
quired (perhaps more 500, Miss
| Thompson returns to tell us that
Russian women are intensely I'M
happy over the state of affairs, ma
trimonial and emotional.
Modern Ideas Wanting
In other words, they have eX-
perimented with the most modern
of ideas concerning the freedom of
| the individual and those ideas have
been found wanting. Not because
of economic reasons, not because of
moral reasons, but because they
leave the heart empty of love and
! the life arid of romance. Because,
with the most engulfing emotion of
! love and passion, there also must
be at least feeling of permanency
and security.
Marriage is changing. There is
no doubt of that. 1t is becoming
a more sane state. Naturally, with
the acceptance of women as
people and not as chattels, orna-
mentS, or necessities to the earth's
welfare, their position at least in
the intellectual world has changed.
But it has not, and never will,
change to the extent that women
will not want the security of mar
rage and a home and family, under
the legal and moral status of mar
riage.
Woman Writes of Daring
A woman who thinks it is being
brave to defy conventions and the
accepted standard of marriage has
written a letter that diScloses at
least some of the reasons why men
wonder why women were considered
capabl of casting a vote.
Dear Miss Lee-I have been going with
a young man for about three years. We
are deeply in love, but we both hate tc
give up our freedom. We dislike the idea
of having to remain together all our lives
merely because it is a law to do so, once
one is married.
We both have been talking of establish
Ing a home on the companionate marriage
plan. L am not sold completely on the
idea. I would like you to give me some
reasons why you think it is not a gooc
idea.
Besides our objection to the shackle.
that marriage places upon one, we d.
not feel we have the funds, to marry OF
the established plan.
, PUZZLED
If you can understand that once
you are in love, really, you are more
shackled to man than any MUIR
to the accepted standards can make
you, then you can understand what
minor problem this fear of losing
your freedom, as you say, can be.
A girl who enters into a com.
panionate marriage with a man j:
not only giving up her freedom, a!
legal wives do, she is giving it W
| without any of the advantages O.
marriage She has not the security
5 the feeling Of permanence, the sense
J of well being that wife has.
Man Shirks Ties
If this man hates to give up hi
! freedom to you, you can know tina
he does not intend to be bound tt
you in any way. The companion
ate plan sounds modern and free
,, AS matter of fact, it is more bind
,, ing that any other form of mar.
! riage.
It definitely cuts you off from
further opportunities, it lowers YOU
status, it binds you emotionally. L
has all the disadvantages and none
OF the advantages. Love and Sacri-
! flee are all very fine and noble.
But no man can love a woman
who. hasn't good sense, and, really
my dear, as we think now, at least
this is not only lack of good sense
but poor taste as we'll.