Marriage Isn't a Drag, Kids Are.

You've hit it on the nail

By: Kamil | Fri, 07/03/2009 - 02:00

Marriage Isn't a Drag, Kids Are - you've hit it on the nail here at least for me. My marriage is beautiful and my husband and me are great together, we have a lovely son and its a great bonding we have.

But my son needs my time and therefore at times my husband and me cannot spend quality time together as earlier. Sitting on the king size mattress we sit around our son playing and chatting but as soon as we are together he just wants to be between us again.

I understand that's the case for a few years till he grows up but by then it could become huge drag and we'll just lose a little spark.

Marriage Problems

By: nitsnitz | Thu, 07/02/2009 - 01:31

Well, it is true, sometimes mothers of couples getting married are having high and unexpected expectations to person their daughter or son is going to be married. This may be economical, social, family and dislikes issues. Despite of all these things some other marriage problems come to the life of couples and families. These common problems are infidelity, stubborn spouse, unfaithfulness, extra marital affair, anger, lack of communication skills, dowry, verbal abuse, divorce, financial abuse, relationship addiction and many more. In all these relationship conflicts you need help of an experienced and certified marriage counselors. Make sure that you are being logical when you classify the behavior that you feel is causing the marriage problem and attempt to recall if the character or behavior that you have identified in your spouse are 'fixable' in your mind assuming of course, that your spouse will concur that you are correct.
http://www.marriage-counselors.net/couples-problems/Marriage-Problems.htm

Thank God somebody said it!

By: Grace H. | Wed, 06/17/2009 - 12:51

Thank you, Jessica, for calling Tsing-Loh on her equating of marriage with parenting, economics and house management. And thank you, Meredyth, for reminding us that marriage can be, instead, a personally fulfilling partnership: "nothing more or less than the combination of two lives into a powerful shared experience of our world."

As a happily married, childless woman, I'm probably a little defensive about this. But it makes me CRAZY when people think the only reason to get married is to have children (with the economic partnership/shared household piece as a subset of that). People seem to feel that, since we can have rewarding relationships without marriage, it is only the responsibility for raising children that necessitates a legal contract. But I'm just idealistic enough to think that a publicly declared commitment to share one's life with somebody else is so important -- so mmeaningful -- that it justifies marriage in and of itself.

Sure, caring for children and a household puts a strain on a marriage. But I suspect that more strain is created by the very act of perceiving that marriage as simply a vehicle for parenting and household management.

I think the fact that I feel this way -- and that my husband does too -- might be part of the reason why we're still happily together (friendship, sparks, and all) after 17 years.

Of course, I also know that we are very lucky.

No point to marriage without children?

By: Meredyth | Wed, 06/17/2009 - 10:53

Wow. So what's the point of marriage if you don't have children? Gee, I sincerely hope you never run into problems with infertility. What would the point of your marriage be, after all, if you found out that you can't make the point of your marriage a reality? Might as well get a divorce, no point in being married if you can't make the babies. Marriage with or without children . . . assuming you've married someone you actually like, who is your friend . . . is the most fulfilling friendship you will ever have. (Or, indeed, what about the marriage of two women? Is the object of THAT marriage procreation? Or is there, POSSIBLY, something more to marriage than the formation of a [temporary] family unit?)

Marriage is nothing more or less than the combination of two lives into a powerful shared experience of our world. Go to m-w.com, you will find that the third definition of marriage is "an intimate or close union" (the dictionary gives the example of the marriage of painting and poetry). I think that this mentality that the object of marriage is to create children (besides being incredibly antiquated) leads a lot of fabulous women to marry Mr. Right-Now . . . leading eventually to Mr. Ex-Husband several years (or decades) later after they've accomplished their procreation objective. However, ladies, if you do find Mr. Right, he can, I believe, be Mr. Forever too, the best friend you will ever have. The object of marriage isn't children (they are a happy result of many marriages, it's true). The object of marriage should be your friendship with your spouse, personal enrichment and encouragement of one another, and a shared journey through the universe. He's not just your sperm donor.

Now, I realize that this is thought to be a rather modern view of marriage. Marry your friend? Marry someone you respect and who respects you? A mutually enriching life experience? But consider Pride and Prejudice (published in 1813) . . . . There were pressures to get married on women (to save oneself from abject poverty, if nothing else), to be sure, but why does that story resonate with all of the ersatz Bridget Joneses among us today? It's because we think we're smart, self-sufficient, witty creatures like Elizabeth Bennett, and we want to be loved and respected for those qualities. What is that but friendship dressed up as romance?

One final point: We wouldn't think twice about a friendship between two women lasting 50, 60, 70 years. Why does that relationship seem natural and sweet and an enviable goal to us, but the friendship and marriage of a man and a woman that lasts that long is an out-dated meme, an impossible goal? Why are our friendship with other women more important to us than our friendships with our spouses? Is it possible that THAT many women do not marry their friends?

Not sure childless marriages would fare better

By: Anna Balkrishna | Tue, 06/16/2009 - 17:21

Ok, so you're saying that people without kids would be able to keep their spark aflame decades into their marriage? Somehow I feel like boredom would still set in. This may sound un-romantic, but I can't imagine the point of marriage unless I'm planning on having children. Doesn't seem realistic to remain with one person simply for the companionship for 30 or 40 years; I'd get married because I needed the shared resources it would take to raise a child over a couple of decades. And as Tsing-Loh points out, you really don't even need to be married to be good and loving co-parents.

@lucyb

By: Rooj | Tue, 06/16/2009 - 16:32

I wouldn't let the article get you down.
My grandparents (who did not have traditional roles, she worked as a teacher, he was a botanist) met at the age of 7 (grandfather) and 9 (grandmother). They got married in their mid 20s and are still happily married at the age of 93 and 95. They have 3 daughters, and 3 grandchildren.

I am betting for every divorce there are probably at least 3 marriages that work, they just don't sell that well. (stats have divorce rate for college grads at 30%).

Sadness in my heart...

By: lucyb | Tue, 06/16/2009 - 15:48

Tsing-Loh's piece was SO depressing to me. As someone who is getting married this year and grew up with extremely unhelpful parental role models for both a healthy marriage and child-rearing, I feel shit up a creek. Its like a happy marriage and a happy family are impossible and I almost feel silly for wanting it...

stress comes in many forms

By: omnibaby | Tue, 06/16/2009 - 14:59

Here here to giving up child rearing responsibilities. The unhappiest women I know are those who can't draw even the barest of boundaries between their needs and their children's needs, and feel guilt at the mention of any kind of child care outside the family. "My children can't be cared for people who don't love them". I think children need to realize that while people should be nice to them, they all don't worship the ground they walk on!

When I see friends of mine with children whose marriages are over or crumbling that seemed considerably better before kids, I don't think it's childrearing in and of itself that did the damage. I think it's that these people didn't know each other as well as they thought, or didn't know themselves as well as they thought, added a huge potential stressor to their relationship, found out, and didn't know how to deal with it.

And anyone who thinks that their sex drive is low simply because they're stressed out or tired is clearly evading the most obvious fact there is about sex: it's a stress reliever. It makes people feel good! The stress or exhaustion may make you clam up and leave you not feeling that "come and get it" purr down under like you used to, but if you make it a priority and listen to how you feel when you're laying there in afterglow bliss (which for me at least is "why the hell don't I do this more often?!") you might not find yourselves hating each other or your lives quite so much! Smoking pot and getting frisky once the kids have gone to bed has saved my marriage and sanity more than family therapy ever would.

I think having kids was the best thing that ever happened to me and my marriage. That added level of commitment and sharing (and yes, economic limitations!) made it possible for me to stick around and really dig through some of the shit that was starting to fly from my direction when all the extra stress, identity challenges, relationship strain etc. mounted alongside the piles of dirty dishes and diapers. After years of sweating through it and having just had my second little guy I can say I've never been happier personally, professionally or artistically. I'm not sure I'd ever have grown in such a positive way and really dedicated myself to paying more than lip service to my own values without them or even if me and my baby's daddy would still be together.

But I could have just left and written a book about how ridiculous it all was and I probably wouldn't have been all wrong, either - there are plenty of ridiculous things about being married or being a parent in today's world. But just like with anything else you've got to make your own path, cliffs be damned.

I may only be up to five years in the relationship...

By: auros | Tue, 06/16/2009 - 14:47

...but I'm one of those men that co-everythings (or at least works to split chores evenly; I'm by far the better cook, and in fact she basically didn't cook at all until I taught her how), and strangely, I seem to still be completely crazy about my girl. She's kind of mystified by this, and occasionally asks why. I don't have a particularly good answer. Just am. *shrug*

Maybe we're going through some sort of generational transition, where a bunch of the people (like Tsing-Loh) who fought for and won the equal partnership, are still too steeped in the culture of the previous generation to actually thrive in it, whereas those of us who are 25-35 grew up expecting this kind of relationship, and thus are more likely to do well in it.

I'm glad this was posted

By: deltadisco | Tue, 06/16/2009 - 13:40

I'm glad this was posted because I also wonder why it's always "marriage doesn't work" rather than "my marraige didn't work"?

As pointed out she obviously didn't place the "work" of a relationship as a priority over her parental (and perhaps even professional) duties even though she certainly had the means to do so.

Even worse is this idea put forth about “companionate” marriages. It seems to me that hers wasn't exactly *equally* divided in every realm. Her (ex) husband is travelling quite a bit - getting away from the house and kids and everything that entails. She's working - but she's working from home. That's not even the sort of office job that people can use to keep from going stir-crazy by being alone, or mostly alone, in the house.

In many ways it sounds like she managed to combine the worst aspects of having a career and a being a stay-at-home mom.