Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That just seems to be what many people envision when they think of a "relationship."
But why? What moron came up with the idea that couples must merge their lives? (Which is code for doing everything on the woman's terms, anyway.) Why can't couples join together when certain times require doing so (like pay taxes or go on outings that require a date), and leave each other alone outside of those times? This way, each partner can still actually enjoy their life and have the freedom to do as they please. (Outside of sexual stuff with other people, that is, unless it's an open marriage.)
The last part actually used to be true back in the 50's. A husband could go play poker and talk shop with his Elks Lodge buddies, and a wife could go hang out with her knitting circle, on any night of the week, no permission required. Each person had their own life. Nobody controlled nobody. Marriage was mainly an operational partnership. And yet, couples still ran households quite successfully. Why can't we bring that back?
Last edited by MillennialUrbanist; 04-03-2018 at 05:09 PM..
Why would people envision something so unrealistic?
If you think that it is unrealistic then I question your expertise. Two people need to establish respect, communication, and compromise..... Just to name a few. That's even before we even mention attraction and compatibility.
It takes genuine effort on both parts but certainly not unrealistic.
Keeping in sync... Like maintaining all that plus expectations and boundaries doesn't equate to being attached at the hip. In fact how much time spent together versus as individuals is one of those expectations that a couple must work out and keep in sync.
But why? What moron came up with the idea that couples must merge their lives? (Which is code for doing everything on the woman's terms, anyway.) Why can't couples join together when certain times require doing so (like pay taxes or go on outings that require a date), and leave each other alone outside of those times? This way, each partner can still actually enjoy their life and have the freedom to do as they please. (Outside of sexual stuff with other people, that is, unless it's an open marriage.)
The last part actually used to be true back in the 50's. A husband could go play poker and talk shop with his Elks Lodge buddies, and a wife could go hang out with her knitting circle, on any night of the week, no permission required. Each person had their own life. Nobody controlled nobody. Marriage was mainly an operational partnership. And yet, couples still ran households quite successfully. Why can't we bring that back?
Who said that was the case? I would argue that this is one of the things couples need to decide for themselves. Certainly not for me. However there is a couple at work that is rarely apart... And that's all he talks about.. Puke.. But eh. Works for them.
Maybe I'm just lucky, but I don't feel like marriage is work at all! We get along great and honestly see eye to eye on almost everything. There are very few times that I can say that we don't. I think if you're truly compatible, it should not be "work". We do things together as a couple and also as a family with our kids. We have our own time as well. My DH bowls once a week and I take a Zumba class with my friends. Sometimes he takes our girls to gymnastics, sometimes I do and sometimes be both go. We take family trips and we go on short trips without our kids. You can't be joined at the hip 24/7, I think that would drive anyone crazy!
We have been married 16 years, together 18 and have known each other 27 yrs. And no, life is not perfect, we have hadour fair share of "life's challenges" thrown at us, but because we are not only spouses, but friends it has helped us through those challengers. Trust me, I dated many "winners" before I found my DH and I can truly say we are sole mates. It just works.
But why? What moron came up with the idea that couples must merge their lives? (Which is code for doing everything on the woman's terms, anyway.) Why can't couples join together when certain times require doing so (like pay taxes or go on outings that require a date), and leave each other alone outside of those times? This way, each partner can still actually enjoy their life and have the freedom to do as they please. (Outside of sexual stuff with other people, that is, unless it's an open marriage.)
The last part actually used to be true back in the 50's. A husband could go play poker and talk shop with his Elks Lodge buddies, and a wife could go hang out with her knitting circle, on any night of the week, no permission required. Each person had their own life. Nobody controlled nobody. Marriage was mainly an operational partnership. And yet, couples still ran households quite successfully. Why can't we bring that back?
Huh.
My grandparents spent the 1950s working (yep, grandma, too...no June Cleaver), and in their leisure time, participating in league bowling together with other couples from their neighborhood and work.I guess they never got the memo that they weren't supposed to be doing things together.
I think you have a fairly cliche-informed view of the past.
My grandparents spent the 1950s working (yep, grandma, too...no June Cleaver), and in their leisure time, participating in league bowling together with other couples from their neighborhood and work. I guess they never got the memo that they weren't supposed to be doing things together.
Well, I meant that the 1950's couples had the option to go do things separately, without being looked down upon or asking their spouse's permission. Like in my examples with the Elks Lodge and the knitting circle. I never insinuated that men's and women's hobbies were as separate as public restrooms. With that said, today, it seems like couples are required to be joined at the hip at all times, excluding work.
Well, I meant that the 1950's couples had the option to go do things separately, without being looked down upon or asking their spouse's permission. Like in my examples with the Elks Lodge and the knitting circle. I never insinuated that men's and women's hobbies were as separate as public restrooms. With that said, today, it seems like couples are required to be joined at the hip at all times, excluding work.
What do you mean, without "permission"? My grandparents and parents always cleared stuff with one another.
They didn't literally just walk out the door without saying a word. And if they wanted to start some regular weekly just guys or just girls thing, of course they cleared it with the spouse first. Each had a responsibility to the household and they had the responsibility to make decisions together, nobody swung in and out the door without saying anything. It wasn't a crack house, it was a marriage.
I know NO couples older than sophomore year of high school who are attached at the hip and never do things separately. People expect to have their me time...and are polite enough to let one another know. If you're talking about your friends, they appear to find time with their spouses more appealing than time with you but that doesn't mean they never do things separately. Maybe they're just avoiding your negative take on relationships, something they themselves value. Maybe they're just sick of hearing it.
I wonder why you keep posting stuff like this? You say your home life was full of screaming and dysfunction with the spouses miserable but then you post about how amazing things were in the past - huh?
I know NO couples older than sophomore year of high school who are attached at the hip and never do things separately. People expect to have tneir me time...and are polite enough to let one another know. I wonder why you keep posting stuff like this? You say your home life was full of screaming and dysfunction with the spouses miserable but then you post about how amazing things were in the past - huh?
There's my past, and there's America's past. I was born in early 1980's, and the worst of my parents' fighting happening in 1990's and 2000's. That's long, long after the 1950's. Also, there's a BIG difference between a polite but firm "heads up, I'm going out" vs. what I imagine all couples to be like.
As for the couples who are attached at the hip and never do things separately (other than work), that's my friends and their wives. They're in mid 30's, like me. While my home life planted the seeds, seeing my friends' relationships unfold was the last straw, as far as not wanting to marry is concerned.
But why? What moron came up with the idea that couples must merge their lives? (Which is code for doing everything on the woman's terms, anyway.) Why can't couples join together when certain times require doing so (like pay taxes or go on outings that require a date), and leave each other alone outside of those times? This way, each partner can still actually enjoy their life and have the freedom to do as they please. (Outside of sexual stuff with other people, that is, unless it's an open marriage.)
The last part actually used to be true back in the 50's. A husband could go play poker and talk shop with his Elks Lodge buddies, and a wife could go hang out with her knitting circle, on any night of the week, no permission required. Each person had their own life. Nobody controlled nobody. Marriage was mainly an operational partnership. And yet, couples still ran households quite successfully. Why can't we bring that back?
If you think that it is unrealistic then I question your expertise. Two people need to establish respect, communication, and compromise..... Just to name a few. That's even before we even mention attraction and compatibility.
It takes genuine effort on both parts but certainly not unrealistic.
Keeping in sync... Like maintaining all that plus expectations and boundaries doesn't equate to being attached at the hip. In fact how much time spent together versus as individuals is one of those expectations that a couple must work out and keep in sync.
I'm only asking about keeping in sync.
You are talking about lots of other stuff that is not even related.
It really should not be this complex. That's part of the problem.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What moron came up with the idea that couples must merge their lives? (Which is code for doing everything on the woman's terms, anyway.) Why can't couples join together when certain times require doing so (like pay taxes or go on outings that require a date), and leave each other alone outside of those times? This way, each partner can still actually enjoy their life and have the freedom to do as they please. (Outside of sexual stuff with other people, that is, unless it's an open marriage.)
