Think of yourselves as "business partners"

Cohabiting couples who separate are not equally harmed. Entering into such arrangements in a state of "gleemania" leads to over-optimism and then, with the return to reality, the breakup happens. If they had been smarter business partners and less romantic about the whole relationship, the author of this piece suggests, they would not ruin their bank account and credit history.

When unmarried couples who have been living together part company, women are substantially worse off economically than men, according to a study in the current Journal of Marriage and Family. Men's household income drops by 10 percent, while women lose 33 percent. The percentage of women living in poverty increases from 20 percent to 30 percent, while men's poverty level remains relatively unchanged at about 20 percent.

Even the 33 percent drop for women strikes some financial experts as too low. "That's a nice statistic, but I think it's far worse than that," says Doris Theune, senior vice president of Bryn Mawr Trust Co. in Bryn Mawr, Pa. "I live in a very affluent area, yet I see women all the time lose out across the board. It's the same as divorce. If women have given up a career, or if they have relocated, then they lose."

Granted, this Christian Science Monitor piece is written from a strictly economic point of view, but nothing in it is surprising. Far from being the cornerstone of a patriarchal plot, marriage was created to protect women and children. Women who now cast off that protection as too confining will be burned -- psychologically, spiritually, and financially. This article reminds us that even divorce hurts women more, and yet even the few "protections" in divorce are absent in cohabitation.

More than 40 percent of American women under the age of 45 have lived unmarried with a male partner at some point, according to the US Census Bureau. In 2000, 9.7 million Americans were cohabiting with an unmarried partner of the opposite sex, while 1.2 million lived with a same-sex partner.

Let's see: the guy gets companionship, a little (or a lot of) housekeeping help, decorating assistance, help in his rent, a split in utilities, meals, and free sex (without any transportation costs after). And the woman gets ... what? Woo hoo -- the thrill of ticking off her parents and calling herself liberated. You go, girl!

[sorry: And 40% of women under 45 have tried this? how stupid are we??]

Comments

[Teresa]

You want to hear something really crazy? Five months before getting married, my fiance and I purchased a house together, and I didn't move in until after our honeymoon! People at work thought I'd lost my mind. Almost 20 years later, five out of seven of the women in the firm got a divorce, the other never married... guess who is still together?

[Joanne]

You go, Teresa!! That's awesome. Chesterton said that religion protects people from the "degrading slavery of being a child of one's age." Amen to that.

Best -

[Joanne]

Just read the whole article...you can see how traditional values used to protect women from their own naivete and/or stupidity:

"Dogs were part of the negotiations when Stacy Katz's first live-in relationship ended. She and her boyfriend had two dogs, and they were a big issue in dividing their property. Each took one."

Then Stacy went on to live with another guy, who ran up her credit card bill and didn't repay her. She also co-signed a car loan with the second guy, who let the insurance run out, had an accident, and couldn't pay for the repairs. "That hurt her credit rating."

Then, unbelievably, went onto live with a third guy. The second and third "relationships" lasted one year each, the article says. What does she have to show for any of those three shack ups, except what a fool she is? I feel bad for her, actually, but it's so incredible that women just don't seem to learn from the bad experiences of others!

Best -

[Amy Proctor]

Excellent article! Very interesting comments as well. Based on appearances, money in this case, the woman is the loser. I agree with Joanne that women don't seem to learn from bad experiences, theirs or others. But I think men are big losers as well. For many reasons. They perpetuate, thanks to willing accomplices (women, bad stereotypes of themselves socially and even wound by their future relationships with a future wife because of their present pursuits. They also bring all the consequences of sin upon them.... while believing that women are the ones who really lose.

Fornication is bad for everyone. While some can pull it off and its a beautiful testimony to the grace of God when pre-marital sex couples make it and succeed, they are in the vast minority.

[Teresa]

Thanks, Joanne (glad to see another Chesterton fan!), and Amy, you make a terrific point in pointing out the detriment to men in this position as well. I hadn't thought of the legacy it marks on a man after such a relationship and its effect on his future wife and children. Thank you.

[alicia]

I see it all the time among my patients. I don't get it why otherwise reasonable intelligent women allow themselves to be used and abused in this way.

I have been known to challenge these cohabiting couples to either marry or separate - especially when they are pregnant. I actually had one young woman tell me that she didn't think she was 'ready' to get married even though she and her SO had been living together for 5 years and had two children.