Men & Women, Lack of satisfaction, The Root Cause

Hi Bunch,

I saw the following article in a local Australian newspaper. Since I am new to western culture (aussie a part of it), I made a few observations while trying to understand society with a wish to find my other half here but this bloke have spotted them exactly as I felt them to be. I know I have again invited sheer criticism for bringing this topic

Vows first, for a better life together
It has been said that marriage is highly likely to be our last and best chance to grow up. But increasing numbers of couples are choosing to cohabit instead. "Thirtysomethings" who have no religious affiliation and are of an "Anglo" background are most likely to do this.

Most people know of couples who are cohabiting. Ten per cent of the population over 18 years of age is cohabiting and more than three-quarters of couples who marry cohabited beforehand, says a 2006 HILDA survey (Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia).

Perhaps none of this should surprise us given the high rates of divorce in recent times and studies that show that children of divorce marry less and divorce more than children raised in intact families. Divorce appears to have introduced increased apprehension and uncertainty where once there was a belief that lifelong commitment was reasonably achievable.

Cohabitation has increased even though many studies have concluded there is a "cohabitation effect" that generally results in poorer marital outcomes. A recent issue of the Australian journal Threshold summarised many of these findings, revealing the risk of divorce increases by 28 per cent when women have two intimate premarital relationships. Premarital cohabitation is also linked with a reduction over time in esteem for marriage and childrearing, poorer communication in marriage, lower levels of marital satisfaction and greater marital domestic aggression.

Perhaps most worrying for women is that premarital cohabitation seems to be associated with lower levels of a husband's dedication. In a 2004 Journal Of Family Issues study more than 900 respondents were asked to rate their agreement with a series of statements assessing their level of dedication to their spouse. After controlling for religiosity, age and income, the level of a man's dedication was found to be "significantly lower in married couples who lived together prior to marriage than in those who did not". The poorer marital outcomes known as "the cohabitation effect" are not simply due to the characteristics of people who choose to cohabit. There appears to be something about cohabitation itself that changes the dispositions and attitudes of people and promotes worse outcomes.

On the face of the most recent evidence it appears that cohabitation is a con. If someone seriously wishes to enhance their chances of lifelong companionship and happiness then one of the clearest ways of doing so is to avoid cohabitation. Living together appears to erode the motivation and commitment that is essential for a successful marriage. In particular, cohabiting makes you more likely to become couple-focused and less likely to value having children.

This has resonances for those many women who cohabit and think this is their best way of eventually marrying and having children. Unfortunately, far too many men continue to believe that there is no requirement for any further formal commitment since those needs they regard as most urgent are already being satisfied. Such men need to realise that they are selling themselves short and letting down their partners very badly.


In contrast to cohabitation and premature sexual intimacy, there certainly seems to be value in those genuine physical expressions of affection which come through that growth in friendship and natural bonding associated with a deepening relationship.


Perhaps we need to rediscover the wonder and value of things such as courtship. There is much to be said for encouraging couples to spend time with one another in a social environment that comprises a range of commonly understood structured rituals. For too many couples, cohabitation seems to "just happen" and they are blissfully unaware of its potential for harm.


We need to construct social frameworks which more clearly signify levels of commitment and get marriage and children more firmly on the agenda. Perhaps every dad should tell his daughter "If your relationship with a bloke starts to get serious make sure that he understands that he is to ask my permission to court you". This does not mean that daughters are their father's property. But such a statement would send a strong signal about what loving a woman means, from the man who has devoted his life to her while she was growing up, to the man who would need to devote his life to her in the future. If nothing else it would give young men a reality check about what is at stake.


Chris Meney is the director of the Life, Marriage and Family Centre for the Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney.

And these the comments so far:

Most of the studies that appear to show cohabitation before marriage reduces the success of marriage are comparing apples to oranges: couples who have been together for several years (married for one) with married couples who have been together only one year, for whom the gloss of a new relationship hasn't worn off. When you instead compare couples who have been living together for the same amount of time (e.g. compare a couple who has been cohabitating for 6 years, then married for 1 year with a couple who never cohabitated, but have been married for 7 years), the effect disappears: there is no real difference.Posted by rhyme on 17/06/2008 9:24:05 AM
I completely agree with the thrust of this thoughtful article. As a society we need to try to return to a stage in which lifelong commitments are more valued and strengthened. As one who has experienced the pain and damage of divorce I believe more effort is needed to reduce this scourge and its emotional and financial fallout. If potential marriage partners saw more stable and effective marriages they might more seriously consider its benefits rather than entering into the more shallow de facto relationships well described by Chris Meney. Since my own divorce I have often wondered why pre-marital counselling is not compulsory as it seems rather strange that we require people to, as one example, train to be licensed drivers whilst we provide no compulsory guidance for people entering into a massive and lifelong emotional and financial partnership.Posted by Commentator on 17/06/2008 4:40:07 PM
This won't be popular with the left-leaning brigade, but similar studies around the world have found similar results. Hopefully more people, over time, will see the value in 'traditional' and 'conservative' family values and marry them (no pun intended) to social commitment and justice.Posted by Expat in Singapore on 18/06/2008 10:44:53 AM
Very interesting story, how can we construct social frame work of this country, when our lawmakers are looking towards destruction of this land. Marriage is a past knot of love. Young generation is not interested with matrimonial responsibility due to Australian neglect. How on earth you expect anyone to get married when your life is not secured. You can have a job today, and tomorrow you will be on the street. Commitment of mortgage is the most dangerous issue towards the young couples. Divorces are due to Australian lawmaker’s stupidity. Issue of economy should be balanced to suit every family, to secure their marriage. Judiciary system should be revamped entirely before we can even think of anything else. This is nothing to do with premature sexual intimacy. Now that we have 'Baby Bonus' to boost Australian population and majority if birth is by single mothers shouldn’t we reverse this and say that this bonus is only for married couples? In general our social issues are growing up, and we are heading into 'XENOPHOBIA' the same as it is now in South Africa. Our country is living in fear for many years, and this is discouraging especially young people. Looking further on many people has their eye further on. If they work all their life, and after retirement they become second class citizens. So what is the point of marriage and work? One way or the other destruction of ex-workers is colossal discrimination, the same as it was years back with immigrants when arrived here. However, who build this country, ‘Asians or Europeans?’ ‘SUMMIT 2020’ didn’t help at all, as many candidates didn’t have a chance to express their views. And simple as that an ‘ELECTION STUNT' In this story all the facts and issues should be tabled not just about marriages to see how can better life be achieved.Posted by BB-Leo on 19/06/2008 9:48:26 AM
Also interesting that "de facto" wives seem to encounter violent ends quite a deal more than de jure ones. Posted by Felix on 25/06/2008 7:42:48 PM
Spot on article Chris. They shack up as a mark of disrespect to themselves and a calculated insult to their parents in many cases. Children come along and guess who suffers, the kids and taxpayers who have to support them. I often wonder why many Eastern European and some Asian arranged marriages with no premarital sex are so successful. It is about respect and committment and not about comparing one love affair with another to the extent that total disillusionment occurs. Posted by jack on 1/07/2008 11:43:01 PM

I think this is a somewhat contentious topic... it's got strong cultural elements, and maybe religious to some extent.

I don't want to give you my opinion, instead, I prefer to reply with a poem I found some time ago, which possibly describes the difficulties a lot of couples are going through these days no matter their background.

FOR A BETTER LOVE

Everybody agrees that sex is a category in the world of lovers:
thus its tenderness and savage branches.

Everybody agrees that sex is a family category:
thus children, nights spent together and days apart
(him, looking for bread on the streets,
in the office or in the factory;
her, in the rear tasks of the household,
in the strategies and tactics of the kitchen
that allow for survival in the common battle
at least until the end of the month).

Everybody agrees that sex is an economic category:
you have only to mention prostitution,
fashion,
the newspaper sections that are only for her
or only for him.
The trouble begins when a woman says
that sex is a political category.


Because when a woman says
that sex is a political category
she can begin to stop being a woman as such
and become a woman for herself,
to make the woman into a woman
on the basis of her humanity
and not of her sex,
to know that the magical lemon-flavoured deodorant
and the soap that voluptuously caresses her skin
are made by the same firm that makes napalm,
to know that the basic household tasks
are the basic tasks of the social class of the household,
that the difference of sexes
shines much better in the profound amorous night
when all those secrets are known
that had us wearing masks and estranged.

Roque Dalton

Chris Meney is the director of the Life, Marriage and Family Centre for the Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney.

Well, there you go! 'Nuff said.

Pashtun, perhaps, in all honesty, a liberal westernized country isn't where you need to live. I realize you wanted more liberalism than you had, but perhaps you went too far in your seeking. Perhaps some more traditional country, that's not as strictly conservative?

You're only beating a dead horse, seeking that which isn't there.

If you still want arranged marriages, or abstinence prior to mariage, or "virtuous" women holding out for marriage, perhaps Australia, or the USA, or any similar country isn't for you. You want values closer to what you grew up with, but you left that, because you wanted a different lifestyle.

You have to take what it is, with what it is.

Surely, some place, where the people live more in line with your comfort level exists.

I would never "marry" a man I hadn't spent a considerable amount of time with. I don't need to know everything about him, or hound him. But it's nice to know if we are going to have good relations, and whether he's a disaster in the personal hygiene department. It helps to know that he's not going to have his drunken buddies dropping in at all hours, and to let him know that I am not going to have quilting bees in the living room when he wants a quiet day in front of the TV. I suppose I am a strange one. I want to fall in love with a bachelor, because I am a bachelorette. Separate dwellings is the way to go, for myself, anyway. I don't want to collar anyone. It would be nice if I can teach him to cook his own meals when I don't feel like it.

I must be an oddball. I wouldn't feel obligated to hob nob with his family if I didn't like being around them. And they would probably tell him to dump me because they want to "see some grandkids". I am too old to have children, and don't want any. It's just not a role I would crave. I am not the rock of Gibraltar, or "all knowing sage and matriarch". But I can absolutely enjoy dressing up in costumes and playing games with other people's children, and walk away, too, when I get tired. It's ok to be childless. Who wants to play an ill suited role ? Better to be our honest selves.

I did everything the old-fashioned, traditional way. I was a virgin when I married and I was married for 30 unhappy years.

It can go either way. Some studies do show that people who live together and marry, break up more than those who do not live together. But there are also people who live together and never marry who last longer than those who live together and then get married or those who never live together before marriage.

You just have to find someone who shares your views.

Chris Meney is the director of the Life, Marriage and Family Centre for the Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney.
Well, there you go! 'Nuff said.

Exactly, I was sitting here reading that with my eyebrow raised...then read the end little script and thought AHA! I knew it.


As two Atheist I would say that having NO religion has probably helped us be a better couple because there is no guilt to stay together, or to marry quickly because we are having extramarital sex, living together or have a child together. We are together because we love and want to be together and not out of some religious feeling of guilt that have been program into us since childhood. We have chosen to get married because it is our acknowledgment to ourselves, family and society that we are committed to each other and will be responsible for each other, we are marrying because we are choosing it and not because we feel that we have to marry in order to be a "real" family together.

I was raised Roman Catholic so I had that sense of obligation with my first marriage, doing what I needed to do because it was the "right thing to do."

Clint on the other hand was raised as an Atheist and though I have been an Atheist now for wow, ..8 years, my roman catholic upbringing still crops up from time to time and Clint usually points it out by telling me that Im being a tard.

So I will have to disagree with the Australian Catholic Diocese's in depth study of extramarital cohabitation of 900 people. ;):p

Pashtun, perhaps, in all honesty, a liberal westernized country isn't where you need to live. I realize you wanted more liberalism than you had, but perhaps you went too far in your seeking. Perhaps some more traditional country, that's not as strictly conservative?

You're only beating a dead horse, seeking that which isn't there.

If you still want arranged marriages, or abstinence prior to mariage, or "virtuous" women holding out for marriage, perhaps Australia, or the USA, or any similar country isn't for you. You want values closer to what you grew up with, but you left that, because you wanted a different lifestyle.

You have to take what it is, with what it is.

Surely, some place, where the people live more in line with your comfort level exists.

:yes::yes::yes::yes: I agree with you. Maybe this is not the place for you Pash as it seems since you been there you have had a rough time. I am not trying to sound mean but most cultures are not set the way it was in the old days.
We either go with what we were taught and find someone from our culture or we catch up to the modern world and we say okay I can get use to this.

If you wanted the different lifestyle, why are you wanting to stick with your original traditions?? Think about it

my roman catholic upbringing still crops up from time to time and Clint usually points it out by telling me that Im being a tard.


Hun, I hope your intention is not to imply that us Catholics are "tards". :confused::mad::eek:

There is nothing wrong about having a sense of obligation re. your marriage. Sometimes that sense of obligation is what keeps things together during rough time when bunnies and hearts and roses are fading. However, the sense of obligation alone does not cut it... but again, it comes handy during difficulties.

Since I am new to western culture (aussie a part of it) Pashtun you have been a member here since June 2006, it is now July 2008. From what I have read from your past posts that time has been spent in Australia, you are not new to anything any more, if you haven't fitted in yet you never will. I have read back over your posts and they are so contradictory to each other it leads me to yet again question your authenticity! As has been suggested over the past two years, your wants, if indeed they are true, will not be serviced in a western culture and much sound advice and suggestions have been given to you but it seems you wish to ignore this and continue on your fantasy quest. Again may I suggest, if you are for real, either change your attitude or change your location because the two do not go together!

Hun, I hope your intention is not to imply that us Catholics are "tards". :confused::mad::eek:

There is nothing wrong about having a sense of obligation re. your marriage. Sometimes that sense of obligation is what keeps things together during rough time when bunnies and hearts and roses are fading. However, the sense of obligation alone does not cut it... but again, it comes handy during difficulties.

Dont worry it's not just catholics.

I dont believe that obligation is good for anything except guilt and miserable situations. What got me through the rough time of my first marriage was not obligation it was love. Love and wanting to stay together got us through the hard times not roses and flowers. The obligation was to marry in the first place due to the roman catholic upbringing and obligation is a crap reason to stay in a marriage, and great recipe for; resentment, anger, infidelity, you name it. At least in my opinion. If people are staying together because they "have to", then that is where the tard comes in. I had an Aunt who got married in church and because of it "had to stay" even though the man was an abusive alcoholic, in sickness and in health and all that jazz, thankfully my Aunt stop going by what was in the book and decided to use her head and get out of that situation.

Mostly Clint means that he wants me to think for myself and not just go by what I was taught because going through life on auto pilot based on what was taught to you as a kid... is well stupid and the best way at least for us is to live life as we learn it and not by what has been programmed into us before we had a choice.

Oh well, I suppose I was born Catholic in a place where everyone was Catholic, raised by Catholic nuns in a girl-only school for 14 years, educated in a Catholic university with priests.

Now, this is just my opinion, no attacks please because I'm entitled to it. As a teenager I thought the concept of virginity as a virtue was ludicrous for a number of reasons. I still do... I refuse to accept that the value of a woman is based on whether she reaches marriage "intact", very much in the way you would prefer a new car to an old one.

Really, I don't know why it escapes a lot of people that women are not commodities, but actual human beings that have ideas, desires and emotions. As human beings, we all have the right to pursue happiness... and not only we should, but we must put an end to any circumstance that precludes us from reaching that state.

I'm sorry, but at the end, all this virginity thing is more about raw sex and servitude than actual virtue, and ignorance plays a big role.