Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
"We" versus "me".
I had a discussion about this the other day with a friend and I wanted to get the opinions of the nesties on it... Scripture says you "become one flesh" with your spouse when you get married, which my pastor said is not just a physical allusion but also signifies the joining together of two lives.
In what ways have you and your Hs "become one flesh" or joined your lives? Do you think it is ok to keep a certain level of independence from your H (how do you do this)?
According to a book called "Marriage on the Rock", the three biggest examples of people maintaining independence from their spouse is: 1. Not sharing their bodies, ie. withholding sex as a punishment (usually women). 2. Keeping separate bank accounts or having a pre-nup. 3. One person being a dominate parent (doesn't apply to those who are single parents and don't have a choice.)
Do you think these things are good/bad, justifiable, etc.? Thoughts?
Re: "We" versus "me".
First, I want to say that I'm not religious before responding my thoughts.
Now,
1. I agree sex is a big deal in marriage if it's a big deal to at least ONE of the spouses. However, there are some spouses who don't 'need' sex to feel connected with their spouse. Just their presence is enough. I'm not a very affectionate person. I could go without sex for long periods of time. Being in the same room with my H or going on new and unexplored trips help me feel most connected with him. My H is the exact opposite, he needs sex and physical affection to feel a connection. So we meet in the middle. Using sex as punishment would definitely be a sign to me that we have some SERIOUS marital problems.
2. This one I HIGHLY disagree with. H and I have separate bank accounts. We consider all the money we make 'our' money, but we avoid a ton of fights by keeping out accounts separate. I'm very, um, anal with my finances. H is more relaxed. The way we handle our finances is so opposite that if we combined our accounts, we would have a lot more fights over money.
3. We don't have kids. I don't think we will ever have any. I guess I can't really respond to this one except say that parenting (when two parents are involved) should always be a team effort.
There's actually a couple in Seattle that has a 98% success rate in predicting divorces. They can spend three hours with a couple and determine if they will get divorced and when it will happen.
In their studies, divorce has nothing to do with keeping finances separate, pre nups, independence, withholding sex, etc - but has 100% to do with communication styles.
With this knowledge, my response is - Couples should do whatever they want as long as they are happy. IMO, being "joined as one" has more to do with being joined mentally and emotionally than any of the other crap.
Also not religious.
1. Not okay to use sex as a punishment, either forcing or withholding. I don't see people doing this as a way to maintain independence, but to gain power, and the power should be balanced between two people in a relationship. Not justifiable.
2. We have separate bank accounts--my money is for food, water, evenings out, and my own fun money and often vacations. His money is for the mortgage, electricity, his own student loan payment and evenings/lunches when he wants to pay. We switch off.
We do have a pre-nup, but it was set up to protect me from having to take on any of H's hefty student loans in the (not very likely) case that we split. It protects his trust (now mutual) fund from being split between us, as well. That's all it says.
These aren't for us to keep our independence, or that we are hiding anything, but more because neither of us wants to leave our banks (we bank separately, as well) which is just out of stubbornness for both of us. Justifiable, though many would disagree with me.
3. I could see us taking the good cop/bad cop role, me being the bad cop sometimes. We've never really sat and talked about the kind of parents we would be, but I think we both have a pretty good idea. We talk more about what instrument the child will play and what activities we would like for them to be involved in, and how we would handle church, more than anything. We do think that parents should put up a united front so the kid doesn't say, well, dad said I could.
Honestly, when I hear "joining of flesh" I automatically jump to sex. Of course people want to maintain some independence even after they are married. I am not my husband, and he is not me. If you invite one of us out, then we both automatically go, but it doesn't mean that we have to agree on every single life issue. That would be incredibly boring.
Another non-religious person chiming in
1. Withholding sex- that's just immature. If you can't think of a better way to communicate, you're too immature to be married. No one should EVER have sex if they don't want to, but withholding intimacy (not just sex) as a way of gaining power is a form of emotional abuse, IMO.
2. Separate bank accounts- if it works for you and both partners feel the arrangement is equitable (not necessarily equal) fine. When I have a problem with this is something I commonly saw when studying my cohabitors. Most had separate accounts and would pay equal shares of the bills. So, if the bills are $2000/month, She pays $1000 and he pays $1000. I see this as problematic when she only makes $1100/month and he makes $2000/month (or vice versa.) That leaves him with MUCH more fun and savings money while she's struggling to get by.
3. Well, I am the dominant spouse. I think in every relationship one person is at least a little more dominant than the other. I come from a family of leaders, J comes from a family of followers. We're like that at home, at work, with friends, etc. I don't see it as having separate lives so much as falling into the complimentary roles that made us fall in love with one another and fit together so well. The promise I made to myself (and have kept) is that since we almost always do what I want with both small and large decisions (not because I bully but because J almost never has strong opinions and is a very go-with-the-flow person) is that, when he does have a strong opinion, I give in because I know it must be really important to him. It's only happened like 3 times in 9 years, but I've kept my word.
I'm also a lot more independent in our marriage than J is. I need nights away with friends and/or just time by myself. I think he'd be happy tagging along with me whatever I do. That's why his work schedule is PERFECT for us. He works 6 nights, then is off for 8. So, on the 8 nights off we get lots of time together, then, on his 6 nights on I get plenty of time alone or with friends.
To answer your final question, I don't see any of these things as inherently good, bad, justifiable, unjustifiable, sacred or evil. They just are. And whatever works best for BOTH partners is most likely to result in a happy marriage rather than trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.
We have a joint account, and I have a separate bank account of my own. He doesn't have a separate account, and I think he's fine with it. He doesn't control how I spend the money that's in "my" account, and we make joint decisions for the most part within the account we have together. He has never been stingy with me in the sense of "his" money and "her" money, which I love about him. I know that if I think it's important, he's more than willing to provide the funds to do it because it will ultimately benefit us both.
I don't withhold sex. I am honest when I'm not in the mood, and he's never NOT in the mood. So it works. 9/10 we are going to do it, because we both have very high sex drives. But if you're fighting--who wants to be intimate? I mean, unless you're getting in a good "hate-fvck", or having make-up sex.
We don't have a pre-nup currently (neither had assets to bring in the marriage particularly), but I know if I were to ever get remarried, I would DEFINITELY have a pre-nup. There is such a thin line between love and hate, in my opinion.
I think you have to remain independant to a point. I mean we each have our own friends that we do things with, but we do things with friends together too. I sort of think the "one flesh" thing is more that we compliment eachother. Like he is the things I am not and I am the things he is not, so together we make like one whole (aww....barf!).
We don't withhold sex as punishment. Sometimes he wants to and I don't, and sometimes we do it anyway, but if we don't it is not because I want to punish him, I just can't get in the mood. He is never not in the mood so that has never been an issue
We have all of our money in joint accts. When we got married we put all of our money in one acct and we have kept it that way since then. I like that all our money is together because it makes us make financial decisions together.
I think I am the more dominant parent, but that is because I am with the kids all the time. Plus, I am the one who reads and researches stuff about the kids so he sort of just trusts me on that and goes along unless it is something he really doesn't agree with and then we talk it through and come to a compromise.
I think, for me, sometimes it is hard to remember that I am not just S's wife and V and M's mama. Maintaining independence is hard sometimes, but I think it is really important.
ETA: we don't have a prenup either. neither of us had anything when we got married, but I don't think we would have anyway.