Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site utcsstat.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsstat!laura
From: laura@utcsstat.UUCP (Laura Creighton)
Newsgroups: net.social
Subject: finances and marriage -- pulled over from net.singles
Message-ID: <1433@utcsstat.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 15-Nov-83 04:12:40 EST
Article-I.D.: utcsstat.1433
Posted: Tue Nov 15 04:12:40 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 15-Nov-83 04:53:10 EST
Organization: U. of Toronto, Canada
Lines: 59

I may be getting a silly impression here, but I think that
the "shared finances" people in net.singles are working by sympathetic
magic, rather than cause-and-effect. It is an oversimplification to say
that sympathetic magic works by effect-and-cause, but it gets the point
across.

Now, far be it from me to tell people to STOP doing this, but the
arguments that they are using could be construed to be the 'cause
and effect' ones you generally get from scientific sources, which
they are not.

The proposed train of thought goes like this:

1.	So and so had separate accounts.
2.	So and so's marriage didn't last.
	QED

Generally there is talk about "complete partnership" and "total
sharing" necessary to make a marriage work. i don't understand that
either (after 25 years my parents still have separate bank accounts)
but I can see what this is going to lead to.

People are going to get shared accounts, even if they have serious
qualms about them. This is sympathetic magic. My marriage may not have
this wonderful "total sharing" at its foundation, but I am going to
emulate these RESULTS of this "total sharing" (such as the shared
bank accounts) and fake it out.

This may be silly folks. Let us assume for a minute something that I
do not believe -- that there is only one sort of successful relationship
and this is the "total sharing" one. Well, if you do not have that
total sharing attitude (evidenced by your desire for separate bank
accounts) then your marriage is going to fail. All you have done is made
it more difficult for you to settle when this inevitable breakdown
occurs, because your combined bank account will not make you a 'total
sharing' sort of person all by itself. It will, however, give you an
endless supply of arguments.

Now, suppose that you are not a total sharing sort of person, but you
still want to get married. Presumably you want your marriage to last.
This means that you are trying to do something despite the claims
of the firm advocates of the "total sharing" world veiw that your
relationship is doomed. If it is any comfort, you are not alone. There
are also couples making a sucess of it who do not have the much-lauded
"communication skills", though, since generally communication is not
what gives them thrills it is not surprising that you don't hear them
screaming their successes over the rooftops.

If you are one of these people then you are going to have to come up
with an arrangement that you can live with. NOT THAT YOUR NEIGHBOURS
CAN LIVE WITH. If you do not already believe that 'total sharing' is
the only way for a relationship to work, then they are going to look
upon you as weird and perverse anyway, so don't let it get to you.
And DONT think that you have to emulate the effects of what they consider
"good grounds for a successful marriage", because the effects without
the causes may be at best arbitrary and at the worst, dishonest.

Laura Creighton
utzoo!utcsstat!laura