[Edited at 8:25pm on 6 August 2006 to make some points clearer.]
Someone once told me that a relationship is only so complex as the people who allow it to be so. Love is, in fact, so simple that even children who look at it with innocent eyes sum up everything with a hug, a kiss and a smile.
If only it were that easy.
In reality, love has very little to do with just a hug, a kiss and a smile. If it were so, we wouldn’t have divorce rates shooting up the roof. Neither would we have to address the consequences of broken marriages and ultimately, broken homes.
To be honest, I doubt anyone here has had a smooth sailing journey in their romantic relationships. No matter how loving and experienced a couple may be, there will always be that one thing that will come between them, be it another person, an issue or an object. Yes, people do have the tendency to argue over the stupidest of things.
But that is what makes a relationship so worthwhile having and so real. The problems which you face in a relationship as an adult are the ones you never have to address as a singleton. The conflict you have to put up with.
What if I don’t get along with my MIL or FIL?
What if I hate my partner’s siblings?
What if we have to move to another country? How will my partner cope? Will s/he be able to find a job?
What if our career paths are different and causes us to miss out on a few things in a relationship, eg spending more time with each other?
And the ever big question…
Are we ready for marriage?
Puppy love which has its roots in crushes and instant attraction do not address the issues of matured love – issues that revolve around family, career and individual needs. Hence why puppy love is often equally easy to get into and out of.
A love that can stand the test of time is one that is tested with fire, one that fought for with sacrifice and effort – by both parties. Pebbles, rocks and stones help in establishing several key things for a couple prior to the biggest decision of them all – marriage. Things like whether both individuals are well-suited for each other; whether they can grow, adapt and learn to cope with another totally different person; whether they can make sacrifices on their part as a husband/wife and so forth.
About two weeks ago, I was privy to a sermon on the duties of Christians in a marriage. A husband is to be the head of the household and his wife, the assistant. While her duty was to care and obey, a husband’s duty was to not only be the provider spiritually, emotionally and physically but he was also to be the protector, guarding his wife from all harm, be it emotionally, physically and spiritually. He must not cause harm to her neither must he allow harm to come upon her from either himself, his family or their children. When that happens, the balance and order in the household is thrown upside down and despite what disbelief I might have had upon hearing that, I could not help but agree with what was being said.
But that’s not really my point. I was drawn more to the “the protector of the wife” bit. Too long, I have seen how women, despite being individuals of great independence and etc, fall into the trap of the abusive boyfriend or the boyfriend who couldn’t care less or the boyfriend who expects his girlfriend to change, like his family and do the hoop jump and all for them while he gets away without doing anything with her family.
(Am not asking for a man to give up his family for me. He has to know how to balance things, y’know. I don’t want to be the scapegoat for all his family’s problems and stuff. It’s tiring and well, it hardly endears me to my partner.)
Is the whole idea of “you deserve better” really cliche?
The point is this: when we fall in love, we should enjoy what love brings. However, when we start talking about marriage, as women, we should begin to consider if this is a person who will protect and lead us as our partners. If we feel that we can’t get along with our MIL/FIL/family-in-law no matter what, how can our partners help us to better the situation? By avoiding the problem as if it never existed or by finding a middle ground to meet on? Of course we shouldn’t expect a knight-in-shining (or rusting) armour to do everything for us. That would be…well, quite unfair.
(Personally, I expect a partner – someone who will share my ups and downs WITH me, someone who helps me grow through trials and tribulations.)
Our boyfriends should be individuals who now can and are able to give us an insight into his possible new role in the near future, and this comes from playing with fire so to speak.
(For example…. I don’t want him to get rid of his friends but to hear him say that I don’t have to like them just to be with him is comforting. It removes that added pressure to please other people other than him. Moreover, I can be me and still enjoy the company of his friends.
Then of course, there is the family. By teaching me a bit about his culture, guiding me through the tight spots – like how different they are from Asian families and etc – he makes it easier for me to interact with them. We form direct relationships without him having to be the middleman in our “conversations”. He encourages me to keep in touch with them and to write to them on my own and he reassures me of my efforts and presence amongst them.)
If such insight appears to be less than what is expected, then I suppose the next question is if such a person can change. If the fire has time and time again produced poor results, then one should consider other options. Fear of loneliness is just as good as being dissatisfied in a relationship.
What Matters Most by Kenny Rankin
You talk about mature love having the strength to withstand the challenges of time. Yet in the same breath, you also talk about a husband’s duty to provide for the family.
What can and does happen, especially in today’s world of the modern, highly accomplished woman, is that 10 or so years into the marriage, careers wane and thrive, businesses flourish and fail. It may be bad luck on his part, or sheer inherent ability on her part, the wife may well prove to be a much more competent provider than her husband.
What then? Do you still believe the man should be the provider regardless? If the kids need a full time stay at home parent, do you think you can cope with a fulltime housewife for a husband?
[I guess I should be a little clearer in my definition of a provider. *oops*
For me, a provider is a leader. It doesn't matter to me if he earns less than me or is a house husband. Regardless, he should be able provide a sense of direction for my family, form a strong rock fo support and encouragement for me, lead by example, provide a suitable environment for learning and growth for my children, so to speak.
Yes, there are a lot of marriages out there whereby the women is the main breadwinner for the family BUT she is not alone, most of the time - as in my own family. The man still plays his part - he still works to better the home (doesn't equal bring in the bacon), he still leads, he still disciplines, he still makes decisions.
If my children should need full-time care in the form of a stay-at-home mum and I have a stronger career than my husband, I must first of all assess if such a decision (to turn my husband into a house husband) affect our relationship and then will it have an impact on the children's understanding of men and women. I do not expect only one party to make the sacrifices needed - that is not mature love (it comes about through effort, communication, understanding and many other factors).]