Why Buy the Cow?

As my mother and grandmother used to say, "Why buy the cow, when you can get the milk for free?" This was a not-so-flattering analogy to a "living together" arrangement, instead of marriage.

When I was a kid, it was interesting to see the different terms people came up with to describe their live-in lover: Cohabitant, POSSLQ (Person of Opposite Sex Sharing Living Quarters), Significant Other (SO), Lover, Friend, Boyfriend/Girlfriend (though they are more than that), Fiance/Fiancee (really? When's the wedding?)

I lived with someone for 6 years, despite my faith's ban on it. He fluctuated between Boyfriend and Fiance, depending on the status of the mercurial relationship. Of course it could be argued that if it was mercurial, why stay in the relationship? *I* argued that since it was mercurial, it was wise to go no further.

However, I still felt pressure from family and others who share the same faith with me. That isn't a problem facing today's youth, which is why it's no surprise that in "the latest study to probe the minds of America's young men, aged 25 to 33, the study found 10 reasons men won't commit -- from the ease of finding sex partners to the desire to avoid financial risks of divorce."

Why buy the cow, when you can get the milk for free?

But we also need to realize that women are equally to blame in this. Despite the fact that young men are reluctant to commit, it's the young women that are offering up the milk (so to speak). And, as the study points out, "[The men] love their single life and experience few of the traditional pressures from church, employers or society that once encouraged them to marry."

It also needs to be pointed out that the study took place in major metropolitan areas; Chicago, New Jersey, Washington, D.C. and Houston. It is undoubtedly true that cohabitation is seen as distasteful in the more rural areas (and the Bible Belt).

However, the study makes an assertion that I would like to see backed up with facts: "Marriage is a fundamental social institution. It is central to the nurture and raising of children... and the 'social glue' that reliably attaches fathers to children," noted the authors in their 32-page report. "[Marriage] contributes to the physical, emotional and economic health of men, women and children, and thus to the nation as a whole."

In a relationship where the partners are equally committed, what is the difference between marriage and cohabitation? Of course, I come from the perspective of living in a No Fault Divorce state. If your partner wants out, he's out, whether you like it or not. And if the reason for divorce is that he has sex with multiple partners or a circus goat named Billy, it doesn't matter in the least. In states where Fault Divorce is allowed, perhaps marriage holds more value.

If you have valuable assets and you wish to protect them, you have the uncomfortable agony of asking (or forcing) your fiance to sign a pre-nup agreement to protect those assets. Oh sure, "the glory of love" is a beautiful thing and it's easy to neglect the warning signs until he walks off with half of your hard-earned estate when things don't work out. Isn't it easier to spare yourself the court battles and the troubles?

So, (at least in Florida where No Fault Divorce reigns, and there's no such thing as Common Law Marriage) why should they buy the cow when they can get the milk for free?

Is this the de-evolving or the evolving of society? Will this push us toward stricter divorce laws to show that we take marriage seriously? And will that be better, or worse for us as a society? It is highly unlikely that we can change hearts and minds in order to create a society where marriage is valued once again. To use another of my mom's phrases, "we're shutting the barn door after the horse got out."