# Who exactly decided that 50/50 relationships are a good model?



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

I simply don't buy the concept. I have no issue with the notion of working towards equity for both partners, but equity does not and should not mean equal.

What does the concept of a 50/50 marriage mean to you, and are you, or have you lived it? Would you want to? What is the perceived benefit? What were the realities of having made the effort?

Is 50/50 more of an abstract concept about sharing responsibility for the success or failure of the marriage on an emotional level instead of the practical in terms of who does what?

Just curious ...


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

Depends on what equal means to people.

If you take it to the 'i'm counting every hug and kiss to see if you give as many back' then yes it's rather unrealistic and childish.

If you take it to the 'who earns more money, who can do the laundry better' then again, it's doomed

If you take it into the 'we love eachother and when one of us is upset or tired, the other will try to make them feel better' and 'we share responsabilities and are a sort of team to ensure everything goes well' and 'we respect eachother and know that we should listen to our spouse when needed, confort when needed and show love when needed'...then that's a pretty decent version of 50/50.

Equal doesn't mean 'in the same way'. Maybe the woman shows affection by giving a massage. Maybe the man shows affection by fixing her a sandwich. Maybe the woman wants sex 2 times a week and the man 5...but for the other 3 times when she doesn't want sex, the woman makes a point out of fixing him the best dinner ever. Can you really figure out who is giving more in this situation? It's all about perception, and who values what more. But the bottom line is they are both concerned about eachother and interested in making eachother feel nice. And that's what i think is 50/50.


----------



## themrs (Oct 16, 2009)

I agree that it doesn't have to be equal to be fair. In the old model of marriage, a man brought home the money and kept up the grounds and car and the wife took care of inside the house and the kids. This wasn't equal, but it's fair. 

Nowadays, women have to work outside the home too. More women have to work to make ends meet and it takes two incomes to support most families. This totally changed the dynamic of what is equal in a marriage. Because more women have to bring home the bacon, more men were expected to help fry it! That's fair.

It's always fair when two people agree on their role and do their best to live up to what is expected of them. I think it gets confusing with the "job descriptions" of a husband/wife aren't clearly defined. No one wants to feel like they are giving more than their fair share and the other person isn't holding up their end of the bargain.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

I think people understand the intent behind the concept of "we share responsibilities 50/50" or, "we are equal partners in the marriage." but as Nekko points out, in practice it very quickly becomes ambiguous and subjective.

I recognize that the terms of these statements mean vastly different things depending upon the couples involved. I'm curious about the overall concept because I used to adhere to it - my quasi-spouse, not so much.

I also found the circumstances of a couple with a newborn that I spoke with recently, to be very interesting. They wanted to share equally in the responsibilities of child rearing. Certainly a worthwhile intention isn't it? But I thought the practical side of what they were doing is setting them up for resentment and the seeds of a broken marriage. But right now? There is no way to make them see this.

Dad is in law enforcement. Mom is a corporate financial director, currently on maternity leave. Dad gets up at night with the baby in order to let mom sleep. He wants to bond with his child, and enable his wife to rest. But she doesn't. She gets up too. Chock it up to being a new mom, thinking her husband isn't capable, martyr complex, whatever, but she does not choose use the opportunity to sleep. 

Conversely, as a cop, dad has a whacky schedule. Many times the bulk of hours available for sleep are during the day. In essence, because mom chooses to go relatively sleepless - she assumes dad should do the same. She will wake him for assistance. More often than not, he complies. In her mind, this behavior makes them equal in sharing the pain side of the responsibilities of parenting. If he does not get up, she is critical and resentful.

They think they are practicing 'partnership'. I think they are setting a bad precedent for expectations in their marriage, that although looking thoughtful and sweet on the surface, muddies the waters of performing functional roles that keep the marriage healthy.

I'm not criticizing one or the other, but overall, I think their model is a bad one for the longterm health of their relationship.

This is just an example, I'm sure people can think of others.

I'm also a fan of "whatever works" for any given couple, as long as both partners are being open and honest about whether or not it is truly working - as opposed to simply complying to keep the peace.


----------



## themrs (Oct 16, 2009)

I do not think that scenerio will work either. When I was on maternity leave, I didn't expect my husband to get up everytime the baby cried. I got up more often than he did, but when I needed his help I asked for it.

My whole thing was if I had to wake him up for him to get the baby, what's the point? I'm already awake! 

I once read that women have more acute hearing when it comes to high pitches. This allows them to wake up when they hear their baby crying, but a father will not. 

I think it would be fair if the mom in that situation woke up with the baby on most nights and the dad let her get some extra sleep on his day off. That's more practical.


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

I think in the model above, the struggles that go along with having a newborn are relatively short-lived.

And 50-50 is IMPOSSIBLE to measure.

And if you could measure partnership, what split would you propose we aim for? 70-30? 53-47?

My marriage hasn't been 50-50. At this point I'm thinking that has been a blessing in disguise. Having to do more - especially with two young girls looking up to me - has quite frankly prepared me to be on my own if need be. Not sure my wife can say the same.

I don't care if I'm doing 60 or 40 - I will do what needs to do be done and most importantly, I will try to make myself happy while doing so.


----------



## Leahdorus (Jul 28, 2008)

Shouldn't both people put in 100% of their effort to the marriage?


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

Also thinking there have been times my wife was putting in 40% - so I slacked off and started putting in 40% - which only adds up to 80% - right?

That math can work - I've seen it - lived it - until you have kids - at which point THEY suffer the consequences of a marriage operating at anything less than it needs to be.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

100% of what? What if my perception of 100% is different than yours, or my partners?

Again, I understand what you are saying, but somewhere the rubber needs to meet the road. This is exactly where defining the concept needs to be made real - and most couples struggle with the notion of expectations and responsibilities.

I don't doubt that there can be areas of a marriage where both partners do give 100% - but what is the expected result for those efforts?

Feeling fulfilled? Harmony in the relationship? Happiness? Feeling loved? Strengthening your bond?

I think it comes down to this, if both partners aren't 100% on the same page in understanding what they define as a balance in responsibilities and expectations, it makes achieving any of those items above, much less likely.


----------



## themrs (Oct 16, 2009)

I think Leah means that once your role is defined, you give 100%. Basically you do your best in your role. 

Like when you're at work and you do your job to the best of your ability. In your marriage, each person should give 100% to the job of husband/wife however you define it.


----------



## Leahdorus (Jul 28, 2008)

themrs said:


> I think Leah means that once your role is defined, you give 100%. Basically you do your best in your role.
> 
> Like when you're at work and you do your job to the best of your ability. In your marriage, each person should give 100% to the job of husband/wife however you define it.


:iagree:
Yes, what she said.


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

And to answer the original question - who decided 50/50 - I'm pretty sure it was Oprah.


----------



## themrs (Oct 16, 2009)

nice777guy said:


> And to answer the original question - who decided 50/50 - I'm pretty sure it was Oprah.


She's never been married! LOL!


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

Exactly!


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

Funny that you make the job responsibility comparison. That is pretty much what I'm advocating, but I doubt most people do it, once again, making attempts to measure performance ambiguous.

I'm good with blaming Oprah ...


----------



## themrs (Oct 16, 2009)

I'm totally on board with having job descriptions for husbands and wives. Why not? I think it would make things a whole lot easier.


----------



## sisters359 (Apr 9, 2009)

I see 50/50 as shared responsibility for everything in a marriage. This includes stuff that needs to be done, and decision making. Requiring one person to make all the decisions is unfair to both parties, IMO. Making decisions and accepting responsibility for them is part of growing up. So is cleaning up after yourself and cleaning up after kids (while helping them learn to do so as well). Whatever a responsible single adult does to maintain him/herself, a married adult should do; why should marriage change that? It does not mean that both should do the same exact things, but sharing tasks is probably a lot healthier than splitting them--working side-by-side cuts the time in half, saving as much time as splitting tasks between two people, and encourages mutual support, etc. It also allows each person to learn from the other so both are increasing their skill set. 

50/50 is also about "rights" or respect within the marriage. One person's right to have his/her needs and wants met is as important as the other person's. When that balance is out of whack between two adults, resentment creeps in. This doesn't mean, "exactly the same." Her desire for 30 minutes/day of "together time" is as important as his desire for one hour of "alone time." It's not about counting minutes; it's about respecting each person's individuality as much as the other's. 

Marriage is much more like a partnership than a corporation or a government; no single "head of state" is necessary in a partnership. Decisions may take longer to make (not necessarily, however), and the communication required for shared decision making facilitates emotional connection. Furthermore, two heads are better than one and discussion between two respectful adults to find mutually-agreeable solutions can be an opportunity for discovering new things to appreciate in each other.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

sisters359 said:


> I see 50/50 as shared responsibility for everything in a marriage.


I used to think so too. But in practice, it can't work. It doesn't work. I cannot think of a single married relationship that I have ever been familiar with that successfully functioned under the concept of equally shared responsibility.

Invariably, task based roles and expectations are either discussed and defined, or are passively imposed by one, or both partners. It is the latter that I believe is a recipe for disaster.

I would never question that both partners are responsible for the success of the marriage - but the contribution and participation of each in that success is never going to be equal.


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

When I was in college one of my professors wrote a book called "Equal Marriage."

Very 70s feminist tome.

Within a couple years she and her husband divorced.

She did not find it funny when I suggested a follow up sequel entitled "Equal Divorce."


----------



## BigBadWolf (Nov 30, 2009)

I will simply echo the above, and say whoever came up with the common term is most likely either not married or already divorced.

Marriage is very much simply this, a man and a woman who are demonstrating in action that they are willing to sacrifice themselves as individuals, in the faith that together they will become a union greater than themselves.

To instead say, "I will only give myself to another until this point", or "I will not share myself with another except in this amount, and this is only when I see it done in return in some equal measure", is simply trying to build a structure on a foundation of mistrust.

And this is an important question, to do as what is already happening in this thread, to discuss both "what does it mean", and "is this for me", not assuming out of hand that 50/50 marriage is correct, because it may be heard often in business and politics and as well be a simple math, giving the illusion of legitimacy but lacking substance. 

And considering how ruthless and cutthroat and self-serving business and politics are by their very nature, as anyone keen to study such things will quickly see, the question is this:

Should good men and women, who are in faith sacrificing one to another their most precious treasure which is their very selves, should they model the intimate sexual and emotional bond that is marriage after these ruthless things, in doing so expecting a different result?


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

Yeah, well, math, statistics and love have nothing to do with one another. Try to bring scheduling and routine and keeping count of anything in a marriage and you'll inevitably be miserable. 

I take 50/50 in a more vague way meaning 'we both care around as much about the marriage and our life together, throughout our relationship'. It also means knowing your partners' needs, wants and capabilities.

Translated into the child example you gave...that would mean both parents are ready to wake up if the child cries. They have studied the situation, and eachother...hence, if dad notices mom got up to care for the baby...he goes back to sleep to be fresh for the next day. If dad notices mom is exhausted..and didn't wake up, he wakes up and cares for the baby. If dad did this, mom is aware of this fact and wakes up the next morning, fixes breakfast and makes him feel nice for waking up in the middle of the night. 

So bottom line is 50/50 for me ends up sort of in what wolf said about 'giving all you can to help the spouse and have a nice marriage'. It's never about counting, or keeping track of how much your spouse did. It's more about giving your best, respect and roughly equally responsible and caring adults. 

I'm not going to make this a male vs. female thing. Any two people of any gender put together have some differences, skills, ways of doing things which from the start makes em not be the same. Some are more clean, others more sloppy, some cook and clean, others like to relax playing PC games yet have awesome jobs and can bring lotsa money home etc....My point is...equality in the pure sense..measuring so that both partners contribute the same every day is pointless and unrealistic. There's also the 'oh, my spouse is slacking, so i should too' factor. That shouldn't exist. If you can, you should give your best regardless of what your spouse is doing, and keep track less. Guess people are still terrified of giving their all and ending up in divorce. So they end up giving much less...which obviously leads to divorce )


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

I keep thinking about how I got to where I am. I thought I was doing more than 50%, my wife less so - and, in terms of "chores" and "errands" and such I don't think I was wrong.

But I don't think I was giving enough of the intangibles - things you can't measure. Hugs, touches, reassurances, etc., 

I think if things are going to work in the future, I will have to learn to say "no" more often to the chores in order to have more energy for the little things I was missing.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

I think that 'vague' and 'intangible' are pretty much on the money. At any point of any given day, you should have a high level of confidence about where your marriage stands. You know if you are pulling your weight, or not. You know if you are meeting the needs of your partner, or not. You know if you are happy and satisfied in your marriage, or not. I think this speaks to what BBW's point about giving in to, or behaving in a way that best serves the marriage - by both partners.

One of the patterns I have noticed in the relationships that most of us would term as 'successful' (as described by those that discuss their marriage dynamics here), the behaviors, and elements that act as the health barometer for the relationship are neither vague, nor intangible. Both parties know what they need to do to make themselves happy, and their partner happy. At it's simplest, this is about the ability to communicate openly and effectively. Open and effective communication is usually also the greatest hurdle to overcome, as we get lazy and assume that 'balance' just happens, and is static. We stop talking, sharing, connecting. Our marriages become complacent, not balanced.

In sister's example, if husband and wife have an ongoing line of communication, I don't doubt that would be a balanced relationship, regardless of whether the balance is 50/50 or not.


----------



## sisters359 (Apr 9, 2009)

> And considering how ruthless and cutthroat and self-serving business and politics are by their very nature, as anyone keen to study such things will quickly see


I agree, and yet the examples of why a man should lead and a woman should follow include Presidents, CEOs and ship captains--all of which involve a lot of VERY questionable practices, at the least.


----------



## themrs (Oct 16, 2009)

sisters359 said:


> I agree, and yet the examples of why a man should lead and a woman should follow include Presidents, CEOs and ship captains--all of which involve a lot of VERY questionable practices, at the least.


Anyone who is married will agree that it is WORK. It is a job. It may be an enjoyable one, but it's a job nonetheless. I think a lot of the reason why so many people find themselves divorced is because they have become disillusioned by the fantasy of marriage and want to cut and run when it becomes practical. 

I choose to think about my marriage in terms of a business relationship because that makes sense. I also love my husband, but that's just a bonus.


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

themrs said:


> Anyone who is married will agree that it is WORK. It is a job.


Disagree. Everything in life can be seen as work or a job. But when something becomes work or a job, the pleasure is generally gone. You can see raising children as work too, and some women do, but that won't get you anywhere.

Till a year ago, i didn't put any effort into my marriage at all. Now, the time to do so has come. I find it rather difficult at times, but lemme just say that the few days it did feel like 'a job' i felt miserable. It showed, my partner could 'smell it' and in turn he felt miserable. We were together, everything was working just fine from a practical point of view but we were bored an unhappy. 

I don't really know what jobs you have but if marriage were anything like my job (stressful, overworking, low payed, sales rep, data input, assistent manager, secretary and maid all rolled in one) I would have ended my existence by now. 

Seing marriage from exclusively a practical point of view just sets us back to the time of arranged marriages. And the marriage might stay together, but that doesn't mean the people in it are happy. They are most of the times actually bored, in a passionless, heartless marriage and generally unhappy. (there are exceptions but this would be the majority).

Any relationship between two people needs some effort from time to time...not just marriage. But people have to remember that financial problems, tasks, responsabilities are a part of life, not marriage! I come home from a stressful job to escape routine, stress, arguing, stupidity etc...if i were to come home to a job why on earth would i want to be married?


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

What I tend to see over and over again, is that the relationship in a marriage simply becomes passive. Both partners accept the status quo - whatever that may be. Marriage becomes more about management than it does the growth of either partner, or the relationship itself. 

We just stop thinking about maintaining the aspects of the relationship that drew partners together in the first place, or worse, those aspects that made either partner attractive for marriage, disappear once the goal of marriage has been accomplished. Without a doubt this is what occured in my relationship. The expectation became that we each fulfill roles in preserving the family - not the marriage. And once again, specific to my circumstances, the relationship was anything but 50/50.

She felt the division of responsibility was equitable. I accepted it, assuming that it would change over time. It did. I continued to inherit more responsibility.

Looking back, and being honest about how much I was willing to rationalize and simply not challenge - my marriage began it's death spiral less than two years in. I hoped for the best. Believed that we would adjust, adapt, move forward. We didn't start out miserable. Even when the foundation began crumbling I still pledged love, support and commitment. We still weren't unhappy, but importantly, we weren't making efforts to _be_ happy, or contribute to one another's happiness.

So I think both of you are right. It is work. But it shouldn't be the kind of work you dread. I think of it like gardening. It's easy to say 'I want a garden' and make it happen. But over time, you are required to do work to maintain it. You may love, and find joy in the work required to have a beautiful garden, and if you do the work, it shows. It is clearly visible that you are doing the right things. Or you may hate the work required and choose to avoid it or ignore it. If you ignore it completely, your garden will simply decline, be overrun with weeds, bugs, and rot, and without question what you are left with isn't a garden anymore.


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

I think its fair to tell younger people - unmarried people - that you absolutely have to work at a marriage for it to last.

Which I think if more people understood the effort involved, maybe, just maybe, they'd work a little harder rather than just give in and give up (divorce) when things get tough. They'd know that the next one won't likely be any easier either.

I certainly wasn't looking 15 years ahead when I was 23 and getting married. I wasn't thinking about how many things would be changing - both good and bad.

A little warning would have been nice!


----------

