I have come to know a good friend who happens to believe in being childfree or being childless in marriage. I kinda get irked with these terms, btw. Childfree connotes you are scot free of children as if children intentionally destroy one's happiness and individual freedom in marriage, and childless connotes being less of a married couple just because you choose not to have children. The terms only cause disengagements in what I think we should focus on at this day and age= engagements towards respect and tolerance for diversity.
At first, I admit, I stand guilty of finding couples who choose not to have children as strange. I could not, for the life of me understand, how a married couple can do this by choice because for me, having children seemed to be a natural choice out of the decision to get married, otherwise, why even. One can be just be BFF with a man, and live together with no legal terms nor status to bind them together because, after all, love and commitment should be enough.
Getting the marriage contract, by law, for example in the Philippines or under a church blessed-marriage, in my understanding, binds you to your pledge, your partner and to your fellowmen= your family and friends as witnesses, to be together 'forever' or least for as long as you choose to love each other BECAUSE it is a pledge to build family and care for relationships, as one's possible contribution to society. Building a family requires time and effort, and therefore the number of years together assures that the tasks of family maintenance are carried out. Or at least if divorce should happen, both are equally bound to ensure an equal share of provisions for the upkeep of the members of the family.
Add to this is a hardheld stance on certain forms of contraception which inhibit child-bearing through invasion of female reproductive parts, whether surgical, physical or chemical. I find it an injustice to prevent childbearing by having the woman's parts undo the job and NOT the other way around such as having the man take the magic pill instead. Or at least, both should make effort to prevent conception, and not just the female body.
And so, the decision to get married, to me is a decision to raise a family and the choice to practice fair contraception for family maintenance. And when I say a family, I mean relationships over time and not JUST having children, but caring for one's self and your fellow human beings who happen to be your loved ones=partner and offspring, as you go through life's changes and challenges.
In as much as I value my choice to have a family, I do value friendships. Therefore finding time to know a friend, requires one to appreciate and not pass judgement on a friend's choice. This requires me to have a second look at my choices and that of a friend who chose to be at the opposite end. So, following an FB friend's feed on a certain type of marriage is one I have taken time to read. Read I did, and finally I have something to contribute, but through a choice of words instead.
I start by suggesting a change to the terms of engagement. I would like to veer away from the 'child' factor as if it is the only thing that spells the difference between a childfree/less marriage and those with children. Also, with due respect to the child whose voice we have isolated in this argument of whether childfree/less couples are happier than those with child/ren, and why even bother to ask couples why they choose not to have children. This current state of engagement is likened to asking why a homosexual is homosexual and whether being black is happier than being white or whether one is less happier as a European than an Asian. I mean, get real! We can never learn from each others' perspectives and experiences with these kinds of categorization when we are faced with deep discussions about human-kind.
Hence, I bring to the table new terms: a couple-driven marriage and a family-driven marriage...to mean that what we are talking about here are relationships we choose to build. One type of marriage focuses on the relationship of the couple while the other type of marriage focuses on relationships between and among members of the family. And I put both types of marriages in one category=happy and successful marriages, to include maybe those who choose to be happily married to their jobs, their dogs, or their computers, or their narcissistic selves.
Then of course, I leave out on the unhappy marriages because, really, it is no use talking about unhappy marriages and its root causes because clearly unhappiness happen in either types of marriages, and even whether you are single or not, or whether there are children or not. And to even go down the path of asking why is futile. People are unhappy because they choose to be and choose to stay that way, mainly because of poor decision making. Why bother to talk about their concerns when I think these are matters left with the therapist or a counselor.
Getting back to the category of happy folks, I then suggest that we go for understanding humankind over putting these types of marriages as poles apart when in fact, they are not. And so for these very happy marriages, whether couple driven or family driven, I would rather know these:
1) Given tragic incidences, such as death of a loved one in the marriage, how does the partner or how do the other family members cope and stay happy?
2) What common challenges do couples experience, in a couple driven marriage and family driven marriage?
What are their unique workarounds? or ways of problem solving? negotiating? ways of supporting? or how about strategies for conflict resolutions?
3) How do these types of marriages define individual space? How do couples or members care for their individual selves?
4) At what point was there a breakdown or a meltdown in the relationship/s and how was the turnaround like? Or are there even breakdowns and meltdowns unique to each type of marriage?
I am quite sure differences and commonalities shall arise if we care to stop and find out, even before we pass judgement on each others' choices. But all these point to fruitful discussion with a new focus:
our unique ways of finding happiness, at ALL cost, with a partner, with partner+offspring, with one's self.
So, let's lay down our ARMED words and questions, and instead arm ourselves with better terms of engagement, take on new perspectives and arrive at genuine respect and understanding.
At first, I admit, I stand guilty of finding couples who choose not to have children as strange. I could not, for the life of me understand, how a married couple can do this by choice because for me, having children seemed to be a natural choice out of the decision to get married, otherwise, why even. One can be just be BFF with a man, and live together with no legal terms nor status to bind them together because, after all, love and commitment should be enough.
Getting the marriage contract, by law, for example in the Philippines or under a church blessed-marriage, in my understanding, binds you to your pledge, your partner and to your fellowmen= your family and friends as witnesses, to be together 'forever' or least for as long as you choose to love each other BECAUSE it is a pledge to build family and care for relationships, as one's possible contribution to society. Building a family requires time and effort, and therefore the number of years together assures that the tasks of family maintenance are carried out. Or at least if divorce should happen, both are equally bound to ensure an equal share of provisions for the upkeep of the members of the family.
Add to this is a hardheld stance on certain forms of contraception which inhibit child-bearing through invasion of female reproductive parts, whether surgical, physical or chemical. I find it an injustice to prevent childbearing by having the woman's parts undo the job and NOT the other way around such as having the man take the magic pill instead. Or at least, both should make effort to prevent conception, and not just the female body.
And so, the decision to get married, to me is a decision to raise a family and the choice to practice fair contraception for family maintenance. And when I say a family, I mean relationships over time and not JUST having children, but caring for one's self and your fellow human beings who happen to be your loved ones=partner and offspring, as you go through life's changes and challenges.
In as much as I value my choice to have a family, I do value friendships. Therefore finding time to know a friend, requires one to appreciate and not pass judgement on a friend's choice. This requires me to have a second look at my choices and that of a friend who chose to be at the opposite end. So, following an FB friend's feed on a certain type of marriage is one I have taken time to read. Read I did, and finally I have something to contribute, but through a choice of words instead.
I start by suggesting a change to the terms of engagement. I would like to veer away from the 'child' factor as if it is the only thing that spells the difference between a childfree/less marriage and those with children. Also, with due respect to the child whose voice we have isolated in this argument of whether childfree/less couples are happier than those with child/ren, and why even bother to ask couples why they choose not to have children. This current state of engagement is likened to asking why a homosexual is homosexual and whether being black is happier than being white or whether one is less happier as a European than an Asian. I mean, get real! We can never learn from each others' perspectives and experiences with these kinds of categorization when we are faced with deep discussions about human-kind.
Hence, I bring to the table new terms: a couple-driven marriage and a family-driven marriage...to mean that what we are talking about here are relationships we choose to build. One type of marriage focuses on the relationship of the couple while the other type of marriage focuses on relationships between and among members of the family. And I put both types of marriages in one category=happy and successful marriages, to include maybe those who choose to be happily married to their jobs, their dogs, or their computers, or their narcissistic selves.
Then of course, I leave out on the unhappy marriages because, really, it is no use talking about unhappy marriages and its root causes because clearly unhappiness happen in either types of marriages, and even whether you are single or not, or whether there are children or not. And to even go down the path of asking why is futile. People are unhappy because they choose to be and choose to stay that way, mainly because of poor decision making. Why bother to talk about their concerns when I think these are matters left with the therapist or a counselor.
Getting back to the category of happy folks, I then suggest that we go for understanding humankind over putting these types of marriages as poles apart when in fact, they are not. And so for these very happy marriages, whether couple driven or family driven, I would rather know these:
1) Given tragic incidences, such as death of a loved one in the marriage, how does the partner or how do the other family members cope and stay happy?
2) What common challenges do couples experience, in a couple driven marriage and family driven marriage?
What are their unique workarounds? or ways of problem solving? negotiating? ways of supporting? or how about strategies for conflict resolutions?
3) How do these types of marriages define individual space? How do couples or members care for their individual selves?
4) At what point was there a breakdown or a meltdown in the relationship/s and how was the turnaround like? Or are there even breakdowns and meltdowns unique to each type of marriage?
I am quite sure differences and commonalities shall arise if we care to stop and find out, even before we pass judgement on each others' choices. But all these point to fruitful discussion with a new focus:
our unique ways of finding happiness, at ALL cost, with a partner, with partner+offspring, with one's self.
So, let's lay down our ARMED words and questions, and instead arm ourselves with better terms of engagement, take on new perspectives and arrive at genuine respect and understanding.
No comments:
Post a Comment