This entry was posted on Monday, September 17th, 2007 at 2:29 am and is filed under Marital Issues. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
The same care is needed to distinguish the real problem from the apparent one in analyzing any other source of marital discord. Economic difficulties are frequently blamed for destroying harmony. “When poverty comes in the door, love flies out the window.” It sounds good-but is it true? I have seen many marriages in which economic strain prevented disruption-and not only because the couple could no longer afford the cost of divorce. And it is probably not merely the increased ability to meet expenses which raises the number of divorces during prosperity.
Hardship can bring two people closer together as well as break their marital ties. The depression deepened some unions, and broke others. Any kind of misfortune is a test of the courage and sincerity of the mates; it is a test of the fundaments on which the marriage is built. If the wife has married only for the purpose of financial security, then of course the loss of an adequate income removes the only basis on which this particular marriage rests. On the other hand, if there is a feeling of belonging, hardship will strengthen it. Under really trying conditions many minor frictions, which often are more detrimental to the mutual understanding, disappear. Real disaster leaves no room for concern with personal prestige. Any desire of being better, any fear of appearing inferior, loses all meaning when very existence is threatened physically, economically, or socially. Women previously concerned with amusement, appearance, and. luxury become real companions of their husbands, sacrificing comfort in assisting them, and even providing financial support. Many a couple under such circumstances has detected favorable qualities and traits in each other which they had never suspected before.
It cannot be denied, however, that economic troubles are only too often the immediate grounds for the collapse of the marriage. But experience has taught us to look beyond immediate conflicts for deeper reasons. As we have said before, perhaps the foundations of such a union were never broad enough to withstand any strain, or they were already so deteriorated by other frictions that the slightest additional burden completed the destruction. We must always suspect behind any marital collapse the arch-enemy of human cooperation: over-emphasis of personal prestige. How can economic hardship affect personal prestige? To understand this question we must recognize the deeper source of many marital discords which seem to be based on economic difficulties.
The Man as Provider
Prevalent conceptions of rights and duties for men and women give financial matters a peculiar tinge. Many a woman considers her social value in terms of the dollars which a man spends on her be he husband or boy friend. The reduced financial capacity of the husband appears as an intolerable injury to social prestige. Any man who dares endanger her vanity and threaten her social status has to bear the full brunt of her contempt and indignation. On this basis personal quarrels and mutual accusations start. But there is another side to the picture. Men very often consider their own position correlated to the money they make. This conception is so common; at least it was so before the depression, that any man who doesn’t earn or have money is regarded as a failure. Being without a job is still more difficult for a man to bear than for a woman. The deep feeling of personal inadequacy on the side of a husband who has lost his job or fortune increases the intensity of his fight for personal prestige within the family and disturbs deeply the marital equilibrium.
If the husband does not or cannot support the family adequately, it takes much courage and a deep sense of dignity on both sides to maintain the marital harmony. The wife is inclined to regard his shortcoming as a personal insult, often interpreting the man’s failure to make more money as a neglect of wife and family. The husband, on his side, feels his inadequacy deeply, even if his pride prevents him from revealing his feeling of shame. But his actions demonstrate clearly his futile and disturbing attempts to compensate for his alleged failure. He may remonstrate actively or passively by staying in bed and refusing any kind of contribution on his side; or he may play the tyrant, demanding and ordering the other members of the family around. The wife generally doesn’t understand at all why he behaves as he does; and her anger increases when he becomes less and less willing to help at home. She thinks that he should feel more obliged to assume domestic duties if he isn’t working. She does not realize that his conception of domestic work as being feminine and therefore inferior deepens his feeling of shame. Her nagging drives him deeper into desperate opposition.
If men were trained to consider housework as not inferior, and women regarded support of the family as not exclusively a man’s job, then unemployment of the husband would hardly create any problem. The situation is somewhat different among professional men, where the husband’s importance as artist, actor, writer, lawyer, or scientist is less dependent upon the amount of money he makes. In this and similar fields a man may gain professional status and still be poor, and the wife can be proud of him, even though she supports him. Women and men in this group often look down upon men whose only contribution is support.
Changes in the conception of man as the only provider lead to new difficulties in another direction. Many a man resents the desire of his wife to work outside the home and to earn money herself. He regards it as a personal humiliation if his wife works. Actually it is a struggle for supremacy and prestige which prevents many a man from consenting to his wife’s career. To overcome such an obstacle is not easy for a woman who has something to contribute and looks for personal recognition. Neither fighting nor giving in will help. Fighting may lead to a disruption of the marital ties. Even if she wins he will continuously resent her success and, in some cases, may become so discouraged in the competition with his wife that his own efficiency is impaired. And her surrender may entail the cultivation of a resentment that will lead her either to an unhappy, empty life, or to other expressions of independence as distasteful to her jealous husband.
The clash between spouses does not preclude an agreement resulting in some satisfactory equilibrium. Many women capable and desirous of a career renounce it voluntarily because they realize how disturbing it would be for their husbands’ development. Such a decision, however, cannot be regarded as “surrender.” It is made deliberately in full consciousness of the benefits obtained. But, if the woman is sincerely interested in some work and determined to carry it on, her giving in to threats or intimidation will not solve the problem. She should find means of maintaining her marriage along with developing a career. This requires the ability to win her husband’s approval. Arguments and tears, threats and accusations, will only antagonize. Courageous women engaged in a career can be kind and firm enough to convince a husband that he does not lose anything, not even his masculine superiority, if she finds her own field of activity.
Regardless of whether the conflict is created by the husband’s failure to provide or by his desire to be the only provider, the same principles are valid and should be observed if disaster is to be avoided. First of all, the wife must recognize her husband’s problem and help him to solve it. He needs encouragement even if-no, because-he tries to play the tyrant. The husband who prevents his wife from having a career demonstrates thereby his discouragement, his fear that he will be unable to maintain his superiority. Proving to him how wrong he is in his demands proves only how right he is in questioning her devotion. Whenever problems of prestige, of distrust, or of lack of faith arise, logical arguments are of no avail. Humiliation cannot be avoided by humiliating the other one. Expressions of sincere affection, demonstrations of love, strengthen the feeling of belonging and prepare for mutual agreement. In an atmosphere of frank confidence, the most controversial issues can be settled. Of course, a wife who does not believe that her husband will ever agree, or that she will ever be able to make him understand her point of view, prepares only for a fight and disappointment.
