03-01-2019 07:36:35 PM -0800
02-28-2019 01:12:07 PM -0800
02-28-2019 08:28:27 AM -0800
02-27-2019 10:35:18 AM -0800
02-27-2019 08:26:44 AM -0800
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.
PJ Media encourages you to read our updated PRIVACY POLICY and COOKIE POLICY.

Why should it be the man who is relegated to second class status?

I read with interest a post at PJ lifestyle by Rhonda Robinson on cohabitation:

Cohabitation by its very nature is a shortsighted view to a committed relationship between a man and a woman. The amount of young people doing it doesn’t make it socially acceptable or desirable. Despite the author’s veiled attempt to minimize their voices by politicizing it, there’s a lot of good reasons why everyone from social conservatives to psychologists aren’t embracing shacking-up. Not the least of which is how women fall into a second-class slot that even an eventual marriage won’t always change.

My response?

Why would a man get married when he would be the one turned into a second class citizen? That’s the real question here. Marriage gives women rights and men responsibilities. Living together makes sense for men because it is imperative that he choose a spouse he can trust–there is nothing wrong with a man testing a relationship to see if it is the right one for him. If he makes a mistake, he will pay very dearly without protection from the courts or support from society.