Interesting letter in todays Tribune.
I think they are, unless it's an abusive     relationship, but what do I know?  I'm gender biased.

Dawn **** (Tribune, Aug. 15) highlighted the Bush administration's proposed welfare reform programs that encourage poor women with children to marry and stay married. The reasoning behind such programs is grossly oversimplified and naive at best, and overtly racist, classist and patriarchal at worst.
   First, women of color, for a number of reasons, do not reap the same financial rewards of marriage as their white counterparts, and as such would not benefit to the same extent from these programs. Second, such programs imply that poor women cannot be trusted to make good decisions for themselves and their families. Women, poor and otherwise, are perfectly capable of deciding if and when marriage is in their best interest. Finally, these programs send the message that women can only be good mothers and financially stable on the arm of a man.
   Although the question of whether children are better off (financially and otherwise) in two-parent families will continue to be debated, the reality is that an ever-increasing number of children are being raised by single mothers. It is also true that female-headed families make up a large portion of the country's poor. Instead of government programs to push the conservative, Republican version of "family values" and marry off all the poor, single mothers, we should be focusing our efforts on exploring and addressing the income gap between men and women, the connections between racism and poverty, and unequal access to education, health care, child care, housing and other services. The goals of these efforts should be that women will marry because they want to, not because they have to in order to survive, and that all children, regardless of what their families look like, will have the resources they need to grow up healthy and happy.
   
   SARAH *****
   East Lansing, Mich.

edited to add abusive relationship
   

Argh, feminists.  I'd figure that the poorer the mother is, the better off she's married.  If you're a chick like Jodi Foster or Madonna, then having a child is no great burden and a husband can be optional.  But if you're making only $15,000 or even $30,000 it's a lot more difficult. It can and is done, but the child probably ends up deprived and living in a less-than-optimal environment.

I don't think it's patronizing, it's just the truth.



Ah, that'll be a snap.

marriage isn't going to help anyone that doesn't want to be married.  male or female.  there are no intrinsic benefits to marriage.

You got that right. I'll be 24 in about a month and I am seriously considering NEVER getting married. When I look down the list of reasons to get married, the only ones I see are "make my parents happy" and "because society thinks I should".
It's just too much of a liability for a man these days. I've worked too hard to have some bitch decide to leave one day for another guy, file for divorce, take the kids, and then expect me to pay her to do it. And if I refuse, all of a sudden I'm a "deadbeat dad" with no drivers license and my picture on TV.
When and if the law catches up with my expectations, I will reconsider. Until then, get used to seeing single mothers, because there are currently huge disincentives for men to get married.

It's good for men's health, believe it or not.  

Married men live longer.

[url]http://www.rand.org/publications/RB/RB5018/[/url]

Plus, there are such things as happy marriages, and good women, ya know...

Marriage.....aaaaaaahh....the good old days[rolleyes].I was married once,it was like a second job....NO THANKS!  

And why do married men often die before their wives do?

Because they want to!