Would You Agree to a Relationship Contract?
SodaHead Living
2012/05/29 19:45:32
|
|
|||||
|
260 votes
|
|
42% | |||
|
356 votes
|
|
58% | |||
Last week, we gave you the scoop on Mark Zuckerberg's new bride, Priscilla Chan. But we neglected to mention that she supposedly agreed to a "relationship contract."


According to the book "The Facebook Effect," Zuckerberg, 28, agreed to spend at least 100 minutes of private time with Chan, 27, each week, as well as take her on at least one date. They also agreed to vacation for two weeks yearly overseas.
So, is making such a "deal" a good idea? A blogger for dating site howaboutwe.com thinks so, writing: "Dating an eccentric billionaire seems like it’s probably no cake-walk, but Priscilla has obviously done a good job of making sure their relationship remains a priority for the Facebook founder. 100 minutes is less than two hours, but even that can seem like a godsend when you’re dating someone who is just really, really busy."
It's unclear whether the couple agreed to this deal verbally or whether they actually signed papers. But the howaboutwe writer thinks we could all take a page out of the Facebook founder's book:
"Personally, I’m pretty pro agreements or pacts within a relationship. It could be about anything, from the frequency of sex, to the divying up of household chores, to where you spend holidays together as a couple. It may seem unromantic to mandate rules, but having a clear set of expectations for both partners makes it easy to ensure that needs are being met." Do you agree?
Top Opinion
-
★earthbound_misfit★ 2012/05/30 01:55:08No






















But then I read what his contract consisted of... it's very sweet actually!
I was expecting something along the lines of what she can or can't do, but I'm glad it wasn't. It's more of a devoting commitment to her.
Maybe some can't agree with contracts, and I can see where some people would play d!ck moves in a contract regarding their relationship, but if it was something promising each other we'd have at least "x" amount of time with each other during the week and/or "x" amount of dates and vacations, I don't see a problem.
In retrospect, it's the same thing as vows one makes at a wedding. Not a big deal.
It's up to the people in a non-married relationship whether they want one or not.
We have one and we both agreed to the terms and we still stick to them.
Most of these contracts are a joke and will be nullified by the courts later on. I don't believe the courts will find these to be reasonably enforceable when these cases start hitting the dockets. Not everything under the law in contractual.
Considering how much time and how detrimental the influence of that time spent of Facebook is affecting real marriages today- how much more so might it be a factor for the OWNER of the same Facebook!
It addresses and amplifies the evolution of marriage- without the archaic expectation that couples are locked into marriage for life- it acknowledges that different people may have very real and different expectations going into a marital union.
And sketching out in advance- that one agrees to and has the solid expectation and is deserving of TIME =energy-attention=effort=love- is a realistic and adult precondition for any relationship.