Would You Agree to a Relationship Contract?

by SodaHead Living Posted 2012/05/29 19:45:32

Related Topics: Relationship, Contract, Mark Zuckerberg, Priscilla Chan, College, Facebook, Date, Holidays, Vacation, Holiday, Writer, Walk, Bride, Marries, Chores

Read More

616 votes
Read all 261 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Yes	260 votes	42%
	No	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?

+24

Add a comment above

★earthbound_misfit★ 2012/05/30 01:55:08

No

+12
Reminds me of...

>> See Replies

More polls by SodaHead Living

KrSpo to csch 2012/05/30 15:14:07 (edited)

If you never intend to take it beyond a dating relationship, why not keep it separate? Even after a long marriage the other partner can still have alternative plans.. Just ask my ex and her 'old' but new boyfriend...

reply
csch to KrSpo 2012/06/08 11:10:00

you are correct could happen... but if that is the foundation... you would hope you would see the real foundation of that relationship and not marry them in the first place but I still believe that in the long run... maybe 5 years or less... all ... all things would be shared by both... only the beginning to help with insecurity...

reply
jtfm 2012/05/30 15:08:04

No

+2
Not only insensitive but stupid as well. People's needs change over time and such a contract can only fail to accommodate those unforeseeable changes. That is why people commit "for better or worse" etc.

reply
KrSpo to jtfm 2012/05/30 15:14:50

+1
There's a sucker born every day -- PT Barnum.

reply
Smokey 2012/05/30 15:06:26

No

+1
I guess I'm just a romantic at heart but I actually like spending time with my love and not just because a contract said I had to.

reply
KrSpo to Smokey 2012/05/30 15:15:49

a Contract isn't just for that, it can also define intentions. If you do not want to marry, then the document sates that, along with not merging real property.

reply
silverhorn 2012/05/30 14:59:58

No

While I do believe there should be good discussion of the relationship and expectations going into it, having a contract makes it seem too cold and impersonal. Relationships are built on trust. A contract is, in my opinion, not an instrument of trust.

reply
KrSpo to silverhorn 2012/05/30 15:16:24

You are right, it is an instrument of protection most of the time.

reply
John Hall 2012/05/30 14:59:07

Yes

+4
Whatever works for 2 people go for it because I would .

reply
weenyboy 2012/05/30 14:58:04

Yes

+1
Why NOT? After all, marriage is nothing more than a legal CONTRACT in itself. I would have absolutely no problem with signing one and I've been married for over 40 years. In light of the FACT that around 50% of ALL MARRIAGES end in divorce in this country, it only makes sense to"settle things" while BOTH parties are still amicable!

reply
Sperry23 2012/05/30 14:57:06

Yes

+1
While it depends on the people involved, it makes sense to lay out expectations so they can be discussed at the very least. And a prenup is almost mandatory these days.

reply
Matti Linnanvuori 2012/05/30 14:52:03

Yes

+1
All parties have expectations and it is good to speak out about them.

reply
jamiecooper187 2012/05/30 14:50:43

Yes

I thought thats what marriage was?

reply
fortycal_sig 2012/05/30 14:48:52

No

Might be right for some people, but not this person.

reply
Sass 2012/05/30 14:37:49

No

Boy, how this CHEAPENS marriage. Why bother???

reply
KrSpo to Sass 2012/05/30 15:17:39

How does it cheapen marriage to lay out some rules? I will never understand people that blindly go into marriage thinking that it is all unicorns and daisies.

reply
stevegt... to Sass 2012/05/30 18:18:18 (edited)

it enhanced one of my marriages......really did. Its totally not intended to be unfair, its to protect BOTH the man AND the woman.

reply
toots 2012/05/30 14:25:02

Yes

+2
I did, when I got married.

reply
rugrat1411 2012/05/30 14:22:39

No

+1
23 years ago when my boyfriend/now husband moved in together we agreed he would do all outside jobs and I would do all inside jobs. I wasn't thinking cooking, cleaning, laundry everyday, now a family of 4 plus who ever the kids bring home. Trust me he reminds me you made the deal.

reply
Anariashki 2012/05/30 14:19:46

No

I prefer my relationships "at-will."

reply
natashalh 2012/05/30 14:18:53

Yes

as long as it is flexable i am all for it. Everything changes. Like if she wants to take 2 vacations then I say he might be down for it. He is probably super active in his company and it doesn't give him much private time. Besides if she is down for it who are we to say it's a good or bad idea? lol

reply
HAZL_EYZ 2012/05/30 14:16:59

No

+2
just shows there is trust issues even before the relationship starts.

reply
Duane Freemantle 2012/05/30 14:07:49

No

+1
Especially, if I was worth 10,000,000,000 dollars.

reply
Pele Emerging 2012/05/30 14:05:29

Yes

+1
Agree to things within the relationship? Yes, I think that's a good idea. Something legally binding? No. Relationships evolve and change, and everything should be negotiable in the future.

reply
smitty 2012/05/30 14:05:14

No

+1
When I said yes that was the only contract.

I was under the impression she wrote the contract and he agreed to it. Not the other way around.

He wasn't a billionaire when the were dating. He was going to be though. Actually he wasn't till a week ago. Then he got married. Smart move there.. He became a billionaire prior to the marriage so it isn't part of the martial assets.

I don't think she is any dummy though. Her IQ probably makes his look like a toilet washer.

reply
the fuze 2012/05/30 12:23:51

No

+2
If you need a contract saying you'll spend time with someone, it seems to me that you really don't want that relationship. But that's just MY opinion, different strokes for different folks, I guess.

reply
gracious43 2012/05/30 12:22:33

Yes

That is pretty clever.

reply
alanh 2012/05/30 12:17:13

No

+1
What a bunch of nonsense! What ever happened to Love and respect? If you want to be with someone than you wouldn't need a contract!

reply
RamblingVoices. 2012/05/30 12:11:07

No

+1
100 mins? Who in their right mind could put up with that boring toss pot for longer than 10 mins a week...

reply
Bear 2012/05/30 11:27:02

No

+1
NO!!!...If a couple cant trust each other..then they shouldnt be together..whats next?... a contract for having sex with each other...

reply
Sass to Bear 2012/05/30 14:39:38

Men would REALLY like that, they would!!!!

reply
Bear to Sass 2012/05/30 19:11:58

why is it just men?

reply
WaterRon 2012/05/30 10:34:43

No

You don't know or trust the other person enough, why the Hell are you in a relationship to begin with?
How much of an emotionally insecure control freak is the person proposing the contract?
Now personal relation ships or even dating are subject to legalistic paperwork and lawyers?
I support abolishing the legal institute of marriage in order to keep control freaks and legal manipulators out of my property and personal life, I'm certainly not signing an agreement just to go on a date.
People need to grow up and take personal responsibility.

reply
jumpthegun 2012/05/30 10:04:09

No

+1
if you really need a contract so a relationship works, maybe you shouldn't be in a realtionship. ever heard of TRUST anyone?

reply
jerry.alan.carroll 2012/05/30 09:59:37

Yes

let's face it. We get lost in the world around us and forget who is right next to us sometimes. every couple complains that things change so much. If they need a contract to stay on track then so be it.

reply
mr echo 2012/05/30 08:54:33

No

Retarded crap
I hate all

reply
sglmom 2012/05/30 08:52:48

Yes

Actually ..
this puts an emphasis on the RELATIONSHIP ..
carving out time to be just a COUPLE indeed ..
a bit of privacy ..
letting each other know .. this is the boundary where we do NOT let anyone else interfere with our time together ..
A pretty balanced and smart idea indeed ..

reply
TKramar 2012/05/30 08:50:25

Yes

Sure, as long as the terms said that the relationship could not be terminated by either party.

reply
Emi 2012/05/30 06:58:22

No

What is the point for us to sign a relationship contact?

If you want to sign, or think that it's not a problem, why don't you refuse to marry someone?

Be confident to your partner, sign what heck relationship contact??

reply
Aksana 2012/05/30 06:50:06

No

nay

reply