CHAPTER XXXIV
SHALL A MAN BE HEAD OF THE HOUSE?
What do you think of this question: "Should a man be the head of the house?"
I know what most men think about it. They have been trained for thousands of years to be the head of the house. Woman has been largely an appendage to a man or a household, so far as authority was concerned. At least, that has been the theory.
Actually we know in fact that many women have ruled the house with an iron hand. The name hen-pecked husband has a meaning all its own to many a man.
My own idea of marriage is that both should rule, in their own way and in their own departments.
There should be no opposition or conflict of authority. It is not enough for a man to scream, "I'm the head of this house. What I say goes." The basis of true marriage is love. Where love exists it should govern, and it should govern both the husband and the wife. The husband should listen to the woman's side of the case; and the wife should listen to the man's reasons for any given action.
But there should be infinite consideration and the spirit of co-operation on both sides. It is easy to be arbitrary, if one can get away with it.
It may be the case that the woman's will rules and the husband subsides into subjection, but he does not love the woman who rules him.
It may be that the wife subsides before the man's arrogance and violence, but she does not necessarily respect the man.
It is not worth while to have one's arbitrary way and lose the other's love and respect. Some victories are merely victories of force, of superior physical or mental strength.
Marriage is a partnership; and the partners in marriage have each his or her voice in the life of the household, not properly a noisy and strident voice, but the voice of love. Love should be the head of the house, not individuals.