這個小工具發生錯誤

2013年12月25日 星期三

4.3 Premarital cohabitation: revised 3

Cohabitation, becomes more and more popular recently. Many people stand against this kind of life style because of  being worry about their rights after having cohabitation. They said that when the problem of finance or estate occurs, people taking cohabitation would be helpless than people in marriages. So I found a book , which was written by Mireille Dewevre Fourcadeto, to refute these thoughts. Mireille Dewevre Fourcadeto was a professor of French Le Havre University, and he had done so much studies about cohabitation from Ancient Roman to Modern France. This book named "Cohabitation" talked about how to solve common problems of cohabitation and breaking many misunderstanding concepts by mentioning many set laws. And the translator of this book, hsu lien-kao, made many efforts on in the process of translating. He said that he tried to interpret the book much more carefully by studying The Six Laws so hard and asking famous jurists. 
 Some people questioned that how the two people separate their belongings without the indemnification of law if the relationship was broken. This question could be answered in page 26 of "Cohabitation", " In number 1382 terms of the Civil Law, it indicated clearly that if someone cause others' damages, this kind of fact could force this person to be responsible for compensating others' damage." It explained that if our rights were invaded in cohabitation relationship, we could use laws to protect ourselves as well. And the other people were worried about that cohabitation was not in the restriction of law so people who take cohabitation were kind of being not indecent. This nonsense could be broken in page 69, "In the total compilation of laws, only having sex consistently couldn't be admitted as cohabitation. "
 Cohabitation is just a way to live a life , not a way to run away from the control of laws or challenge the society deliberately. It is just a concept which has been misunderstood for a long time.  In fact,the book I mentioned above was standing on a relatively neutral position , so it didn't value anything or make subjective comments to blame on anyone. All the author of this book and me were just trying to use those laws related to cohabitation to correct the misunderstandings. So, stop fussing and take a deeper look on what you were blaming on, maybe it was just read in a wrong way.

5.1 Premarital cohabitation: annotation 4

  After the issue of cohabitation had raised, many economists and sociologists started to discuss how this phenomenon influence our society. To prove that cohabitation has positive effects and origins in the students group, I found a report which was researched and written by Richard Fry and D’Vera Cohn, senior economist and senior writer, respectively, of the Social & Demographic Trends project of the Pew Research Center.

  At the beginning of the report , it used a graph to summarize its points.
We can that the cohabitors of those who don't have a college degrees earn less money than those married ones, while the cohabitors of those who have a college degrees earn more than those married ones. I figured out that whether the cohabitors have college degrees or not, they choose cohabitation because of the cost of marriage is too high to undertake, the difference between these two groups was that those who don't have college degrees may be forced to choose cohabitation. It seemed like cohabitation could be kind of negative that poverty lead to cohabitation, but if we see deeper, we could found out that for those who received education, cohabitation could present a greater economic status. Below this graph, the authors also concluded,"This report finds that greater economic well-being is associated with cohabitation for adults with college degrees, but not for those without college degrees. " The education becomes widespread these years, so we could assume that this effect on higher academic degrees would spread widely with the education. 

  Further more, cohabitation could present part of women's independence. I found an article mentioned that Cherlin (1992), remarked,"Women's new-found financial independence and the spread of more individual-centered values eventually contributed to the instability of marriage. Changes in social standards meant that people no longer felt as obligated to remain in unhappy marriages. Financial independence meant that they did not have to. Besides increasing the divorce rate, changes in postwar economics and ideas caused the rise in delayed marriage and cohabitation." And Gary Becker (1981) also argued,"The single most important factor underlying social transformation related to lower fertility, divorce, and cohabitation has been the rise in the earning power of women. An essential change in the gender division of labor has followed women's increased participation in the waged labor force. This change has reduced the economic advantages and necessity of marriage, and consequently, divorce rates have increased and marriage rates have decreased. The reduced benefits of marriage and the specter of marital instability have made nonmarriage more attractive. Reduction in the expected economic gains from marriage has made men and women more hesitant to enter marital unions, but a shared household still offers economic advantages. Cohabitations make good sense because they capitalize on the benefits of a shared household without the economic risks associated with marriage." We can conclude that the cost of marriage was higher than its benefits sometimes. Especially when the concept of individual independence had raised up , people prefer to show their financial independence through not getting married, which seems to be more independent to make a living on their own.


Sources:
1.Living Together: The Economics of Cohabitation
BY RICHARD FRY AND D’VERA COHN
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/06/27/living-together-the-economics-of-cohabitation/
2.Cohabitation - Reasons For Cohabitation
http://family.jrank.org/pages/275/Cohabitation-Reasons-Cohabitation.html

2013年12月23日 星期一

4.2 Premarital cohabitation: transciption

Okay, I'm Justine, and she is Joselin. We are going to talk about cohabitation. First one, I'm standing at the positive side. I made a photograph (correct: graph or chart). I think cohabitation has many positive meanings like KNOW EACH OTHER BETTER. Cohabitation provides a new way, a brand new way to know each other deeper.You can know his life hobby through cohabitation. And next one is (that) this cohabitation can make you two to FACE THE REAL LIFE. When you start to share your life, you have to learn to face more financial problems. Like, you can save your telephone charges, that(correct: which) is good, but you learn to share your air-conditioner charges because you're living together and you have to face many more problems in reality. Okay. And the third one is (that) all the cohabitations comes from one purpose: TEST IF HE OR SHE IS THE ONE. The one you can rely on him or her in the rest of life. How positive the meaning of cohabitation is.

Next one I'm going to talk about what cohabitation means legally. Cohabitation is a right of liberty that our laws allowed. And some people may say that you can't gain protection from our laws as same as in the marriage because the marriage has a paper(correct: a piece of paper), which means the law. But actually I found a book that writes(correct: said), "In number 1382 terms of the Civil Law, it indicated clearly that if someone cause others' damages, this kind of fact could force this person to be responsible for compensating others' damage." So, we can say that our laws have the ability to control this situation. That the laws can protect you ,you don't have to worry about if we take the cohabitation and we don't have the paper so that the laws can't protect you. That is not true. And we also can say that cohabitation provides a very good way for homosexual couples who can't have a marriage now, and the cohabitation can provide the feeling of home and family.

And next one is talking about WOMEN INDEPENDENCE. Why cohabitation came from women independence? In our conventional society, we depressed women for a very long time. When that day the women waked up, they tried to fight for their (right of) education. After having the education, they learned more and found out not only their right of education was taken away. There were still legal rights, social right, and economic status that they had been deprived. They still fought for legal fairness. We can found that recently we could choose children's last name, not just follow the tradition to use fathers' last names. So that, after all these (things), we could (also) found that women's economic status improved. The women didn't have to rely on marriage and their husband because they (already) have economic ability to make a living. Like "I don't have to marry someone to rely on him." We can say that cohabitation improved the social status of women. And we can found that sometimes someone would say,"When two people take the cohabitation, the Chasity of women would be valueless." They said that women's chasity is important. But actually, if we said that women is as same as men, then why don't we focus on the chasity of men? Okay ,and my part is over.  

2013年11月26日 星期二

4.1 Premarital cohabitation: annotation 3

  Cohabitation, becomes more and more popular recently. Many people stand against this kind of life style because of  being worry about their rights after having cohabitation. They said that when the problem of finance or estate occurs, people taking cohabitation would be helpless than people in marriages. So I found a book , which was written by Mireille Dewevre Fourcadeto, to refute these thoughts. Mireille Dewevre Fourcade was a professor of French Le Havre University, and he had done so much studies about cohabitation from Ancient Roman to Modern France. This book named "Cohabitation" talked about how to solve common problems of cohabitation and breaking many misunderstanding concepts by mentioning many set laws. And the translator of this book, hsu lien-kao, made many efforts on in the process of traslating. He said that he tried to interpret the book much more carefully by studying The Six Laws so hard and asking famous jurists.
 Some people questioned that how the two people separate their belongings without the indemnification of law if the relationship was broken. This question could be answered in page 26 of "Cohabitation", " In number 1382 terms of the Civil Law, it indicated clearly that if someone cause others' damages, this kind of fact could force this person to be responsible for compensating others' damage." It explained that if our rights were invaded in cohabitation relationship, we could use laws to protect ourselves as well. And the other people were worried about that cohabitation was not in the restriction of law so people who take cohabitation were kind of being not indecent. This nonsense could be broken in page 69, "In the total compilation of laws, only having sex consistently couldn't be admitted as cohabitation. "
 Cohabitation is just a way to live a life , not a way to run away from the control of laws or challenge the society deliberately. It is just a concept which has been misunderstood for a long time.  And we could see that many things the society used to question on could actually be solved in our set laws. So, stop fussing and take a deeper look on what you were blaming on, maybe it was just read in a wrong way.

Sources:
同居 / 德韋弗爾-富爾卡德(Mireille Dewevre-Fourcade)著; 許連高譯
臺北市 : 遠流出版 : 信報發行, 1991[民80]
初版

2013年11月25日 星期一

3.3 Premarital cohabitation: reflection

Joselin & Justine

One of my sources was written by an anonymous author, which was collected from a thesis website. But what interests was that my graph was similar with Joselin’s while we had two different analyses. And the mistake we both had was we didn’t find out the background of the author or 
writer of the articles we cited.
Eva & Vicky

Eva used many famous people’s statements to support her point, and she was trying to add the international elements into her annotations which were very great. Vicky also done well as digging the background of the author, and it was good and rare to see that both sides showed strong attitudes.
Claire & Emily



2013年11月14日 星期四

3.2 Premarital cohabitation: revised 2


  Cohabitation, which is used to be considered immoral in ancient Taiwan, should be re-defined nowadays. I found a thesis about cohabitation, which was written by a master student, LI,YA-HUEI,who majored in Department of Human Development and Family Studies in National Taiwan Normal University. It mentioned ," In foreign, Nock (1995) pointed out there were almost half of the US population had experiences of cohabitation before 30-year-old. And YANG,JING-LI(2004) used a census and the marital status distribution of household registration in 2000 A.D. to evaluate the overview of cohabitation in Taiwan. ... , (the population of cohabitation) accounted 5.9% in over-15-year-old and unmarried people." We can see that the rate of cohabitation in Taiwan is far lower than foreign countries. It is because the foreigners takes cohabitation as normal instead of discriminating it like an indiscretion.

  And in other paragraph, " Except the United States, in fact, cohabitation has generally accepted in many European countries , such as there are 90% of the Nordic population had experienced premarital cohabitation phase (quoted from YANG,JING-LI,the associate professor of department of Sociology in Nanhua University, 2004). Trost thought the statement that cohabitation is very common in Sweden than in the US is not complete, cohabitation is a kind of social structure rather than deviant behavior unmarried." This studying also mentioned that a research of ZHEN,XIANG-REN about Japanese rate of cohabitation.




sources:

LI,YA-HUEI
http://ir.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/retrieve/45698/metadata_01_05_s_05_0014.pdf

2013年11月13日 星期三

2.3 Premarital cohabitation: revised 1




"The Reasons to Support Cohabitation:
1. To test if he or she would be a ideal mate.
2. Only care about what we had once.
3. To learn how to face the real life.
4. To have a identity that between single and unmarried.
5. To make the time that fighting together earlier.
6. To make the relationship stable."


- from "Living Together for Love",Yi-Xin Huang,published by Gao-Lin International AG.

  Cohabitation, which means couples come up a thought to live together. It becomes more and more popular recently, in the meanwhile, this phenomenon starts to assault the established concept in our society. I also have friends who are thinking about the possibility of cohabitation, however, they all refused eventually which made me to think about their reasons. I'm stand on the positive side even that I'm single, so why are these girls who is in a relationship rejected this cohabitation choice?
  We can start from why we should support people to take cohabitation. First, this is a right of liberty that the law allowed. No one could judge or forbid it. Second,couples can see things, understand things, and learn things during the cohabitation. Third, the book I quoted mentioned that cohabitation is to transfer the abstract feelings to reality. This book also said the benefits of the cohabitation, in page 56, it said," The telephone charge that saved could buy two more clothes." And in page 57, it said," The time you two stick together is much longer than separating." These reasons are so practical to approve why the cohabitation should be accepted rather than being discriminated.
  Talking about discrimination, cohabitation used to be considered negative, and our first thought while seeing it would be " Those girls who does this must be terrible." How we see this term at this way? Why our first idea comes to blame on girls? It can trace back to our traditional background. In ancient time, people emphasized the virginity of girls because of the domination of masculinity. However, we are living in a world which values the equity, how could we still see things at this old, ancient way? How could we call ourselves modern people when our ideology didn't improve? This kind of thought could be called prejudice nowadays. And there is one more interesting thing that "Live Together for Love" mentioned, maybe the boys are at the disadvantage. It is surprising that they could suffer from their masculism that they always want to pay for all the life stuff or the things to cater to their girlfriends even that they never have to do this. So we'll never know who's the winner, then we can't give judgement to the couples who take cohabitation.
  Somebody may questions about the sexual part that men and women are born with different body structure, it would push women into disadvantage and dangerous way. I think this part is true that women would suffer from being pregnant more than men, however, I don't think this could be a obstacle that even the couple don't live together, they still could have sex, what matters is not how long they spend together, it's how much they want to. So cohabitation is not the motive to make couples have sex.
  There is no right-or-false question in the definition of cohabitation. Cohabitation is only a kind of way for lovers to understand his or her lover deeply.That is exactly why I support couples to do the cohabitation at their will because understanding is the most important part of a relationship. The concern about the freshness fading away is totally unnecessary, when you grow up and have to marry someone, that one you choose must be mature enough to face the reality, the development of love and the entire life with you. Each-other-understanding is far important than freshness.

source:
同居潮流,屋簷下的親密關係 /黃憶欣 著


2013年10月30日 星期三

3.1 Premarital cohabitation: annotation 2

  Cohabitation, which is used to be considered immoral in the ancient time, should be re-defined nowadays. I found a piece of research paper named, " The Economic Study about Premarital Cohabitation." It mentioned many benefits of cohabitation in economic way.  In a paragraph of the article, "Considering the long-term contract of marriage and the high cost of divorcing , people in the marriage market are more careful about finding marriage partners, which increases the cost of finding marriage partners more. ... So we can say that the cost of finding a person to cohabit is lower than a person to marry, " which explained that cohabitation provided either a more flexible option for couples to share a life without contracts or incentives for people to love someone. 
  The article also mentioned that cohabitation meant the economic independence of women. Women started to refuse the restrict of a marriage, which emphasized that the obligation of women is to obey her husband, to raise kids and to hold a family. These "obligations" were overturned gradually and women should have the right to refuse these unfair concepts and embrace the cohabitation as the first step.


Resource:
http://big.hi138.com/jingjixue/xinjingji/201102/287037.asp

2.2 Premarital cohabitation: transcription

  I’m standing on the positive side. I think that everyone knows it becomes more and more popular that cohabitation is accepted among many couples. But I think cohabitation is discriminated because it is very different from our established concept. It is because our traditional background emphasized the virginity of girls, and it is also because of the domination of the maculism. If we want to develop, we have to change our concepts. Cohabitation is a right of liberty that the law allowed, so it couldn’t be discriminated like that. 
  And I’m going to talk about my experience, even I’m single now, I stand on the positive side in this case. But my friends, who is in the relationship, they all refused to take cohabitation because they thought this was inappropriate. And I was trying to persuade them, so I concluded many benefit of cohabitation. Reason number one, cohabitation is to test he or she will be your ideal mate. Number two, it is to learn how to face the real life. Three, it is a way to make the relationship stable. Four , we can say that couples can see things, understand things and learn things during the cohabitation. They try to adapt each other and try to understand each other deeply. For example, sometimes we see a girl who is pretty outside, but actually she is dirty while in the dorm. So if her lover starts a life with her, he will find out this fact, and maybe he’ll say ,”Oh no , it is too dirty. I don’t want to live with you forever.” 
  And next, I’m going to talk about the book I quoted to proof my viewpoints, the author mentioned that cohabitation is to turn abstract feelings to reality and listed many practical benefits such as “The telephone charge we saved could buy two more clothes” or “If you live together, the man can drive you to school so that you can save your traffic fee.” Or “the time you spend together is longer than separating,” lovers would like to do that because they want to stay with each other much longer much better. 
  To oppose to Joselin, I think if we really want to stay long with this mate, we can’t only take freshness into consideration because you will spend a really long time with your “the one”, you can’t just say that “I had seen you so many times. I ‘m tired. I don’t want to see you anymore.” If you want to share your life with a totally different individual, you have to understand him deeply rather than thinking cohabitation would increase the freshness. I’m finished. Thank you.

2013年10月16日 星期三

2.1 Premarital cohabitation: annotation 1

"The Reasons to Support Cohabitation:
 1. To test if he or she would be a ideal mate.
 2. Only care about what we had once.
 3. To learn how to face the real life.
 4. To have a identity that between single and unmarried.
 5. To make the time that fighting together earlier.
 6. To make the relationship stable."
- from "Living Together for Love",Yi-Xin Huang,published by Gao-Lin International AG.
  Cohabitation, which means couples come up a thought to live together. It becomes more and more popular recently, in the meanwhile, this phenomenon starts to assault the established concept in our society. I also have friends who are thinking about the possibility of cohabitation, however, they all refused eventually which made me to think about their reasons. I'm stand on the positive side even that I'm single, so why are these girls who is in a relationship rejected this cohabitation choice?
  We can start from why we should support people to take cohabitation. First, this is a right of liberty that the law allowed. No one could judge or forbid it. Second,couples can see things, understand things, and learn things during the cohabitation. Third, the book I quoted mentioned that cohabitation is to transfer the abstract feelings to reality. This book also said the benefits of the cohabitation, in page 56, it said," The telephone charge that saved could buy two more clothes." And in page 57, it said," The time you two stick together is much longer than separating." These reasons are so practical to approve why the cohabitation should be accepted rather than being discriminated.
  Talking about discrimination, cohabitation used to be considered negative, and our first thought while seeing it would be " Those girls who does this must be terrible." How we see this term at this way? Why our first idea comes to blame on girls? It can trace back to our traditional background. In ancient time, people emphasized the virginity of girls because of the domination of masculinity. However, we are living in a world which values the equity, how could we still see things at this old, ancient way? How could we call ourselves modern people when our ideology didn't improve? This kind of thought could be called prejudice nowadays. And there is one more interesting thing that "Live Together for Love" mentioned, maybe the boys are at the disadvantage. It is surprising that they could suffer from their masculism that they always want to pay for all the life stuff or the things to cater to their girlfriends. So we'll never know who's the winner, then we can't give judgement to the couples who take cohabitation.
  There is no right-or-false question in the definition of cohabitation. Cohabitation is only a kind of way for lovers to understand his or her lover deeply.That is exactly why I support couples to do the cohabitation at their will because understanding is the most important part of a relationship.

2013年10月2日 星期三

1.1 Premarital cohabitation : introduction

  It is a fresh experience when I became a second-graded student, two of my roommates started to stay overnight in their boyfriends' houses. At first, I thought it was really a big step forward to the relationship and really didn't approve it. However, I soon found out that this might be a great start for two people to understand each other more because they could get used to each other's living habits earlier, so I turned to persuade my roommates to move to live with their boyfriends next semester. It was reported many times that lots of couples figured out they didn't fit when they finally built a dreamy sweet house.
  To my surprise, they all refused. They told me they couldn't accept premarital cohabitation or something like that because they insisted on the sense of fresh was important than their future happiness. So I asked deeply and discovered that they didn't stand against premarital cohabitation but they fought against "cohabitation before engagement". The definition of these two terms was a little different that the range of the second one term was much smaller than the first one. They said when somebody came up the thought of marrying someone else , it was necessary to live together for a while to make a final decision; however, when two people hadn't thought to make a forever contract to each other, they shouldn't live together hastily.
  It was unexpected because I think the thing in another way. I support any kind of cohabitation since there is no difference between temporary staying or long-time-stay. Discontinuous living together is actually a reflection of the desire to live together. If you want to stay longer with your lover and you have ability to do, why not just moving into his house?