This paper assesses the implications of existing research on the intra-household economy for current debates about the emergence of new forms of radically democratic intimate relationships in ‘late modern’ or ‘world risk’ society. The different ways in which couples organise money are particularly important in evaluating these debates because as Pahl (1989, 1997, 1999) argues, money can be seen as a tracer for other aspects of a couples' lives together, especially the power relationship between them. One of the groups currently thought to be in the vanguard of shifts to new forms of egalitarian and radically democratic intimate relationships are heterosexual cohabiting couples. So far however, there has been little, if any, research on the ways in which cohabiting couples organise money, particularly in Britain. This paper therefore assesses the possible implications of existing research on the intra-household economy amongst heterosexual couples in the UK and elsewhere, for the ways in which cohabiting couples may possibly be organising household money in Britain today, and what light this sheds on current debates about shifts towards greater equality in new forms of intimate relationships. One of the main questions underlying the discussion concerns the extent to which trends towards individualisation in intimate relationships are coming to be associated with greater sharing and equality in the distribution of financial resources, as Giddens' (1992) thesis would lead us to expect, or whether as Pahl (1999) and others (Jamieson, 1999) have suggested, an increasing proportion of couples may now be coming to use individualised or privatised systems of money management which while enhancing individual control over finances, may nevertheless still be associated with the maintenance and reproduction of some very traditional gender inequalities between male and female partners, albeit in a new and apparently impersonal, ‘marketised’ form.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArthurS., (2002), Settling Up, London, National Centre for Social Research.
2.
BatalovaJ. and CohenP., (2002), ‘Premarital cohabitation and housework: couples in a cross national perspective,’Journal of Marriage and the Family, 64, August: 743–755.
3.
BaxterJ., (2004), ‘Transitions through the life course and time spent on housework’ paper prepared for the 99th Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association 14–17 August, San Fransisco.
4.
BeckU., (1992), Risk Society, London: Sage.
5.
BeckU. and Beck-GernsheimE., (1995), The Normal Chaos of Love, Cambridge: Polity.
6.
BerringtonA., (2001), ‘Entry into parenthood and the outcome of cohabiting partnerships in Britain’Journal of Marriage and the Family,’63, February: 80–96.
7.
BerthoudR. and GershunyJ., (2000), ‘Seven years in the lives of British Families’ in BerthoudR. and GershunyJ. (eds), Seven Years in the Lives of British Families, Bristol: The Policy Press.
8.
BlumsteinP. and SchwartzP., (1983), American Couples: Money Work and Sex, New York, William Morrow.
9.
BrinesJ. and JoynerK., (1999), ‘The ties that bind: principles of cohesion in marriage and cohabitation,’American Sociological Review, Vol 64, June: 333–355.
10.
BurgoyneC., (1990), Money in marriage: how patterns of allocation both reflect and conceal power in The Sociological Review, 38: 634–665.
11.
BurgoyneC. and LewisA., (1994), Distributive Justice in Marriage: Equality or Equity?’Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol 4: 101–114.
12.
BurgoyneC. and MorisonV., (1997), ‘Money in remarriage: keeping things simple – and separate,’The Sociological Review, 45, 3, August: 363–395.
13.
ChodorowN., (1978), The Reproduction of Mothering, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
14.
ClarkbergM., (1999), ‘The price of partnering: the role of economic well-being in young adults' first union experiences,’Social Forces, March, 77, 3: 945–968.
15.
ClarkbergM.StolzenbergR. and WaiteL., (1995), ‘Attitudes, values and entrance into cohabitational verses marital unions,’Social Forces, December, 74, 2: 609–634.
16.
ClulowC., (1995), (ed.), Women, Men and Marriage, London, Sheldon Press.
17.
ClulowC., (1993), (ed.), Rethinking Marriage: Public and Private Perspectives, London: Karnac Books.
18.
CromptonR.BrockmannM. and WigginsR.D., (2003), ‘A woman's place,’ in ParkA. (ed.), British Social Attitudes 20th Report, 2003/4 edition, London, Sage.
19.
CromptonR., (1999), ‘The decline of the male breadwinner: explanations and interpretations’ in CromptonR. (ed.), Restructuring Gender Relations and Employment, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20.
DavisJ.A. and JowellR., (1989), Measuring national differences: an introduction to the International Social Survey Programme in JowellR.WitherspoonS. and BrookL. (eds), British Social Attitudes: Special International Report, Aldershot: Gower.
21.
EllingsaeterA.L., (1998), Dual breadwinner societies: provider models in the Scandinavian welfare statesActa SociologicaVol 41.
22.
EmmanuelA., (1972), Unequal Exchange, London: New Left Books.
23.
ErmischJ. and FrancesconiM., (2000), ‘Patterns of household and family formation’ in BerthoudR. and GershunyJ. (eds), Seven Years in the Lives of British Families, Bristol: The Policy Press.
24.
FerreeM., (1990), Beyond separate spheres: feminism and family research, Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52: 866–884.
25.
FlemingR., (1997), The Common Purse, Aukland N.Z.: Aukland University Press.
26.
GiddensA., (1992), The Transformation of Intimacy, Cambridge: Polity Press.
27.
GoldthorpeJ., (1987), Social Mobility and Class Structure in Modern Britain, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
28.
GoodeJ.CallenderC. and ListerR., (1998), Purse or Wallet? London: Policy Studies Institute.
29.
HeimdalK.R. and Houseknecht (2003), ‘Cohabiting and married couples income organisation: approaches in Sweden and the United States,’ in Journal of Marriage and the Family, 65: 525–538.
30.
HertzR., (1986), More Equal Than Others, California, USA: The University of California Press.
31.
HertzR., (1992), ‘Financial affairs: money and authority in dual earner marriage,’ in LewisS.IzraeliD. and HootsmansH. (eds), Dual Earner Families, London: Sage.
32.
IrwinS., (1999), ‘Resourcing the family’ in SilvaE. and SmartC. (eds), The New Family? London: Sage.
33.
IrwinS. and BotteroW., (2000), ‘Market returns? Gender and theories of change in employment relations’ in British Journal of Sociology, Vol 51No 2, June: 261–280
34.
JamiesonL., (1999), ‘Intimacy transformed? A critical look at the ‘pure relationship,’Sociology, Vol 33, No 3: 477–494.
35.
KiernanK.E. and EstaughV., (1993), Cohabitation, London: Family Policy Studies Centre.
36.
LaurieH. and GershunyJ., (2000), ‘Couples, work and money’ in BerthoudR. and GershunyJ. (eds), Seven Years in the Lives of British Families, Bristol: The Policy Press.
37.
LaurieH. and RoseD., (1994), Changing Households, Colchester: University of Essex ESRC Research Centre on Micro Social Change.
38.
LaneD., (1991), The Market Experience, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39.
LewisJ., (2001), The End of Marriage, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
40.
LewisJ., (1993), ‘Introduction: Women, Work, Family and Social Policies in Europe’ in LewisJ. (ed.), Women and Social Policies in Europe, Edward Elgar.
41.
Ludwig-MayerhoferW., (2000), ‘Transaction Costs, Power, and Gender Attitudes in Financial Arrangements of Couples’ in WeesieJ. and RaubW.The Management of Durable Relationships, Amsterdam, Thela Thesis Publishers (on CD ROM).
42.
MacleanM., (1995), Economic Ties, in ClulowC. (ed.), Women, Men and Marriage, London: Sheldon Press.
43.
MacInnesJ., (1998), The End of Masculinity, Buckingham: Open University Press.
44.
MolloyD. and SnapeD., (1999), Financial arrangements of couples on benefit: a review of the literature, Department of Work and Pensions, London: HMSO.
45.
SummerfieldC. and BabbP., (2003), ‘Households and Families’ in Social Trends, 33London: HMSO.
46.
McRaeS., (1993), Cohabiting Mothers, London: Policy Studies Institute.
47.
MurphyM., (2000), ‘The evolution of cohabitation in Britain 1960–95,’Population Studies, 54: 43–56.
48.
NymanC., (1999), ‘Gender equality in ‘the most equal country in the world’? Money and Marriage in Sweden’, The Sociological Review, Vol 47: 767–793.
49.
OrbachS., (1995), A woman's place in ClulowD. (ed.), Women, Men and Marriage, London: Sheldon Press.
50.
OrbachS., (1993), Women, Men and Intimacy in ClulowD. (ed.), Rethinking Marriage: Public and Private Perspectives, London: Karnac Books.
51.
PahlJ., (1989), Money and Marriage, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
52.
PahlJ., (1997), Our money and my money: what do financial arrangements tell us about relationships, Seventh Jackie Burgoyne Memorial Lecture, University of Kent at Canterbury.
53.
PahlJ., (1999), Invisible Money, Bristol: The Policy Press.
PhillipsA., (1993), Democracy and Difference, Polity: Cambridge.
56.
RakeK., (2000), Women's Incomes Over the Lifetime, London: HMSO.
57.
RakeK. and JayatilakaG., (no date), Home Truths, London: Fawcett Society.
58.
RomanC., and VoglerC., (1999), ‘Managing money in British and Swedish households’, European Societies, 1, 3: 419–456.
59.
SeltzerJ., (2000), ‘Families formed outside marriage,’Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, November: 1247–1268.
60.
ShoveE., (1993), Accounting for power: formal financial systems and domestic power in DunneG.BlackburnR. and JarmanJ. (eds), Inequalities in Employment, Inequalities in Home Life, Conference Proceedings for the 20th Cambridge Stratification Seminar, University of Cambridge 9–10th September, Sociological Research Group, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Free School Lane, Cambridge.
61.
SinghS., (1997), Marriage Money, St Leonards Australia: Allen and Unwin.
62.
SinghS. and LindsayJ., (1996), ‘Money in heterosexual relationships,’The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, Vol 32: 57–69.
63.
SmartC. and NealeB., (1999), Family Fragments? Cambridge: Polity Press.
64.
SmartC. and StevensP., (2000), Cohabitation Breakdown, London: Family Policy Studies Centre.
65.
SmockP. and ManningW., (1997), ‘Economic circumstances and Marriage,’Demography, Vol 34, no 3: 331–341.
66.
SummerfieldC. and BabbP., (2003), ‘Households and Families’ in Social Trends, 33London: HMSO
67.
TaylorM., (2000), ‘Work, non-work, jobs and job mobility,’ in BerthoudR. and GershunyJ. (eds), Seven Years in the Lives of British Families, Bristol: The Policy Press.
68.
TreasJ., (1993), Money in the bank: transaction costs and the economic organisation of marriage, American Sociological Review, 58, 5: 723–734.
69.
TreasJ. and WidmerE., (2000), ‘A multi-level analysis of financial management in marriage for 23 countries’ in WeesieJ. and RaubW. (eds), The Management of Durable Relations, Amsterdam: Thela Thesis.
70.
VoglerC., (1994), ‘Money in the Household’ in AndersonM.BechhoferF. and GershunyJ.The Social and Political Economy of the Household, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
71.
VoglerC., (1985), The Nation State: The Neglected Dimension of Class, Aldershot: Gower.
72.
VoglerC., (1998), ‘Money in the household: some underlying issues of power’ in The Sociological ReviewVol. 46, No 4 November: 687–713.
73.
VoglerC.BrockmannM. and WigginsR.D., Intimate relationships and changing patterns of money management at the beginning of the twenty-first century (forthcoming).
74.
VoglerC. and PahlJ., (1993), Social and economic change and the organisation of money within marriage in Work, Employment and Society, 7, 1: 71–95.
75.
VoglerC. and PahlJ., (1994), Money, power and inequality within marriage in The Sociological Review42, 2: 263–288.
76.
WhiteL. and RogersS., (2000), ‘Economic circumstances and family outcomes: a review of the 1990's,’Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, November: 1035–1051.
77.
WilsonG., (1987), Money in the Family, Aldershot: Avebury.
78.
WinklerA., (1997), ‘Economic decision making by cohabitors: findings regarding income pooling’Applied Economics, 29: 1979–1090.
79.
ZelizerV., (1989), ‘The social meaning of money: special monies’, American Journal of Sociology, 92, 2: 342–377.
80.
ZelizerV., (1994), The Social Meaning of Money, New York: Basic Books.
