Feminists of various kinds – structural, radical, critical, materialist – have repeatedly asserted that marriage benefits men more than women and usually at women's expense. There is now a considerable body of empirical evidence that supports the major thrust of their claims. However, there are feminists adopting a post-structuralist perspective who argue that many accounts of men's dominance are overly deterministic. The argument goes that there is insufficient recognition of change that is already ensuring more rewarding marriages for women much of which is probably due to women's exercise of agency. It is further argued that, in order for women to initiate successful change, it is necessary but not sufficient for them to be aware of inequities and other shortcomings occurring at specific sites in their marriage. In the present study, a sample of 45 wives and 40 husbands were questioned to see if they agreed that men generally benefited the most from marriage, to find out what reasons they offered for their judgements and to establish if women were more conscious than men of the need for specific changes in their own marriages. The possibilities of actors negotiating successfully for specific change in the face of their partner's opposition are also considered. It is argued that women will make only limited gains until men experience a change of heart.