jj33 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Has anyone read the book "Committed" by the author of Eat Pray Love? I just started reading it and am at the part where she interviews Hmong women in Vietnam about their marriages and their husbands. The short quick summary of what she finds is that they live communally and for them "husband" is more of a job description and they didnt marry for romance. She concedes that romantic love is a part of their culture but not the primary basis for the marriage. She also observes that they have broader community ties and husbands and wives dont spend much time together. While the Hmong live a very different life than we do in a more modern society, many people marry for reasons other than romantic love. And that being the case it makes sense that if great romance wasnt the basis for the marriage, then even if they feel a more intense love for someone else, it may not be a reason to leave the marriage. To paraphrase Tina Turner Whats Love Got to Do with It? Not alot in some cases. That really hit home with me. xMM's marriage to his wife was not based upon romance it was based upon status and yes they liked each other well enough at some point in time. But romance and romantic love as we discuss it was not part of the equation. So all the squabbling that goes on here about whether the MP loved the AP and whether he/she would leave if they really loved the AP may be based on a flawed premise in many many cases. Link to post Share on other sites
desertIslandCactus Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Marriage brings with it Respect and an ownership of one-another that can develop love and/or romantic love. Perhaps the union itself develops the love and devotion. Link to post Share on other sites
Author jj33 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Share Posted January 31, 2011 You hope so. But I think there are many marriages where the romance and the romantic love and the shared hobbies etc etc are not the key parts of the relationship. The wife tends to the home, raises the children and supports the husband in various ways and the husband supports the family. Im not saying its better or worse than other types of marriages but those sorts of marriages are common in all societies. Until divorce became more common I think many men and women just lived with the status quo. Affairs were more hidden and there was no way "out" for most people. The thing I think has changed most is the fact that divorce is so common. The feelings of what do I want from my marriage, what needs do I fulfill outside my marriage are age old issues. Link to post Share on other sites
desertIslandCactus Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 My marriage ended because it didn't have God in it. The two have to have a respect for the marriage union - and what it is Meant to be. Link to post Share on other sites
journeyeleven Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 I haven't read the book but the description does fit the MM with whom I was involved. When he and I were together as teenagers, he was crazy for me, loved me so much. One day, I mentioned a certain girl's name who my neighbor was dating. He went on and on about how unattractive she was. (Pretty? No. But I didn't think she was THAT bad) and couldn't understand how anyone would want to date her. Anyway, I broke his heart and he married that very same girl 7 years later. Years later, just before the beginning of the affair, I never mentioned that conversation from years earlier but I did ask him why he got married and he told me it was because he wanted a family. At any rate, though I know he loved me more, he stayed with her. So, yes, I think even though we live a different culture, the tendency to marry and stay with a person for whom one never had romantic passion, is present and thriving in our society. They call it honor. Hard to argue with that. Link to post Share on other sites
spice4life Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 While I agree that this premise is prevalent (sp?) In our society, I totally disagree that it is a good premise for marriage. The woman who wrote "Eat Pray Love" left her marriage precisely for that reason...because she knew "happiness" came from within and not from what society tells you it should be. I was married once for "society" reason and would never ever marry for that reason again. No way! I will only marry if I know that the relationship has the romantic element and we will both inspire each other to grow and be the best we can be. Otherwise forget it...I would rather be single. Link to post Share on other sites
wheelwright Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Has anyone read the book "Committed" by the author of Eat Pray Love? I just started reading it and am at the part where she interviews Hmong women in Vietnam about their marriages and their husbands. The short quick summary of what she finds is that they live communally and for them "husband" is more of a job description and they didnt marry for romance. She concedes that romantic love is a part of their culture but not the primary basis for the marriage. She also observes that they have broader community ties and husbands and wives dont spend much time together. While the Hmong live a very different life than we do in a more modern society, many people marry for reasons other than romantic love. And that being the case it makes sense that if great romance wasnt the basis for the marriage, then even if they feel a more intense love for someone else, it may not be a reason to leave the marriage. To paraphrase Tina Turner Whats Love Got to Do with It? Not alot in some cases. That really hit home with me. xMM's marriage to his wife was not based upon romance it was based upon status and yes they liked each other well enough at some point in time. But romance and romantic love as we discuss it was not part of the equation. So all the squabbling that goes on here about whether the MP loved the AP and whether he/she would leave if they really loved the AP may be based on a flawed premise in many many cases. Love, if to last, whatever the levels of passion and intimacy, will also need commitment. Of the three, the commitment element is the part within our design. Passion and intimacy can be beyond wildest expectations. But commitment holds, because we made it as a choice, and it counts. Rarely, we switch allegiance. We have to have a reason for that better love. It's like paper stone scissors Paper is M to the stone of other kinds of love. It's like that. Unless you get scissors of course. That's about all there is to say I reckon. Link to post Share on other sites
Sidtheskid Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 But it seems that most of the relationships that OW/OM are here about ARE based on romantic love, right? As for the love or lack of love that they share with BS, well who knows but romantic seems to be the theme of OW/OM - MM/MW relationships. Of course it's romantic love. what else would it be? Link to post Share on other sites
redcurls Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 I'm absolutely sure that xMM was never romantically in love with his wife. I know the reasons why they got married, I know the reasons why they will stay together forever. Love, as in romance and passion was never a part of their marriage. Their family unit is very important to both of them and they will both do anything to protect it. They love and care of each other deeply, and share a great deal of history together - there is no discounting that. But as far as true romantic love and passion - no. They found their way to substitute romantic love and sexual passion with companionship, comfort, and by aiming their entire focus at their kids. I just hope, for their sake that one of them doesn't wake up years from now, when the kids are all grown and gone, wondering where the emptiness came from, because it will. Link to post Share on other sites
PeachyPink Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 I found Eat Pray Love to be nauseatingly self absorbed, so it should come as no surprise that I find the comparison between a failed affair to a man with status to the traditions of a near third-world country a bit of a stretch. Sorry. If it makes you feel better to believe that, that's ok. It says to an outsider that what he really loves more than anything is his status. A shallow man or woman does not make a good life partner unless the partners are equally as shallow. Could be the xMM has exactly what he deserves. Water seeks its own level, love or no love. Everyone usually gets what they deserve in the end. Doesn't matter if they have status or live among the Hmong. My .02. Link to post Share on other sites
redcurls Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 This is wrong. You do not know anything about their marriage. You need to check your feelings, hun. Actually, I do know, not from xMM (he never talks about their R) but I know enough, and am certain that I'm correct. And, there is no question about my feelings, they are very clear. Link to post Share on other sites
Fieldsofgold Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Of course it's romantic love. what else would it be? People have affairs for some of the very same reasons they get married. Sometimes it is for romantic love, sometimes it is for hot sex, sometimes it is for financial benefits, sometimes for status, sometimes for power, sometimes just to have "someone." And even because someone wanted a baby. To say that all affairs are about romantic love is as wrong as saying all marriages are about romantic love. Link to post Share on other sites
Fieldsofgold Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) It could be based on a lot of things.........convenience, sex, excitement, ego strokes, getting needs met other than romantic love. Oh, LOL, I see I'm running a little behind tonight. I didn't see your post before I wrote mine. But I totally agree. There are many, many reasons why people have affairs. Romantic love is only one of those reasons. And frankly, I don't see that the "why" of the affair matters. An affair is an affair is an affair. BUUUUUT, back to JJ's very interesting topic . . . Edited January 31, 2011 by Fieldsofgold Link to post Share on other sites
pureinheart Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 I found Eat Pray Love to be nauseatingly self absorbed, so it should come as no surprise that I find the comparison between a failed affair to a man with status to the traditions of a near third-world country a bit of a stretch. Sorry. If it makes you feel better to believe that, that's ok. It says to an outsider that what he really loves more than anything is his status. A shallow man or woman does not make a good life partner unless the partners are equally as shallow. Could be the xMM has exactly what he deserves. Water seeks its own level, love or no love. Everyone usually gets what they deserve in the end. Doesn't matter if they have status or live among the Hmong. My .02. After knowing the OP'er I almost see this as a personal attack, I could be wrong...Yawn? Link to post Share on other sites
East7 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 I'm not surprised in some countries people marry for convenience more than for love. Their concept of love is based on respect and affection more than the sense of romantic passionate love. Not that it doesn't exist, but their society doesn't put Love at the same importance level than we do. They think that it is better to marry someone who is supposed to make you happy in the long run. Absence of romantic/passionate love in the marriage is not a reason for having an A. Here comes the cake-eating mode. MM/MW often romantically love their AP but they want their marriage as a social achievement (they say "I have worked hard to achieve this, property, children etc) that they don't want to give it up for the sake of love. Some others will see D as a failure so they prefer a loveless status quo than taking risks. Link to post Share on other sites
Author jj33 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Share Posted January 31, 2011 Thanks you Pure. Its unfortunate that the poster you quoted is unable to add anything constructive to the discussion but I wont take it personally as I wasnt commenting on MMs personal feelings for me, only his marriage and what he felt for me years ago is of no consequence now as it has been over for a very long time. And before whatever her name is tells me I dont know I do and how I do is none of her business. Everyone knows. If you knew who he was married to you and the background you would know too. Link to post Share on other sites
Author jj33 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Share Posted January 31, 2011 I'm not surprised in some countries people marry for convenience more than for love. Their concept of love is based on respect and affection more than the sense of romantic passionate love. Not that it doesn't exist, but their society doesn't put Love at the same importance level than we do. They think that it is better to marry someone who is supposed to make you happy in the long run. Absence of romantic/passionate love in the marriage is not a reason for having an A. Here comes the cake-eating mode. MM/MW often romantically love their AP but they want their marriage as a social achievement (they say "I have worked hard to achieve this, property, children etc) that they don't want to give it up for the sake of love. Some others will see D as a failure so they prefer a loveless status quo than taking risks. East it may feel like cake eating to an outsider but in many cases, to those who live in that realm it is expected or accepted. Marriage and romantic love are separated. Im not saying that is true of the Hmong but I know this is true in certain other western social circles outside of the US. Link to post Share on other sites
East7 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 East it may feel like cake eating to an outsider but in many cases, to those who live in that realm it is expected or accepted. Marriage and romantic love are separated. Im not saying that is true of the Hmong but I know this is true in certain other western social circles outside of the US. If I understand, you are saying that in Western countries it is normal to look for romantic love outside of your marriage and A are normal ? If I had an A is that I genuinely (or naively) thought that MW was my true love and I had to fight to be with her. Now for me love without commitment is worth nothing ! It is just a fantasy in which people want to escape. Link to post Share on other sites
desertIslandCactus Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 If I understand, you are saying that in Western countries it is normal to look for romantic love outside of your marriage and A are normal ? If I had an A is that I genuinely (or naively) thought that MW was my true love and I had to fight to be with her. Now for me love without commitment is worth nothing ! It is just a fantasy in which people want to escape.[/QUOTE] I agree. And the true love is also found within the commitment. Link to post Share on other sites
OpenBook Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Water seeks its own level, love or no love. Everyone usually gets what they deserve in the end. Doesn't matter if they have status or live among the Hmong. My .02. So the BW's who spend an inordinate amount of time castigating the OW due to (their own) bitterness at (their own) H's cheating (on them) - you know, the ones who by all (of their own) accounts have the market cornered on virtue, priopriety and innocence - they got what they deserved as well? Wait... on the other hand, I see what you mean. Link to post Share on other sites
desertIslandCactus Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Thanks you Pure. Its unfortunate that the poster you quoted is unable to add anything constructive to the discussion but I wont take it personally as I wasnt commenting on MMs personal feelings for me, only his marriage and what he felt for me years ago is of no consequence now as it has been over for a very long time. And before whatever her name is tells me I dont know I do and how I do is none of her business. Everyone knows. If you knew who he was married to you and the background you would know too. All OW/MM stories I have read, have named the W to be the cause of the so-called weakness of the M. Even if it's just to say: She sticks her head in the sand. In my ER, I was lead to believe that she was a late marriage opportunist. Still the two are in a closed marriage - (and they are there because they wish to be). Although placing blame on the spouse is common, it appears to be an excuse. Link to post Share on other sites
Author jj33 Posted January 31, 2011 Author Share Posted January 31, 2011 Yes East I am saying that within social groups in Western countries it is not unusual (normal is a difficult word to use in this context) Dont you remember the Italian French reaction to the Clinton scandal? They laughed at us that we made such a big deal over a marital indiscretion. Now I am not saying ALL people in those countries feel that way but there are different social mores among different social classes in different parts of the world. There was someone a few months ago who posted on this topic and got a lot of flack but the things she was posting were all true. She disappeared after a short period of time but I think she posted an article from a newspaper about it. The affairs are very discreet but they are affairs nonetheless. The US has a different mentality based largely on its history. Link to post Share on other sites
Woman In Blue Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 This is wrong. You do not know anything about their marriage. You need to check your feelings, hun. Sid is right. NONE of us can speak for what someone ELSE felt years ago. That's a ludicrous premise to think we CAN. People in affairs have a tendency to rewrite their history, projecting the feelings they have NOW over the course of their entire past relationship history because they tend to forget how they felt 20 years ago (or refuse to acknowledge it). Hell, I've done it myself. People change. They see things differently at 45 than they did at 25. They'll take their 45 year old 'wisdom' and apply it to their behavior 20 years ago. While they may be interpreting things differently now, the fact remains that most are simply rewriting history using the way they see things NOW. Link to post Share on other sites
East7 Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Dont you remember the Italian French reaction to the Clinton scandal? They laughed at us that we made such a big deal over a marital indiscretion. Now I am not saying ALL people in those countries feel that way but there are different social mores among different social classes in different parts of the world. . I do remember ! I live in Europe. What we didn't understand is why Americans would prefer losing a good President for a BJ story..who cares ?! I think it is a mindset factor. For us private life is totally separated from political integrity. We consider that a good President is still a good President, whether he had 1 or 10 wives, 5 mistresses or whatever. Who cares what he does in his private life if he is good for the country ? This doesn't mean that in Europe we approve A. Concerning infidelity the mores are pretty much the same than in US. I would say the BIG difference with US is that in US people get married very easily and divorce easily. For you either you are married or not, living with someone is not really a frequent option. In Europe, IMO people are more hesitating before marring someone. A lot prefer unofficial unions, they actually settle together but don't want to get married. Link to post Share on other sites
OWoman Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Marriage brings with it Respect and an ownership of one-another that can develop love and/or romantic love. Ownership of other humans is against the law in the enlightened world. And if you consider abusive Ms to be respectful , then give me outlaw status any day. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts