Will your marriage last? (An article)

[sinner]

But I suppose it the argument cannot be sustained to contradict this evidence, then we might as well discuss individual experience.

 

One does not "blame" the messenger. Rather, one "psychologizes" him in the hopes that the messenger's biography (pathologies?) can deflect or explain away this uncomfortable challenge to marital ideology.

 

A good trick, if somewhat transparent.

[moimeme]

Nah, it's not 'uncomfortable'. It's just without genuine, supported proof. Therefore, baseless. So, given that there's no real proof or even evidence that 'marriage' is the problem, people wonder how someone comes up with such a theory. What motivates someone to stick to an argument that hasn't weight behind it? Could it be that they are embittered and cynical because they don't choose to examine their own situation and figure out what went wrong and how to never do that again? Much easier to just fling blame at the whole institution than do do an honest evaluation of the way they got to this point. Mind you, if you uncover the root of a problem, you have some hope of, if not solving that problem, not having the problem again. Which means you could be hopeful.

 

Could it be that the people who lose faith in it had mistaken ideas of what it was supposed to be in the first place, or chose their mates unwisely? Could it be that one or both of the people in the situation didn't do all the work that marriage requires? Nah. Has to be marriage itself is to blame.

[Samson]

Could it be that the people who lose faith in it had mistaken ideas of what it was supposed to be in the first place, or chose their mates unwisely? Could it be that one or both of the people in the situation didn't do all the work that marriage requires? Nah. Has to be marriage itself is to blame.

 

There seems to be an odd refusal to believe that there is some link between marriage and people that are married. Are they not one and the same? And if obviously so, then are people who fail (or succeed) at "marriage" not just simply representative of the institution, ideal, illusion, or whatever we call society's recognition of legal cohabitation, but they embody the aggregate health of that "ideal?"

 

Moi, et. al., your heads are firmly stuck, Elmo-muppet-ostrich-like, in the sand if you believe that a 50% failure rate of a perfectly conceived "institution, ideal, or illusion" is only a result of poorly prepared individuals that deserve their unhappy fates, and that the other 50% are enjoying the wonders of warm, supportive spouses.

 

While whatever we may call it is not "dead," it certainly needs major surgery, and blaming the patient for his chronic diseases is exactly the type of narrow mindedness that keeps them from being cured.

 

Luckily, evolution will overcome the hard of head: Although there will always people who insist that the present norm's of society are perfect, eventually social change moves on without them.

 

............................Ask the Taliban.

 

Curmudgeonly Muppet,

Samson

[Matilda]

Samson,

 

So what about those of us that are happily married?

 

And your analogy to chronic disease: what about lung cancer, a doctor can give you all the "cure" he or she can, but if you don't stop smoking, it will not help much. Or diabetes, again if you continue to eat high sugar foods, the treatment is ineffective. Or even if the doctor gives you medicine, and you simply do not take it, does that mean the medicine is no good? How about obesity, is food at fault, or is it the person eating it that it is at fault, or is it the fault of some metabolic abnormality in the body that we are simply not aware of yet?

[Moose]

Man, this is getting pretty deep.......call me selfish, but as for me and my house, we're just fine, I can't do much for the rest of the world except what advice I give on this forum. So with that being said, why waste my energy worrying about how society views the institution of marriage? As long as I do my part of instilling my values into my children, I'm doing the only thing I can to contribute to future societies. Right?

[Samson]

Did I claim that no one was happy?

 

Is all cancer, lung or otherwise, preveted through personal eating, smoking, drinking, whatever decisions?

 

But smoking is another great example of an "institution" that is legally suuported by our society that has ha a high rate of "failure," but whose social acceptance has declined. Thanks Matilda, I hadn't though of that one!

 

Good for you Moose.

Why not start a thread about that subject: Head in Sand, Happily Married and Don't give a Hoot About the Rest of You Losers!

[Moose]

Samson,

I do care about folks who are struggling in their marriage. I have a several newlyweds in my Sunday School class who come to us for advice. I just don't care what society thinks about it. You talk as if I'm blinded with my head in the sand so I can't see what terrible damage my marriage is doing to me......I guess what you are saying is that I need to pull my head out of the sand, beat my wife and kids so I'll be just what society thinks marriage is, oh, wait a minute, I need to get drunk and stoned first.....it wouldn't be right if I didn't do that......no thanks Samson, I say screw social acceptance and live your life the way you want. But that's just my opinion......

[sinner]

The marriage critics are pointing out the obvious: Marriage in the traditional sense of "till death do us part" monogamy is honored more by word than deed. The institution can no longer support the weight of its own idealized expectations. All Samson and I are saying is that this "one size fits all" institution is becoming increasingly anachronistic to more and more people. Most people do not marry for life anymore.

 

When the majority of people, or a sizeable minority, no longer have their needs met by a social institution, that institution becomes less and less relevant to people's lives.

 

As long as people believe that only bad people make bad marriages, there's absolutely no hope for this increasingly irrelevant institution.

[Wolvesbaned]

The problem is change.

 

When I was younger I didn't understand why people cried at weddings --sure it's beautiful and people are quick to say that they're "happily in tears" but the beauty that's witnessed on a wedding day is embedded by hope and love (and where there's love there's sacrifice).

 

Marriage comes with all its familiar promises and when you take those vows, it is supposed to be for life. We now marry for love (amongst other things) and fortuneatly we live in a time when love is a point of necessity.

 

We marry a familiar person, a soulmate even, but somehow we divorce a stranger. People change. The motions of our everyday experiences affect us - we are all constantly changing. The "growing apart" constant is always looming amongst couples but it's a tricky one because you don't really know it's happened until you've grown apart. Couple that with no-fault divorce, financial stability, societal acceptance of being a single-mom, single-dad, single in general and we are were we are at today.

 

It's just plain easier to divorce now. Like movie stars that divorce so often, if you had the money, power and convenience would you? Apparently a lot of people has taken on this movie star mentality--look at our divorce rate.

 

Could it be that they are embittered and cynical because they don't choose to examine their own situation and figure out what went wrong and how to never do that again? Much easier to just fling blame at the whole institution than do do an honest evaluation of the way they got to this point. Mind you, if you uncover the root of a problem, you have some hope of, if not solving that problem, not having the problem again. Which means you could be hopeful.

 

For some, it's not about the "not doing it again" --they just grow apart. You can't really stop it, prolong it yes, but stop it? Imagine a person moving away from you and you realizing so you move closer to narrow the gap. But as long as they keep moving, the motion apart continues --and we all know we can't force another to action or inaction in this case.

 

Marriage ties 2 constantly changing individuals to be forever united. This promise, is of coarse, only based on conclusions brought upon prior to the wedding day. Put life experiences and change in general in the mix and you can't help but wonder how much luck really plays a factor.

 

Even if you are devoted, it takes two to make a marriage work. Does that mean you've picked the wrong person, apparently... but who would of known (especially in my case if they've done a 180)?

[Wolvesbaned]

sinner, if bad people make bad marriages than that makes us ALL [color=red]baaaaaaad[/color]

 

Samson, it's been a long hiatus ... but I'm OK --gotta focus on school for the next two more months and been slowly moving in. Been through a whole lot more other things that merit me a +10 to my constitution (and its non-divorce related). What doesn't kill you makes you stronger and I must be superwoman now

 

I really loved your quote about "cutting bait" ... I must of read it about 2 weeks ago now. It was awesome, it's inspired me to make a slogan out of it! sinner, can't forget to mention your dental filling analogy! Brilliant!

 

I'm glad to hear you're all well.

[sinner]

No one is "blaming" Marriage (ie, "till death do us part" monogamy). To the Marriage critics, unlike their opponents, this is not about blame or fault in any personal sense. Happily married well adjusted people criticize Marriage for failing to answer the needs of more and more people. Marriage critics are not all embittered, maladjusted malcontents.

 

Look at the numbers: Something is happening, here. Fewer people are marrying and even fewer are marrying for life. We're not all Dr. Phil(wait, isn't he on his second marriage?).

 

It's incredibly naive, and need I say stupid, to argue, as some have done on these Boards, that if only people were perfect then Marriage would not be a declining institution. Well, guess what: People are not perfect. So get over it. And any institution that demands near human perfection in order to function is a joke.

[Samson]

It's just plain easier to divorce now. Like movie stars that divorce so often, if you had the money, power and convenience would you? Apparently a lot of people has taken on this movie star mentality--look at our divorce rate.

 

 

HYSTERICAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

IF IT WAS EASY THE DIVORCE RATE WOULD BE MUCH HIGHER THAN 50%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

The only reason it is 50% i9s because it isn't easy for those unable to survive on only half of a multimillion $/yr income.

 

BTW, Wolf, good to hear your doing just fine with "cutting bait."

 

Sinner,

[color=red]EXACTLY[/color]

[moimeme]

Um. Could this 'institution' discussion be more irrelevant? Here's what to do. If you don't believe in marriage,

 

DON'T GET MARRIED

 

Don't go on about abolishing marriage because it's flawed, because half of marriages are not failing. Just simply do not marry. End of discussion.

 

One of you doesn't have a degree. Forget which. So what - abolish all universities because some folks drop out? Most churchgoers aren't saints so I guess we ditch all churches. No fitness clubs can boast that every member gets or stays fit - they can go, too. There are a phenomenal amount of stupid people, so we might as well not have schools at all.

 

It's ridiculous to fault an organization in instances like this. It's nothing to do with 'marriage' as I keep saying. It means that you may not be suited to it just as you weren't suited to university. So fine. Go your own way and don't involve yourself. But don't insist it be torn down or changed because other folks want it just the way it is.

[sinner]

IF IT WAS EASY THE DIVORCE RATE WOULD BE MUCH HIGHER THAN 50%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Probably something approaching 70-75%. But heck, who's counting?

[ladyangel]

Originally posted by moimeme

Um. Could this 'institution' discussion be more irrelevant? Here's what to do. If you don't believe in marriage,

 

DON'T GET MARRIED

I'm just trying to understand something here. Maybe you can clarify it for me. What if a person DOES believe in marriage, gets married, then eventually gets divorced? Does that mean they must not have really believed in marriage and, therefore, shouldn't have gotten married at all?

 

What if someone DOES believe in marriage, falls in love, gets married, and years later realizes that they both have changed considerably; as a matter of fact, they've grown apart and seem to be irreparably disconnected? What if they've gone though counseling and nothing seems to work? Should they not get divorced and just live with it?

 

Isn't hindsight 20/20? Don't the majority of people truly believe in marriage when they GET married? I think they do.

[Wolvesbaned]

I should clarify, divorce is the hardest thing in the world, I wouldn't wish it on my enemies. What I meant to say is that divorce has lost its negative social stigma, its the norm now, although difficult, it's accepted. The divorce is easy comment comes from personal experience -- how some people can easily just stop loving (2 weeks after just "professing" your love kind of stop).

 

Anyway, carry on, carry on -- I'm glad to see this thread is so lively!

[moimeme]

What if a person DOES believe in marriage, gets married, then eventually gets divorced? Does that mean they must not have really believed in marriage and, therefore, shouldn't have gotten married at all?

 

This is not about divorce. This is not about whether a divorced person believed in marriage whatsoever. Apparently, you have understood me, somehow, to be saying that one must believe in marriage to be married successfully. I can't quite figure how you got that from what I've said but that is not my meaning. If you want my thoughts on why people divorce, they are in plenty of other threads.

 

This discussion is currently about people unhappy in their marriages blaming marriage itself for their unhappiness.

[Samson]

Don't go on about abolishing marriage because it's flawed, because half of marriages are not failing. Just simply do not marry. End of discussion.

 

What a simple answer: Why hasn't anyone thought of this?

 

Again, somehow there is the amazing ability to somehow separate marriage and people who marry. Would people "marry" if the ideal of marriage did not exist? Don't people get married based on the ideal, and not the reallity of marriage?

 

No, not in Moi's Land of Oz.

 

Not to denigrate: as a social anthropological case study, I've found her views expressed in the thread no less interesting than those held by island dwelling pygmies that worship phallic symbols fashioned from the shrunken heads of their (male?) enemies.

 

And based the context of the board, we understand her construct: Unless individuals are to "blame" for the unhappy predicaments they find themselves, then we cannot manufacture the beloved chemicals designed to make individuals "happy." Prescriptions for aggregate welfare become mute. Just take a chill pill. There's nothing wrong with the society, as long as you have your "Soma."

 

Of course if they were to ever admit that there is something wrong with our collective ideal norm of marriage, Ozians would need to examine the value of their soma. This, above all, is not acceptable, and therefore, they will never admit that social change might influence individual unhappiness.

 

Regardless of acceptance, some Ozians will no doubt continue the illusion as the divorce rate increases whilst the remainder decide to face reality, waiting longer in life to marry (if at all), writing prenuptual agreements, having fewer children (or having them outside of marriage).

 

Evolution is Hell on Percriptive Remedies.

[CurlyIam]

Would people "marry" if the ideal of marriage did not exist? Don't people get married based on the ideal, and not the reallity of marriage?

 

Wait, isn't marriage about loving and trusting someone that much that you want to take a vow to share the rest ot your life with that person?

 

I see no ideal here, no perfection needed, no unreachable goal. It simply about trying to make it work. About continuing to live together, to have support and help.

 

Ideal of marriage? I'd have to know what the ideal of a realtionship is first. Yes, people are less and less inclined to compromise for the other one, yes, society has it's way of telling us" biger better faster more".

 

The rate of failure in marriage does not scare me. Most people I know are weak. Most people I know hate fighting. Most people I know are afraid to be happy or to be different (by different I mean different from the norm of the society, being themselves). Most people I know don't care a strow about their SO. Not really.

 

I'm looking at my parents' marriage. That is the script for the best horror story ever. Did I mention that they continue to stay married? When I was 8 I sweared to God I'd do better in life then them.

 

Samson may I ask how exactly would you adapt marriage to the needs ot the "society"? What aspect does it bother you?

 

 

About the "soma": my soma is not a pill. My soma would be a special room where one could look in the heart of the other person and actually see the other person. The qualities that made them fall inlove with eachother, the flows, the love, the hurt, he feelings. A room where they would remember and get intouch with themselves, with their feelings.

 

After a walk to the room, one would easily see weather divorce in an option.

[Samson]

Samson may I ask how exactly would you adapt marriage to the needs of the "society"? What aspect does it bother you?

 

So glad you asked. An astonishingly concrete query from an Ozian who believes marriage would be more acceptable given the mystical ability to enter a magic room. No doubt behind a curtain, and filled with all sorts of buttons and levers!

 

Anyway, a start: Increase the legal marriage, make prenuptuial agreement mandatory.

 

But whatever is MANDATED is irrelevant, Curly.

 

Social change is already making it happen.

 

But, The

 

special room where one could look in the heart of the other person and actually see the other person.

 

doesn't exist any more than Moi's perfect people for who marriage holds the greatest potential for success. I'm not saying that NO ONE has ever been there, but to believe that any marring couple SHOULD know in the present that they'll be able to enter this room 20 years in the future is asking a bit much of ordinary humans.

[sinner]

I'm not saying that NO ONE has ever been there, but to believe that any marring couple SHOULD know in the present that they'll be able to enter this room 20 years in the future is asking a bit much of ordinary humans.

 

Amen, Brother, Amen.

[moimeme]

Wait, isn't marriage about loving and trusting someone that much that you want to take a vow to share the rest ot your life with that person?

 

I see no ideal here, no perfection needed, no unreachable goal. It simply about trying to make it work. About continuing to live together, to have support and help.

 

Precisely. Which is why all this blather about 'institution' is bogus. And why criticizing the 'institution' is ridiculous.

And, Samson, I don't know which planet you've travelled to, but I don't live in Oz. I just have seen people who managed to make marriages work very well for very very long periods of time and queried them about how they went about it and observed how they still treated each other, even after 40 and 50 years. I've also read the reports from the studies of successful long-lasting marriages. It can be done if you know how. That is not because of the institution, either, but because of the people involved.

 

So you can either continue to bitch about how flawed 'marriage' is and never be happy, or you can learn from those who have been successful and do your best to do it right. Biggest trick is picking the right person, of course.

 

I'm sorry you're stuck in your own situation and bitter about it, but that's not the fault of marriage, and abolishing marriage or changing won't fix your situation anyway. In fact, even if you had your famous renewable marriage contract, you'd still be hooked to those kids such that you'd not want to exercise it. Once you've produced offspring, all the contracts in the world mean zilch, which is one more reason why all this bleating on about how marriage 'ought' to be fixed is ridiculous. Even had you never married, you'd not want to leave because of the kids. Same with your balcony pal.

[jmd28]

The person dumber than the one who thinks he know its all, is the person who tries to prove him wrong. I am no intelect, nor do I have big words or concepts to prove my point, I just have my thoughts...

 

Between the idea of Moimeme and Samson, there is a middle ground. And that is where you'll find the people who's relationships have lasted "till death do us part." In a world surrounded by negativity, yes, the whole idea of marriage and what it stands for is increasingly deminishing. But that doesn't mean that its not going to work. The word and concept of marriage is a scary thought for many. Some people only marry so they won't lose the other person, and some people only marry for the money the other might possess. I believe that people are initially marrying for the wrong reasons, and the marriage does not work for all the right reasons and that's why divorce is inevitable for them.

 

To be so analytical as the idea of Samson and his supporters to marriage, their marriages are probably the ones that have not or are not working so well, and that is no big surprise given the thoughts and notions they argue.

 

I personally do not know who's idea is more realistic, because statistics are used to prove points everyday which Samson's views involve vs. Moimeme's point that a person should be wiser before the marriage and realize whether or not marraige is something they can commit to. Most people would choose to go with the percentage rate vs having a little faith before they get married.

 

I do not know what the percentage rate of people going to church vs people who don't is, but do you think that would have any direct correlation to the people who divorce and don't go to church vs those who do and do go?Church is based on the faith that God does exist, yet no body has ever seen or spoken with him in person. Could that also be for marriage? Your choices to involve yourself in an idea that is greater than yourself takes a lot of faith, commitment, dedication, understanding, and compromising. So if a statistic proved that people who do go to church and get divorced is less than people who don't and get a divorce, then maybe a part representing a whole would conclude that the ones who don't go have less or don't believe in faith, commitment, etc... and that is why their marriage didn't work? I don't think so.

 

I don't think you can draw a reasonable conclusion to this conversation based on statistics. The only thing that I can say about a good or a failed marriage is this, two people who get married whether they know they're right for eachother or not, are the only ones to make the choices to make it work. Yes the society and situation that surround them may influence their decisions, but I don't think when people get divorced they say "We read the statistics and the likelihood of our marriage working was not probable so we based our decision to get a divorce on that."

 

My view is very simplistic and naive, but maybe being so analytical is why people get a divorce. Because one or the other think about it so much and analyze every move the other makes, it causes a sense of paranoia, which in turn leads to counseling to make it work, or divorce.

 

Most people believe that the simplest most ovbvious answer to a solution is too simple and obvious to be right.

[Wolvesbaned]

I see no ideal here, no perfection needed, no unreachable goal. It simply about trying to make it work. About continuing to live together, to have support and help.

 

Making it work is the ideal, Curly. With the key --both still being in love with each other. Simple as that and yet that is the ideal.

[Wolvesbaned]

Most people believe that the simplest most obvious answer to a solution is too simple and obvious to be right.

 

Since we're on the topic of simplicity ...

we should all just stop everything and make it work!!!! That's it, problem solved, and we all can live life happily ever after.

 

Goodness, I wish things were that easy. In reality easiness is a rarity, especially in a marriage. Humans are complex creatures (as opposed to muppets that is ) , life is complicated, make that 2 fold and how does that come out simple? If you have the answer, I'm first in line.