imajerk Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) The other 50% end in death. Interesting thought. Edited March 9, 2012 by imajerk Link to post Share on other sites
worldgonewrong Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 14% of the posters here utilize statistics. Link to post Share on other sites
donnamaybe Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 100% of anything ends in death. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 While I wouldn't generalize, that has been pretty much the case for my social circle, at least with first M's; in fact higher than 50%, as I can think of only one person who is still on their first M, approaching their silver anniversary now. She and her H got married at 18. When my exW and I divorced, we became a part of statistics, my first and her third (D's) and, further, contravened some conventional wisdom that older, more stable people are less likely to D. That's the tough part about generalizing, though statistics attempt to do so with some accuracy. I have one friend who's now on his second marriage after 42 years with his first wife. She died. A good friend of his died too. He married the friend's widow after a number of years. They're both in their late 70's having the time of their lives. That's living, something that will never be quantified by statistics IMO. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
KathyM Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Well, I know a lot of people who are still with their original husband, myself included, and people who have been married to the same person for life. A lot of my relatives and friends have had sustaining marriages that have stood the test of time. If you marry a quality person with good values, good character, and are willing to put in the effort to maintain the relationship, I think there's a pretty good chance that relationship will last. Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Does the longevity of marriage other than a failed first marriage have any effect on the statistics? Or, would those in my social circle who've been married for 20-30 years in their second M's, not unlike my father, who died while M the second time after 32 years, be extraneous to the 'success/failure' statistics? Any insight on that? Link to post Share on other sites
musemaj11 Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 And how many of those end in death marriages are unhappy marriages? Marriage is stupid if you are a man. Having a healthy long term relationship is perfectly achievable without it being a marital relationship. Getting married is basically taking up an unnecessary risk upon yourself. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 IMO, it's hard to really know, generally, how many of the 'to death' M's were happy or not. I only have a few anecdotes, markedly the 17 years of interaction with my mom after my dad died, as well as those of a few male friends, one of which was outlined above. Perhaps what they shared says more about themselves than the totality of the health or happiness of marriage, but to my ear it was predominantly positive, yet realistic, meaning that they accepted life is imperfect and didn't expect perfection from their partners, in any sense of the word. Humanity and love and commitment, apparently, and were not disappointed in the journey. We each have choices, both in whom we associate with and how we process the journey of life. As imperfect beings, we make mistakes. And then the cat wants to eat Link to post Share on other sites
KathyM Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 And how many of those end in death marriages are unhappy marriages? Marriage is stupid if you are a man. Having a healthy long term relationship is perfectly achievable without it being a marital relationship. Getting married is basically taking up an unnecessary risk upon yourself. Of the marriages I know of personally that are still intact, or of which have ended by one of the partners dieing, most were happy. Some were not totally happy, but were satisfying for the most part. Marriages are not perfect. People are not perfect. Any relationship is a struggle, and will have its ups and downs. Life is full of risks, but the rewards of taking those risks are often worth it. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
KathyM Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Does the longevity of marriage other than a failed first marriage have any effect on the statistics? Or, would those in my social circle who've been married for 20-30 years in their second M's, not unlike my father, who died while M the second time after 32 years, be extraneous to the 'success/failure' statistics? Any insight on that? I'm sure a lot of factors go into the success rate of marriages. Second marriages have a greater failure rate because, not only do people bring to the second marriage factors or characteristics about themselves that may have contributed to the demise of their first marriage, making that also more likely to fail because those factors have not been addressed, but there is also a greater strain on second marriages when minor step kids are involved. I would think that a second marriage that has lasted for several years with no minor step kids involved would have a higher chance of success than the majority of second marriages, but I don't have any statistics on that aspect. Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 In my anecdotes, the apparently long second marriages did 'survive' varying lengths of family blending (meaning children), which is a factor worth addressing in more detail, IMO. I recall my exW often talking about that particular factor with marked negativity when reflecting upon her first M, as her H at that time had children from a prior relationship and had 'difficulties' with the children's mother. She seemed to feel that factor was a major one in the demise of the M. However, for balance, observing how she reacted during my years of caregiving, I'm not so sure the children or their mother were the only factor. Most of my current data points are now in grandchildren or great-grandchildren mode so are far removed from the direct impact of children, as theirs are in their 30's-40's. Some remarried while children were minors; others after children reached majority. As an outsider, I've observed no marked disparities or commonalities between the two paths but your comments pose some interesting questions about that potential. Thanks 1 Link to post Share on other sites
quankanne Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 husband's first marriage ended after 18 months ... they were in their early 20s; no kids. second marriage ended after 5 months ... second time around for both of them, who were in their 30s. She had kids. third marriage is fixing to hit the 20-year mark this summer. Why? Not completely sure, but I think maturity (for both of us) plays a huge factor and we have the same belief and definition of marriage. I think when they're starting out, people rely too much on the "in-love" aspect of a relationship without seeing if they can weather the serious stuff (being apart for a reasonable amount of time, dealing with each other's family, finances, lack of sex). Because it seems once a problem hits, one or both seem to make the relationship disposable simply because there's always someone else out there to be with ... Link to post Share on other sites
standtall Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Only 10% of the couples that worship regularly together get divorced. If they worship together and study their "non-denominational holy book" together, the divorce rate drops to 1%..go figure. I could be wrong..I heard that from my non-denominational holy figure. Link to post Share on other sites
Saxis Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Marriage is stupid if you are a man. Having a healthy long term relationship is perfectly achievable without it being a marital relationship. Getting married is basically taking up an unnecessary risk upon yourself. I won't argue that marriage is a risk. I've spent the last 3 years telling myself I would NEVER take that risk again. Now I find myself with a woman who has completely changed my mind, and not because I don't think it's risky. I have complete trust in her, but I never do know what will happen. We would most likely need to put in VERY MUCH work and communication to make it work, both having kids from our previous marriages, but I also think I am MUCH better prepared to handle this than I was previously. My biggest reasons for taking that on would be for her security and safety. I would be able to add her to my insurance and know that she would be taken care should anything happen to me. Simply because I care about her that much. I would not think it fair to invest in a shared life without those benefits, just because I thought she was "too much risk". If you see it that way, you're not ready to be married... Link to post Share on other sites
Author imajerk Posted March 9, 2012 Author Share Posted March 9, 2012 Only 10% of the couples that worship regularly together get divorced. If they worship together and study their "non-denominational holy book" together, the divorce rate drops to 1%..go figure. I could be wrong..I heard that from my non-denominational holy figure. It would be interesting to know if the 90% that stay together do so because they are happy, or because their holy figure tells them that that's what God wants them to do and they believe it. Link to post Share on other sites
g450 Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Yep, Early age divorce I think is because people get married for the good parts but are still to immature to deal with the harder aspects of marriage. Late age divorce is probably when one of the partners starts to question their roll in life and reanalyze their own existance. Or they just go freaking middle age batchit crazy like my XW did. The really sad part is when these imature people decide to bring children into this world. And the kids have to deal with that. At least I can thank my XW for waiting until my Son was grown before she bought her ticket to the crazy train. Link to post Share on other sites
FitChick Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Marriage isn't the problem. It's the person you marry and the reasons you marry. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
KathyM Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Marriage isn't the problem. It's the person you marry and the reasons you marry. Exactly. If people choose to marry someone of low character, poor moral values, irresponsible, unmotivated, or other bad character traits, and either choose to ignore the negatives or red flags and marry that person anyway, then it should be no wonder why these types of marriages don't last. Or if people get married even though they don't get along, and they choose to ignore their incompatibility, or they get married in order to have a family, or for financial reasons, or to be rescued from family of origin, or other reasons besides that they have found the right person, then it should be no wonder why those marriages don't last. The problem is not with the institution of marriage, it's the problem with the participants or the expectations. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
SincereOnlineGuy Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 The other 50% end in death. Interesting thought. That is an idiotic statistic published just to draw and maintain the attention of simpletons. For when good, healthy people pair-off in marriage, most of those pairings last a lifetime. This leaves the damaged, and the giant subset of those, the self-damaged, to crash and burn repeatedly after going to the altar. So while each marriage that lasts a lifetime counts as "one" marriage... the damaged people get to go to the altar 3, 4 or more times to keep weighing-down the data to suit the media and jokers like you. All too often those self-damaged people bring-down spouses far more innocent and deserving than they are. When you restrict your study to, say, "first marriages"... then we might have something more meaningful than your insignificant data. Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 I know I am happily married but if they sold a product that failed that much nobody would buy it yet people still get married. What else with that rate of failure would people take a risk on? Link to post Share on other sites
quankanne Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 it's a leap of faith, Woggle ... and face it, no matter how jaded we think we are, we still have that unflagging hope that *maybe* we could be successful in a love relationship. I'm guessing that's what keeps people trying when it comes to marriage. Only 10% of the couples that worship regularly together get divorced. If they worship together and study their "non-denominational holy book" together, the divorce rate drops to 1%..go figure. I could be wrong..I heard that from my non-denominational holy figure. interesting factoid ... I do believe that your faith upbringing has a huge amount to do with how you approach marriage, but you don't necessarily *need* to worship together to be successful in that marriage. At least, this has been my experience: We both see marriage as a sacramental union, even though his Protestant upbringing didn't use the same language as my Catholic one to identify it as such ... Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 I guess it is a leap of faith but people should be damn sure they know who they are marrying and be careful. People put more thought into the expensive flower arrangements at each table at a wedding than they do in picking a spouse. Marriage should be as carefully scrutinized as buying a house or a car. Link to post Share on other sites
xxoo Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 I know I am happily married but if they sold a product that failed that much nobody would buy it yet people still get married. What else with that rate of failure would people take a risk on? Bad analogy. Who buys a car, much less a bed or a lightbulb, expecting it to last forever? Yes, marriage is a huge risk. But it can potentially meet a basic need we have as humans for companionship, family, and sex. People will keep taking the risk, hoping for the best. I guess it is a leap of faith but people should be damn sure they know who they are marrying and be careful. People put more thought into the expensive flower arrangements at each table at a wedding than they do in picking a spouse. Marriage should be as carefully scrutinized as buying a house or a car. I agree that some women pay more attention to the details of the Big Day than to the details of marriage. It's super annoying to me. Marriage is an even bigger commitment than a house or a car. Much bigger. The closest I can think of is the decision to be a parent, but that is an even bigger commitment than marriage. Link to post Share on other sites
standtall Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 The closest I can think of is the decision to be a parent, but that is an even bigger commitment than marriage. Oh contre, parenting is for a limited time. Marriage is supposed to be forever. One major flaw for marriages today is the spouse putting their children's needs first. The married parents should be committed to each other and their marriage first, and their children second. Link to post Share on other sites
xxoo Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 ME!!!! i think things should last forever.. thats the trouble with your `anology` on marriage, that it should last exactly how long then??? My point is that marriage, unlike things we generally buy, should be expected to last forever. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts