this is something that Chef's post made me think about and I'm wondering why so many marriages today fail miserably.I know there can be any number of reasons But it's a sad statistic that makes me wonder why some of these people even got married in the first place.Is it for convenience and for the fact that they want extra income? Is it for the title and the public image that goes along with being married? Is it really love in the true sense or is it just a situation where someone says I found someone I like enough and so I'm settling? on the bad side is divorce because of jobs and money trouble and is it because of trouble and differences in raising kids? probably all of the above and more on both positive and negative sides.It just seems that things used to be much simpler and when most people got married they stayed married and worked through hard times and got back to what brought them together in the first place and they were accountable for taking their part and making it better.what's wrong today..?
have younger folks today lost touch with what real love is and have they accepted what I call convenient love where someone rarely sees you and spends no time but they are there for certain things and for certain times on a limited convenient business deal type of love..all I know is if I ever do get married I want to find real love and stay married and make it work even if there is just a glimmer of hope in saving and finding something again I would try and that's what I believe in. Are we teaching our kids to bail out and to be selfish and to look out for number one at the cost of children and emotions and all of it..what are we doing today that doesn't mesh like it used to when things made sense?
what's missing inside people today that they don't trust and love like they used too? why do they rush to go before god only to turn away when trouble finds it way to their homes? growing old and being a couple on the front porch used to be something people looked forward to and today it seems it's something to run away from.Alot of times I had wished I was born sometime ago because I truly feel like I would have fit much better in an earlier more simple time but I wasn't so I'm left with this modern day mess of things we call society..what's goin on or am I the only one who think this stuff?
Marriage...
Moderator: Available
As I see it, part of it is cultural...there are many ways out of a marriage nowadays, and it is even expected that marriages will fail. Divorce is no longer taboo. Not to say that is all negative.
But also I think marriage was easier to take for most people when life expectancy was shorter. As I was joking with my wife the other day, marriage was a good idea when life expectancy was only 35 or so. Now we're talking about 50-60 years together being a real possibility for marriages that last...man, what was I thinking to make a commitment like that!!!
Even then though, there is no guarantee, as the former chairman of Boeing has discovered now that his wife filed for divorce after his affair became public...they celebrated their 50th anniversary last month.
And I think real love is still there, but the social aspects and pressures are different for couples today. I saw a sign recently that said the secret to a good marriage is you have to fall in love many time, but always with the same person. I think that is harder for couples to do in today's society.
But also I think marriage was easier to take for most people when life expectancy was shorter. As I was joking with my wife the other day, marriage was a good idea when life expectancy was only 35 or so. Now we're talking about 50-60 years together being a real possibility for marriages that last...man, what was I thinking to make a commitment like that!!!
Even then though, there is no guarantee, as the former chairman of Boeing has discovered now that his wife filed for divorce after his affair became public...they celebrated their 50th anniversary last month.And I think real love is still there, but the social aspects and pressures are different for couples today. I saw a sign recently that said the secret to a good marriage is you have to fall in love many time, but always with the same person. I think that is harder for couples to do in today's society.
Glenn
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
People get divorced more today because they can.
The pill enabled women, and now they do not fear being on their own if they feel they need to leave a bad relationships. They can support themselves, thank you very much, and they meet many intelligent people out in the workplace. That's both good and bad.
Government to some extent has destroyed the black family in our culture. It was a classic case of the law of unintended consequences. What was supposed to be a hand reaching out to folks in abject poverty became an institution that encouraged child bearing and child rearing out of wedlock for a lower socioeconomic class. And where a Democrat got us in this mess, it took a Democrat to start us out of it.
Religion used to be the cultural device that held families together. Morals and ethics were taught, and community values were reinforced. But then there was a trend towards bashing those who were religious. Thomas Jefferson was a person who supported freedom of AND from religion. But I don't think he or other founders ever intended it to be the pejorative it has become in some political circles. Our society still seeks a balance here.
And finally... The information revolution is driven by ad dollars, and sex sells. So we're ramming sexuality down the throats of our youth who now mature physically far faster than they do intellectually and emotionally. Talk about screwing your kids up...
But life goes on.
- Bill
The pill enabled women, and now they do not fear being on their own if they feel they need to leave a bad relationships. They can support themselves, thank you very much, and they meet many intelligent people out in the workplace. That's both good and bad.
Government to some extent has destroyed the black family in our culture. It was a classic case of the law of unintended consequences. What was supposed to be a hand reaching out to folks in abject poverty became an institution that encouraged child bearing and child rearing out of wedlock for a lower socioeconomic class. And where a Democrat got us in this mess, it took a Democrat to start us out of it.
Religion used to be the cultural device that held families together. Morals and ethics were taught, and community values were reinforced. But then there was a trend towards bashing those who were religious. Thomas Jefferson was a person who supported freedom of AND from religion. But I don't think he or other founders ever intended it to be the pejorative it has become in some political circles. Our society still seeks a balance here.
And finally... The information revolution is driven by ad dollars, and sex sells. So we're ramming sexuality down the throats of our youth who now mature physically far faster than they do intellectually and emotionally. Talk about screwing your kids up...
But life goes on.
- Bill
UGH! Sensitive issue... so I'll try to be nice ;^)
As Bill already pointed out, women no longer feel pressured by society to:
a) get married if pregnant
b) stay in abusive relationships
These are good things (some may debate A, but B is certainly a good thing).
Bill also touched upon government interference. Let me expand on this a little, because it is my sincere belief that they helped create this "problem" (we'll get to my quoting of the word later). First, as already mentioned the goverment encourages child birth in our welfare system. Now, mind you, if an intelligent person does the math, the "welfare benefits" do not really cover all the expenses needed to raise a child properly. But the fact that a person can get tax breaks AND pay checks from the government for not workind and having children doesn't help (you think inner cities are are a problem? Try Utah! There are folks out there that go out of their way to "Scr*w the Feds"... but i digress). Also, consider our current tax system. When you file a return notice it asks you if you are filing married or single. Why? Becasue government is in the business of financially rewarding people to get married. Can you imagine if Bill Gates was standing on a street corner in Silicon Valley with sign reading "Get Hitched and I'll Hand You $10k; No Questions Asked!!!". The govenment shouldn't be rewarding people for having children or getting married; it cheapens both institutions.
Now back to the divorce "problem". Is it really a problem (i.e., a negative thing)? I would argue that it depends upon whether children are involved or not. If two consenting adults without children decide to get hitched and divorce a year later, who cares? It is probably better for society as a whole if they discovered their incompatibility before copceiving/adopting. Does this mean all divorces involving children are "bad"? Not necessarily. I've know several well-adjusted, happy kids who have dealt with mom and dad living apart. This always seems to be in cases where both parents wisely decide that their responsiblity to raise well-rounded children out-weighs their relationship with one another (good, bad, or ugly). Is it the easiest thing to explain to a child? NO. But I think with proper attitudes by that parents, things do not have to go badly for the children. I should also point out the obvious case where one parent is abusive or persistently neglectful towards the other parent and/or the children. In many cases I would say the children are better off being away from the problemed parent.
Finally, one last item of note. Even in this day and age there is still considerable peer pressure on single adults to "find thier one true love." This pressure comes from friends, family, and co-workers in all shapes and sizes. It also comes from ridiculous standards set by commercial and theological organizations on what the "ideal family" should look like. If I had two bits of advice for a young high-school or college graduate it would be:
1) You have you whole life to find "the right person"; don't feel like you have to get married to first person you "connect with".
2) Many will not like to hear this, my wife included, but I really don't believe that there is just one "true love"/"soul mate"/"right person" for everyone in this world. It sounds nice and rosey and I believe it myself much of the time. But my rational side says: "Billions of people in this world and just one great match?" Sorry. My head says "no", despite my heart.
This is getting long and I've probably already said to much (let the flaming begin
).
cheers,
chewy
a) get married if pregnant
b) stay in abusive relationships
These are good things (some may debate A, but B is certainly a good thing).
Bill also touched upon government interference. Let me expand on this a little, because it is my sincere belief that they helped create this "problem" (we'll get to my quoting of the word later). First, as already mentioned the goverment encourages child birth in our welfare system. Now, mind you, if an intelligent person does the math, the "welfare benefits" do not really cover all the expenses needed to raise a child properly. But the fact that a person can get tax breaks AND pay checks from the government for not workind and having children doesn't help (you think inner cities are are a problem? Try Utah! There are folks out there that go out of their way to "Scr*w the Feds"... but i digress). Also, consider our current tax system. When you file a return notice it asks you if you are filing married or single. Why? Becasue government is in the business of financially rewarding people to get married. Can you imagine if Bill Gates was standing on a street corner in Silicon Valley with sign reading "Get Hitched and I'll Hand You $10k; No Questions Asked!!!". The govenment shouldn't be rewarding people for having children or getting married; it cheapens both institutions.
Now back to the divorce "problem". Is it really a problem (i.e., a negative thing)? I would argue that it depends upon whether children are involved or not. If two consenting adults without children decide to get hitched and divorce a year later, who cares? It is probably better for society as a whole if they discovered their incompatibility before copceiving/adopting. Does this mean all divorces involving children are "bad"? Not necessarily. I've know several well-adjusted, happy kids who have dealt with mom and dad living apart. This always seems to be in cases where both parents wisely decide that their responsiblity to raise well-rounded children out-weighs their relationship with one another (good, bad, or ugly). Is it the easiest thing to explain to a child? NO. But I think with proper attitudes by that parents, things do not have to go badly for the children. I should also point out the obvious case where one parent is abusive or persistently neglectful towards the other parent and/or the children. In many cases I would say the children are better off being away from the problemed parent.
Finally, one last item of note. Even in this day and age there is still considerable peer pressure on single adults to "find thier one true love." This pressure comes from friends, family, and co-workers in all shapes and sizes. It also comes from ridiculous standards set by commercial and theological organizations on what the "ideal family" should look like. If I had two bits of advice for a young high-school or college graduate it would be:
1) You have you whole life to find "the right person"; don't feel like you have to get married to first person you "connect with".
2) Many will not like to hear this, my wife included, but I really don't believe that there is just one "true love"/"soul mate"/"right person" for everyone in this world. It sounds nice and rosey and I believe it myself much of the time. But my rational side says: "Billions of people in this world and just one great match?" Sorry. My head says "no", despite my heart.
This is getting long and I've probably already said to much (let the flaming begin
).cheers,
chewy
I eloped and married for $50.00, she was a good bargain for the price really even for the 80`s. To upgrade I can`t imagine the cost would be in $50.00 range...People use to do same job for a lifetime and keep the same "better half " for a lifetime. Why we marry is no big mystery, we want others to know of our love. When those endorphines no longer blind us to the reality of the other then the challenge often begins. I never pay attention to the divource stats or judge who is right or wrong in a failed marrage. I do however admire those who can remain friends afterwards.
Léo
-
benzocaine
- Posts: 2107
- Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2003 12:20 pm
- Location: St. Thomas
When ever people get into a new relationship many tend to make a mental image of who that person is. As time moves along the image is replaced with reality.. and the courtship is over.. and "till death do us part" has begun.
Also, I personally am not who I was 7 years ago. People change.
I think that it's important to recongnise that we are always evolving and changing in life, and that a marraige isn't always about how you feel. Like Candaneh says the endorpins wear off. It's a commitment to work with your partner and be willing to communicate and compromise and be tenacious in your resolve to stay together.
Also, I personally am not who I was 7 years ago. People change.
I think that it's important to recongnise that we are always evolving and changing in life, and that a marraige isn't always about how you feel. Like Candaneh says the endorpins wear off. It's a commitment to work with your partner and be willing to communicate and compromise and be tenacious in your resolve to stay together.
To have and to hold....
As far as marriage goes, good point: it is not until love do us part. Love is a verb, an active one. True love puts the other first and is unselfish. It looks out for the other person. When someone loves you like that, the love is usually returned in like.
You have to decide, did you choose that person you are with out of infatuation, sheer animal attraction or lust, lonliness, or for love. You reap what you sow. You choose for the wrong reasons, you get what you get, unfortunately.....so be picky and choose wisely.
Keep this thought in mind: If he/she never changes, can I live with this person?
Just some thoughts,
Vicki
You have to decide, did you choose that person you are with out of infatuation, sheer animal attraction or lust, lonliness, or for love. You reap what you sow. You choose for the wrong reasons, you get what you get, unfortunately.....so be picky and choose wisely.
Keep this thought in mind: If he/she never changes, can I live with this person?
Just some thoughts,
Vicki
"Cry in the dojo, laugh in the battlefield"
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
If he/she gets...chef wrote: Keep this thought in mind: If he/she never changes, can I live with this person?
..... CHOOSE 1 or more...
..........a) wrinkled
..........b) fat
..........c) droopy
..........d) bald
..........e) sick
..........f) countless other things...
...can I live with this person?
Be careful what you lust for; you just might get stuck with him/her!
- BillI want to live,
I want to give
I’ve been a miner for a heart of gold.
It’s these expressions I never give
That keep me searching for a heart of gold
And I’m getting old
-
f.Channell
- Posts: 3541
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Valhalla
I remember my sociology professor telling us the truth about marriage.
#1 reason is money.
Financial gain, increase in status.
The stats he used had "Love" down in the bottom five.
Seeing more of my pals lose their wives when fired or forced to take a low paying job has only made me believe it more.
But most after a year said good riddance.
F.
#1 reason is money.
Financial gain, increase in status.
The stats he used had "Love" down in the bottom five.
Seeing more of my pals lose their wives when fired or forced to take a low paying job has only made me believe it more.
But most after a year said good riddance.
F.
Sans Peur Ne Obliviscaris
www.hinghamkarate.com
www.hinghamkarate.com
Disjointed thoughts:
"The pill enabled women, and now they do not fear being on their own if they feel they need to leave a bad relationships. They can support themselves, thank you very much, and they meet many intelligent people out in the workplace. That's both good and bad."
Sounds all good to me....
"So we're ramming sexuality down the throats of our youth who now mature physically far faster than they do intellectually and emotionally. Talk about screwing your kids up..."
Capitalism is great. And unchecked, its as moral as the wilds of the serengetti. No one wants to sell the RIGHT thing. Anything will do. We have to be willing to say our culture is trashy and needs fixing and then DO soemthing about it. Meanwhile, wow, wouldn't it be nice if it took a conscious, adult, easy decision to become fertile, rather than the other way around? Soooooo many lives improve from young mothers to the kids of these kids. And there has to be some kind of pressure on the dumb young men (zip it or lose it? would do well for the methamphetamine "party and play" morons spreading HIV, too).
I don't think its the ONE perfect person out of 6 billion. But I've experienced the difference between true love and getting along just fine adequately. And the former remains the goal.
Why shouldn't government encourage stability in an institution primarily responsible for the upbringing of the next generation? Sin taxes and grace incentives. Ok by me. Except I feel I qualify for a break myself and the USA disagrees.
Margaret Mead commented that she had several perfect mates for the changing her over a lifetime. A great romance, an intellectual partner, a soulmate with which to reflect. Depended on her stage. The new face of marriage is not Mr/Ms. right but Mr/Ms right now or right this decade or so. Good? Bad? Both?
If anyone wants to push for a secular society in which we share a deep sense of community pride, responsibility, the capacity to feel shame (where appropriate), and above all the understanding for the golden rule, I'll help, hit me up.
"The pill enabled women, and now they do not fear being on their own if they feel they need to leave a bad relationships. They can support themselves, thank you very much, and they meet many intelligent people out in the workplace. That's both good and bad."
Sounds all good to me....
"So we're ramming sexuality down the throats of our youth who now mature physically far faster than they do intellectually and emotionally. Talk about screwing your kids up..."
Capitalism is great. And unchecked, its as moral as the wilds of the serengetti. No one wants to sell the RIGHT thing. Anything will do. We have to be willing to say our culture is trashy and needs fixing and then DO soemthing about it. Meanwhile, wow, wouldn't it be nice if it took a conscious, adult, easy decision to become fertile, rather than the other way around? Soooooo many lives improve from young mothers to the kids of these kids. And there has to be some kind of pressure on the dumb young men (zip it or lose it? would do well for the methamphetamine "party and play" morons spreading HIV, too).
I don't think its the ONE perfect person out of 6 billion. But I've experienced the difference between true love and getting along just fine adequately. And the former remains the goal.
Why shouldn't government encourage stability in an institution primarily responsible for the upbringing of the next generation? Sin taxes and grace incentives. Ok by me. Except I feel I qualify for a break myself and the USA disagrees.
Margaret Mead commented that she had several perfect mates for the changing her over a lifetime. A great romance, an intellectual partner, a soulmate with which to reflect. Depended on her stage. The new face of marriage is not Mr/Ms. right but Mr/Ms right now or right this decade or so. Good? Bad? Both?
If anyone wants to push for a secular society in which we share a deep sense of community pride, responsibility, the capacity to feel shame (where appropriate), and above all the understanding for the golden rule, I'll help, hit me up.
--Ian
-
Bill Glasheen
- Posts: 17299
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am
- Location: Richmond, VA --- Louisville, KY
It depends, Ian. It depends on who or what created the bad relationship in the first place. It depends on whether or not leaving a "bad relationship" also means screwing up perfectly innocent kids who are a product of that "bad relationship" which someone made the conscious decision to get into in the first place.Ian wrote:Bill wrote: The pill enabled women, and now they do not fear being on their own if they feel they need to leave a bad relationships. They can support themselves, thank you very much, and they meet many intelligent people out in the workplace. That's both good and bad.
Sounds all good to me....
It's not that simple. That's all I'm saying.
When there is an easy out, many will choose to avoid pain over working towards a workable (and sometimes brilliant) solution.
- Bill
Re: To have and to hold....
I agree with what you said here Vicki. I think this is a concept better understood by women than men.chef wrote:As far as marriage goes, good point: it is not until love do us part. Love is a verb, an active one. True love puts the other first and is unselfish. It looks out for the other person. When someone loves you like that, the love is usually returned in like.
You have to decide, did you choose that person you are with out of infatuation, sheer animal attraction or lust, lonliness, or for love. You reap what you sow. You choose for the wrong reasons, you get what you get, unfortunately.....so be picky and choose wisely
Vicki
It has been said, "Men want to be respected, women want to be loved." I don't know who said this, but I agree 100%. Men have a desire and need for respect from their wives. When the wife starts nagging, condescending, and disrespecting her husband, big trouble is on the horizon.
Likewise, when a man failes to love his wife, ie- Tell her he loves her, bring her gifts, make her feel wanted, appreciated, and special, share in the chores around the house (Love is something you do, not something you say), then the relationship will also begin to crumble.
I think our culture is now a "personal happiness" driven society. Americans have always valued our right to "life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness", but I think this might have been better understood in days past to include the duty to your family, community and country, perhaps more than it does today.
When I served in the U.S.A.F.(1998-2002), most of the people I served with (all basically good guys) had joined not out of a sence of duty, but for personal reasons, money for college, just needed a job, etc. I am not saying these a bad reasons, but they are self serving.
When most people get married they do so for self serving reasons. Agian, these reasons aern't bad reasons, after all, human beings are designed to need one another, but if love was associated more with sacrifice than with lust or the fulfillment of needs, more marriages might succeed.
Ethan
