4 ms·

I'm happy to be stuck with my wife for the next 4 decades and have more than one to look back at. When you find the right person, it isn't much of a compromise.

I'm happy to be stuck with my wife for the next 4 decades and have more than one to look back at. When you find the right person, it isn't much of a compromise. I'm curious - what is the more "modern approach"? No commitment, no family?

Balgair 9y ago
Correct. Yes, I compromise with her, but it is because I love her and she is usually right and she comes at the problems loving me. We all have blind spots, and she knows mine pretty well by now. Together, we are much much stronger than apart. I can't live without her at this point, I would be 'myself', with the same body and memories, but I would not be me. It's like The Doctor when he re-gens. He has all the same memories, but he is totally different. Without my wife, I would be 'dead' in that way too. I wouldn't want to be with anyone else at this point, she and I have created a world and life together and I love her more everyday.
- fosk 9y ago
  Correct me if I am wrong, you could still love her, and do all the things you do, and keep supporting each other just with the power of your love without grabbing a pen and signing a piece of paper. I am not arguing against long-term relationship or against honest and true love, I am arguing against the actual marriage practice.
  - spookthesunset 9y ago
    You are gonna get something that looks awfully close to a marriage over long enough of a term. Why not just go for marriage?
  - Balgair 9y ago
    If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, you may need some stale bread to feed it, not a sirloin. What's the big deal with signing a piece of paper and having a really awesome party with all your family and friends? I don't get the adversity to the marriage 'practice' (not a bad word choice either, as you do have to practice it everyday).
  - amag 9y ago
    It sounds like you agree with the concept but disagree with its name.. All relationships have their ups-and-downs, and there may come a time when the only thing holding it together is a promise that was made in front of other people. You may think that's a bad reason to stay together, but the fact is that that (bad) time will most likely pass and if you're still together you may very well find your way back to each other. I know my own marriage has sometimes hung by not much more than that and then we've found our way back. Of course if a promise you make means very little to you, then so will marriage.
    - fosk 9y ago
      > All relationships have their ups-and-downs, and there may come a time when the only thing holding it together is a promise that was made in front of other people. Marriage is not a pre-requisite for going through the up and downs of a relationship. Normal relationships with no marriage have ups and downs too, and if there is mutual understanding and affection it will survive anyways. If it doesn't work, well, then maybe it's better to put an end to it and find a better partner? I guess my question is, why are we putting ourselves in the corner with a contract just to force ourselves to stick around a little bit longer, since you could do that anyways without that same contract? Maybe it's part of the human nature to go through this, to find a partner that we think will be loved forever, and then it won't work, and we learn from it, and we make more mistakes until we find the real one. Society tells you to find a life partner between a specific age range, but what if it's not true? What if you must make mistakes, you must break up with a partner, maybe only to find out that you both love each other and come back together. Maybe all of this must happen, but we are not letting it happen because of external contingencies. In a way it seems like we are artificially containing our human nature.
      - nl 9y ago
        I guess my question is, why are we putting ourselves in the corner with a contract just to force ourselves to stick around a little bit longer, since you could do that anyways without that same contract? So.. don't? In most Western societies there is some degree of protection for de-facto relationships. You can always add extra protections with some form of extra legal agreement. There's a generalized form of this called "marriage". Like most forms of legal structure that have evolved over the years (eg, land title! Employment law, etc) it has its problems but it's mostly sorta ok for most people. But if you want to try to optimize that I don't think anyone will stop you. Edit: There are of course some specific things (rights to children, default rights in case of a partner's death etc) which do require a marriage. You maybe able to replicate some of these things with a legal contract, but it will be a lot of work and no in anyway efficient.
  - edwhitesell 9y ago
    Without being married, or signing a piece of paper, there's no one in my life who could make medical or financial decisions if I were incapacitated. Maybe you have other relatives who could by default (and that you trust), but I don't. Having spent the last few months dealing with medical issues, this is more important to me than I had ever anticipated. I see your point at a basic level, but I feel like you're missing out on details that really make an impact in the long run of the marriage itself. Maybe they aren't important to you today, but someday they may be. Maybe whatever you do can be called a partnership or something else if you're more comfortable with that.
fosk 9y ago
Sure, but why getting married? A couple can believe in love, without contracts on the side. And if they decide to break up, then let it be so. Marriages more often than not seem to force people together when things are not right anymore, instead of letting them be free to choose something else when love is gone.
- spookthesunset 9y ago
  The longer you live together and pool resources the harder it will be to cleanly break apart. Marriage makes an implicit contract and ruleset an explicit one. If you are gonna be in a perma-relationship, why reinvent the wheel when you can adopt an existing system that has been in place in one form or other for thousands of years?
  - fosk 9y ago
    I thought marriage was about love, but if it ends up being about managing resources then why not start something like a company with equal(or not) shares, vesting periods, etc? It would make more sense to me because it's a more efficient way of dealing with shared assets than the current legal form of marriage.
    - upvotinglurker 9y ago
      Marriage being "about love" is a relatively recent phenomenon. It has previously been about managing resources, making family political/social alliances, and (as it still is) creating social and economic stability for children. I don't have, want, or even particularly like children, and even I have a problem thinking of them as "shares" or "assets" or pre-deciding their fate with a formal contract written before they were born or old enough to express their own wishes.
    - pamqzl 9y ago
      Because people who are in love want to get married, like their parents and grandparents and great-grandparents and great-great-parents and [etc] did, not "start something like company for the holding of joint assets". Getting married is romantic and irrational, and that's why we enjoy doing it.

Balgair 9y ago

Correct. Yes, I compromise with her, but it is because I love her and she is usually right and she comes at the problems loving me. We all have blind spots, and she knows mine pretty well by now. Together, we are much much stronger than apart. I can't live without her at this point, I would be 'myself', with the same body and memories, but I would not be me. It's like The Doctor when he re-gens. He has all the same memories, but he is totally different. Without my wife, I would be 'dead' in that way too. I wouldn't want to be with anyone else at this point, she and I have created a world and life together and I love her more everyday.

fosk 9y ago
Correct me if I am wrong, you could still love her, and do all the things you do, and keep supporting each other just with the power of your love without grabbing a pen and signing a piece of paper. I am not arguing against long-term relationship or against honest and true love, I am arguing against the actual marriage practice.
- spookthesunset 9y ago
  You are gonna get something that looks awfully close to a marriage over long enough of a term. Why not just go for marriage?
- Balgair 9y ago
  If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, you may need some stale bread to feed it, not a sirloin. What's the big deal with signing a piece of paper and having a really awesome party with all your family and friends? I don't get the adversity to the marriage 'practice' (not a bad word choice either, as you do have to practice it everyday).
- amag 9y ago
  It sounds like you agree with the concept but disagree with its name.. All relationships have their ups-and-downs, and there may come a time when the only thing holding it together is a promise that was made in front of other people. You may think that's a bad reason to stay together, but the fact is that that (bad) time will most likely pass and if you're still together you may very well find your way back to each other. I know my own marriage has sometimes hung by not much more than that and then we've found our way back. Of course if a promise you make means very little to you, then so will marriage.
  - fosk 9y ago
    > All relationships have their ups-and-downs, and there may come a time when the only thing holding it together is a promise that was made in front of other people. Marriage is not a pre-requisite for going through the up and downs of a relationship. Normal relationships with no marriage have ups and downs too, and if there is mutual understanding and affection it will survive anyways. If it doesn't work, well, then maybe it's better to put an end to it and find a better partner? I guess my question is, why are we putting ourselves in the corner with a contract just to force ourselves to stick around a little bit longer, since you could do that anyways without that same contract? Maybe it's part of the human nature to go through this, to find a partner that we think will be loved forever, and then it won't work, and we learn from it, and we make more mistakes until we find the real one. Society tells you to find a life partner between a specific age range, but what if it's not true? What if you must make mistakes, you must break up with a partner, maybe only to find out that you both love each other and come back together. Maybe all of this must happen, but we are not letting it happen because of external contingencies. In a way it seems like we are artificially containing our human nature.
    - nl 9y ago
      I guess my question is, why are we putting ourselves in the corner with a contract just to force ourselves to stick around a little bit longer, since you could do that anyways without that same contract? So.. don't? In most Western societies there is some degree of protection for de-facto relationships. You can always add extra protections with some form of extra legal agreement. There's a generalized form of this called "marriage". Like most forms of legal structure that have evolved over the years (eg, land title! Employment law, etc) it has its problems but it's mostly sorta ok for most people. But if you want to try to optimize that I don't think anyone will stop you. Edit: There are of course some specific things (rights to children, default rights in case of a partner's death etc) which do require a marriage. You maybe able to replicate some of these things with a legal contract, but it will be a lot of work and no in anyway efficient.
- edwhitesell 9y ago
  Without being married, or signing a piece of paper, there's no one in my life who could make medical or financial decisions if I were incapacitated. Maybe you have other relatives who could by default (and that you trust), but I don't. Having spent the last few months dealing with medical issues, this is more important to me than I had ever anticipated. I see your point at a basic level, but I feel like you're missing out on details that really make an impact in the long run of the marriage itself. Maybe they aren't important to you today, but someday they may be. Maybe whatever you do can be called a partnership or something else if you're more comfortable with that.

fosk 9y ago

Sure, but why getting married? A couple can believe in love, without contracts on the side. And if they decide to break up, then let it be so. Marriages more often than not seem to force people together when things are not right anymore, instead of letting them be free to choose something else when love is gone.

spookthesunset 9y ago
The longer you live together and pool resources the harder it will be to cleanly break apart. Marriage makes an implicit contract and ruleset an explicit one. If you are gonna be in a perma-relationship, why reinvent the wheel when you can adopt an existing system that has been in place in one form or other for thousands of years?
- fosk 9y ago
  I thought marriage was about love, but if it ends up being about managing resources then why not start something like a company with equal(or not) shares, vesting periods, etc? It would make more sense to me because it's a more efficient way of dealing with shared assets than the current legal form of marriage.
  - upvotinglurker 9y ago
    Marriage being "about love" is a relatively recent phenomenon. It has previously been about managing resources, making family political/social alliances, and (as it still is) creating social and economic stability for children. I don't have, want, or even particularly like children, and even I have a problem thinking of them as "shares" or "assets" or pre-deciding their fate with a formal contract written before they were born or old enough to express their own wishes.
  - pamqzl 9y ago
    Because people who are in love want to get married, like their parents and grandparents and great-grandparents and great-great-parents and [etc] did, not "start something like company for the holding of joint assets". Getting married is romantic and irrational, and that's why we enjoy doing it.