7 ms·

Years ago I learned this lesson about marriage while on a trip in South Western China. I joined a tour group to see a mountain for a few days. My party was six

by Cerium 5y ago

Years ago I learned this lesson about marriage while on a trip in South Western China. I joined a tour group to see a mountain for a few days. My party was six and the van sat eight, so the driver got another couple to join us. They were fascinating. We learned over meals together that they were an arraigned marriage. At the time I had extremely negative views around the practice, thanks to growing up in the USA where we celebrate our freedom to choose the perfect partner. From them I learned a new facet of love and saw something beautiful in their relationship. They entered marriage knowing they would have differences to solve together. They solved those differences and developed a great relationship. After that encounter I changed my mental model of finding someone to marry from finding someone perfect for me to arainging my own marriage. By that I meant that I wanted to find someone generally compatable but also willing to work together. It turns out I found that person on that same trip, and we have now been married for 7 years, but that is a long off topic story. For sure, each side needs to always be trying to compromise more than the other.

bombcar 5y ago
This is a very important lesson - the chance of finding a "perfect" partner is vanishingly small if considered in the normal view - but the chance of finding someone who is willing to work together is higher. And most marriages are "arranged" in some way or another, we just like to pretend that random chance plays little part and somehow we've got it down to a science.
- toomuchtodo 5y ago
  I can't recommend this book enough on the topic. TLDR Women are more picky then Men in the courtship marketplace, and finding a partner with matching values is most important to growing and staying together. People expect a fairy tale, when they're signing up for a job (relationships require work and effort). A quote from the author 10 years post publishing: “I think the book is really, ironically, about having higher standards about the things that matter, like the character qualities, generosity, kindness, reliability, and not getting so hung up on things like, you know, whether you’re going to go on a second date with a guy because of how he dressed.” https://smile.amazon.com/Marry-Him-Case-Settling-Enough/dp/045123216X https://smile.amazon.com/Marry-Him-Case-Settling-Enough/dp/0... (Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough) https://openlibrary.org/books/OL23687614M/Marry_him https://openlibrary.org/books/OL23687614M/Marry_him The Atlantic piece that was the genesis for the book: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/03/marry-him/306651/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/03/marry-h... https://jezebel.com/lori-gottliebs-marry-him-was-always-a-caricature-of-the-1840878562 https://jezebel.com/lori-gottliebs-marry-him-was-always-a-ca... EDIT: @300bps (HN throttling, can't reply directly) Indeed. The book covers exactly this (census data for the dating marketplace and the dynamic between genders as age brackets tick upwards). The market is great for women 21-30, and it rapidly declines after 35. You can borrow the book from the Internet Archive with the library link I tossed in this comment for more context.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    "People expect a fairy tale, when they're signing up for a job." This is worth reiterating.
    - openknot 5y ago
      It’s important to note that part of the job is to make it a fun job at the least, and daresay a fairy tale at the most. This includes positive surprises (though care needs to be taken), thoughtful gifts (especially on Valentine’s and birthdays), and some element of spontaneity. Flirting is also important. Spontaneity can be considered as part of the job, but it’s important to keep it fun to avoid boredom in a relationship. I’ve read anecdotes that a faithful but boring relationship can cause another partner to unexpectedly break up at the least, or have an affair at the most. I recommend a person to work on making the relationship exciting instead of breaking it off, but as evidence that this is important to factor in, a few anecdotes of people with this problem are listed below: -Thread with humane advice for the original poster: https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/1qcomq/anyone_in_a_ltr_do_you_ever_get_bored_despite/ https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/1qcomq/anyon... -Thread with not-so-humane advice that I personally disagree with: https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/oq7so/after_2_yrs_i_think_im_bored_with_a_relationship/ https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/oq7so/after_... -Final perspective to establish a pattern, with the rule of threes: https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/67df9t/i_29f_ruin_every_relationship_by_getting_bored/ https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/67df9t/i_29f...
    - pdimitar 5y ago
      It's not. It's BS but it's apparently popular view among certain audience (maybe Americans?). Why are you people so cold and calculating when talking about feelings? Love and care do wonders and you are able to work everything out almost effortlessly. I have seen it in couples several times in the past and I am experiencing it for over 8 years now as well. With the right person it works automatically and there's zero sense of "sacrifice" there. In 8 years I haven't felt that I've made a compromise that hurt me or her. None of us ever felt like they had to cut a part of themselves to continue being in the relationship. We develop and grow together. I'll never agree to this work-ethic-like expression of relationships. To me you look miserable for even using that framework of a language.
- billmalarky 5y ago
  There is no such thing as the "perfect" partner if the definition of "perfect" means "perfect compatibility." Even if there were perfect compatibility (which would really just be extending solipsism to one's relationship), the only constant in life is change. Thus one might be "perfectly compatible" with another person in a small snapshot of time in which they enter into a marriage. Then every single day and every single change threatens that compatibility. It's a fragile house of cards to build a longterm relationship around.
  - em-bee 5y ago
    you have to continuously work on the relationship to keep each other compatible.
qiskit 5y ago
> At the time I had extremely negative views around the practice, thanks to growing up in the USA where we celebrate our freedom to choose the perfect partner. For most of american history, "arranged" marriages were the norm and was based in communal, religous and practical realities. The disneyified idea of marriage is a modern PR invention primarily to get more business activity. Just like the idea of proposing with a diamond ring. It's amazing how easily and quickly media can change minds individually and collectively and alter history/culture.
- JoeJonathan 5y ago
  > For most of american history, "arranged" marriages were the norm Were they? First-wave feminists made serious headway in challenging marriage norms as early as the 1850s/60s. The language of "soulmate" comes from this period, and was Spiritualist way of rationalizing divorce from your partner for someone you truly loved.
- cma 5y ago
  > For most of american history I see some things saying it was common among certain immigrant groups before 1900 (it doesn't say whether it was a majority): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arranged_marriage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arranged_marriage Now that it is 2022 though we're closer to 1900 than 1900 is to the enactment of the constitution, so even then I'm not sure it would be most of american history unless maybe going colonial or pre-colonial (or are talking north+south america).

by Cerium 5y ago

bombcar 5y ago

This is a very important lesson - the chance of finding a "perfect" partner is vanishingly small if considered in the normal view - but the chance of finding someone who is willing to work together is higher. And most marriages are "arranged" in some way or another, we just like to pretend that random chance plays little part and somehow we've got it down to a science.

toomuchtodo 5y ago
I can't recommend this book enough on the topic. TLDR Women are more picky then Men in the courtship marketplace, and finding a partner with matching values is most important to growing and staying together. People expect a fairy tale, when they're signing up for a job (relationships require work and effort). A quote from the author 10 years post publishing: “I think the book is really, ironically, about having higher standards about the things that matter, like the character qualities, generosity, kindness, reliability, and not getting so hung up on things like, you know, whether you’re going to go on a second date with a guy because of how he dressed.” https://smile.amazon.com/Marry-Him-Case-Settling-Enough/dp/045123216X https://smile.amazon.com/Marry-Him-Case-Settling-Enough/dp/0... (Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr. Good Enough) https://openlibrary.org/books/OL23687614M/Marry_him https://openlibrary.org/books/OL23687614M/Marry_him The Atlantic piece that was the genesis for the book: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/03/marry-him/306651/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/03/marry-h... https://jezebel.com/lori-gottliebs-marry-him-was-always-a-caricature-of-the-1840878562 https://jezebel.com/lori-gottliebs-marry-him-was-always-a-ca... EDIT: @300bps (HN throttling, can't reply directly) Indeed. The book covers exactly this (census data for the dating marketplace and the dynamic between genders as age brackets tick upwards). The market is great for women 21-30, and it rapidly declines after 35. You can borrow the book from the Internet Archive with the library link I tossed in this comment for more context.
- giantg2 5y ago
  "People expect a fairy tale, when they're signing up for a job." This is worth reiterating.
  - openknot 5y ago
    It’s important to note that part of the job is to make it a fun job at the least, and daresay a fairy tale at the most. This includes positive surprises (though care needs to be taken), thoughtful gifts (especially on Valentine’s and birthdays), and some element of spontaneity. Flirting is also important. Spontaneity can be considered as part of the job, but it’s important to keep it fun to avoid boredom in a relationship. I’ve read anecdotes that a faithful but boring relationship can cause another partner to unexpectedly break up at the least, or have an affair at the most. I recommend a person to work on making the relationship exciting instead of breaking it off, but as evidence that this is important to factor in, a few anecdotes of people with this problem are listed below: -Thread with humane advice for the original poster: https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/1qcomq/anyone_in_a_ltr_do_you_ever_get_bored_despite/ https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/1qcomq/anyon... -Thread with not-so-humane advice that I personally disagree with: https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/oq7so/after_2_yrs_i_think_im_bored_with_a_relationship/ https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/oq7so/after_... -Final perspective to establish a pattern, with the rule of threes: https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/67df9t/i_29f_ruin_every_relationship_by_getting_bored/ https://www.reddit.com/r/relationships/comments/67df9t/i_29f...
  - pdimitar 5y ago
    It's not. It's BS but it's apparently popular view among certain audience (maybe Americans?). Why are you people so cold and calculating when talking about feelings? Love and care do wonders and you are able to work everything out almost effortlessly. I have seen it in couples several times in the past and I am experiencing it for over 8 years now as well. With the right person it works automatically and there's zero sense of "sacrifice" there. In 8 years I haven't felt that I've made a compromise that hurt me or her. None of us ever felt like they had to cut a part of themselves to continue being in the relationship. We develop and grow together. I'll never agree to this work-ethic-like expression of relationships. To me you look miserable for even using that framework of a language.
billmalarky 5y ago
There is no such thing as the "perfect" partner if the definition of "perfect" means "perfect compatibility." Even if there were perfect compatibility (which would really just be extending solipsism to one's relationship), the only constant in life is change. Thus one might be "perfectly compatible" with another person in a small snapshot of time in which they enter into a marriage. Then every single day and every single change threatens that compatibility. It's a fragile house of cards to build a longterm relationship around.
- em-bee 5y ago
  you have to continuously work on the relationship to keep each other compatible.

qiskit 5y ago

> At the time I had extremely negative views around the practice, thanks to growing up in the USA where we celebrate our freedom to choose the perfect partner. For most of american history, "arranged" marriages were the norm and was based in communal, religous and practical realities. The disneyified idea of marriage is a modern PR invention primarily to get more business activity. Just like the idea of proposing with a diamond ring. It's amazing how easily and quickly media can change minds individually and collectively and alter history/culture.

JoeJonathan 5y ago
> For most of american history, "arranged" marriages were the norm Were they? First-wave feminists made serious headway in challenging marriage norms as early as the 1850s/60s. The language of "soulmate" comes from this period, and was Spiritualist way of rationalizing divorce from your partner for someone you truly loved.
cma 5y ago
> For most of american history I see some things saying it was common among certain immigrant groups before 1900 (it doesn't say whether it was a majority): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arranged_marriage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arranged_marriage Now that it is 2022 though we're closer to 1900 than 1900 is to the enactment of the constitution, so even then I'm not sure it would be most of american history unless maybe going colonial or pre-colonial (or are talking north+south america).