8 ms·

I've noticed a trend with computer people who married the first person they dated and the marriage being very successful (in terms of longevity at least). I ha

I've noticed a trend with computer people who married the first person they dated and the marriage being very successful (in terms of longevity at least). I haven't quite figured out why that is but I would say the vast majority of my software engineering friends are like this. I've been told by women who are in my other circle of friends that they wouldn't want that because then they feel like they aren't the first choice but whatever the guy can get. But then I think about the marriages that have resulted and how happy those people are. Sometimes I wonder if people over think these things. Forget the Kepler strategy. Forget getting the "best", if there is such a thing. If you click with the other person and both people care for and are kind to each other, then go for it and enjoy love and life.

jackbravo 12y ago
This is very well discussed in Erich Fromm's book "The art of loving". He proposed that in today's society we put too much value on the object of love, and too little in learning how to love. Thus we look intensely for the best possible partner and we may have second thoughts even once we reach a decision, instead of learning how to love and enjoy life.
- marincounty 12y ago
  Eric Fromm also said true love is letting that person you love sleep with other people if it makes them happy. I have been with one person who I felt I loved according to Fromm, but I was not attracted to her--so I guess I never loved? By the way, I think Fromm is right, but I'm just to selfish, and he said that before AIDS. I wonder if he would be so cavileer today?
  - mtdewcmu 12y ago
    Intellectuals have been known to give terrible relationship advice. They have their theory and they apply it. You can't hold them responsible when it blows up for you. I don't have advice on what to do, but mix a good dose of common sense and your experience of human nature in with Eric Fromm. Edit: It sounds to me like you are rationalizing and intellectualizing.
  - meric 12y ago
    Parents who truly loved their children would let their children pick others as parent figures if it's what would make them happy. I think there's a difference between that love and romantic love.
  - JamonSilva 12y ago
    If that's what you believe, wouldn't you also say that true love is not sleeping with other people if it makes your love unhappy? "You love me, so you allow me others; but I love you, so I will not take them."
philwelch 12y ago
In choosing a partner, satisficing beats optimizing any day.
muuh-gnu 12y ago
> married the first person they dated > the marriage being very successful > I haven't quite figured out why that is It is not about software engineers, it is a general correlation to the "numbers" of pre-marital dates. The lower the number of partners before marriage, the more likely is the marriage to succeed: > http://socialpathology.blogspot.com/2010/09/sexual-partner-divorce-risk.html http://socialpathology.blogspot.com/2010/09/sexual-partner-d...
- cm2012 12y ago
  Thank you for that data - I've never seen it before and it's really interesting.
- sarah2079 12y ago
  Isn't this data very skewed by the fact that not believing in cohabitation and not believing in divorce are highly correlated? This group includes lots of marriages that I wouldn't consider good outcomes even though they don't end in divorce.
  - samscully 12y ago
    > The most salient finding from this analysis is that women whose intimate premarital relationships are limited to their husbands—either premarital sex alone or premarital cohabitation—do not experience an increased risk of divorce. It is only women who have more than one intimate premarital relationship who have an elevated risk of marital disruption. As far as I can see this suggests that believing in cohabitation is not a strong factor when it comes to divorce.
  - thret 12y ago
    I think this is a very important point that is often overlooked.
- SiVal 12y ago
  As I see the data in those green bars (the chart in your linked article), the chance of your marriage surviving ten years falls with each non-marital sexual partner you had before marriage in the way you might expect if your current partner had to go on competing with all your previous partners simultaneously. If she's the only one, she's the best. If she's one of two, the chance of her remaining the best is 1/2. If one of three, only 1/3 chance that she goes on seeming like the best of the lot, etc. (And substitute "he" where appropriate and note that the same calculus is being applied to YOU, too.) Of course, maybe the marriage survival doesn't require being the best but just >= the past average or some other variation, but that still leaves a curve dropping in a sort of 1/n Zipf Law descent into too-bad-for-you-ness where the competition with the "ex"es never ends. Yikes.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
js2 12y ago
Computer person here, married to the third person I dated. We met our senior year of high school, fell in love, got married a few years after that. This year will be our 20 year anniversary. I dunno, you meet someone you like, why date more people just because? I never really understood the survey-the-field strategy. Seems like a recipe for disappointment.
cm2012 12y ago
Yep - I married the woman I've been dating since I was 15. We've been together 8 years now (not married the whole time).
pinaceae 12y ago
well, the pessimistic view, as also expressed by michel houllebecq in his books: ugly, weird, fat (and come on, look at our industry) people tend to stick to their partners because they know that the alternative is not another partner - but being alone. truly attractive (varies by gender, between pure aestethics and power, wealth) humans tend to have more relationships - because of pure availability. it is one thing to stay loyal if there is no one actively going after you, but a whole other ballgame once you have suitors. "is there someone better out there for me?" is the key question that defines longevity of marriage. and fear of being forever alone is a strong bond. think about it the next time you see a morbidly obese couple living "happily" together.

jackbravo 12y ago

This is very well discussed in Erich Fromm's book "The art of loving". He proposed that in today's society we put too much value on the object of love, and too little in learning how to love. Thus we look intensely for the best possible partner and we may have second thoughts even once we reach a decision, instead of learning how to love and enjoy life.

marincounty 12y ago
Eric Fromm also said true love is letting that person you love sleep with other people if it makes them happy. I have been with one person who I felt I loved according to Fromm, but I was not attracted to her--so I guess I never loved? By the way, I think Fromm is right, but I'm just to selfish, and he said that before AIDS. I wonder if he would be so cavileer today?
- mtdewcmu 12y ago
  Intellectuals have been known to give terrible relationship advice. They have their theory and they apply it. You can't hold them responsible when it blows up for you. I don't have advice on what to do, but mix a good dose of common sense and your experience of human nature in with Eric Fromm. Edit: It sounds to me like you are rationalizing and intellectualizing.
- meric 12y ago
  Parents who truly loved their children would let their children pick others as parent figures if it's what would make them happy. I think there's a difference between that love and romantic love.
- JamonSilva 12y ago
  If that's what you believe, wouldn't you also say that true love is not sleeping with other people if it makes your love unhappy? "You love me, so you allow me others; but I love you, so I will not take them."

philwelch 12y ago

In choosing a partner, satisficing beats optimizing any day.

muuh-gnu 12y ago

> married the first person they dated > the marriage being very successful > I haven't quite figured out why that is It is not about software engineers, it is a general correlation to the "numbers" of pre-marital dates. The lower the number of partners before marriage, the more likely is the marriage to succeed: > http://socialpathology.blogspot.com/2010/09/sexual-partner-divorce-risk.html http://socialpathology.blogspot.com/2010/09/sexual-partner-d...

cm2012 12y ago
Thank you for that data - I've never seen it before and it's really interesting.
sarah2079 12y ago
Isn't this data very skewed by the fact that not believing in cohabitation and not believing in divorce are highly correlated? This group includes lots of marriages that I wouldn't consider good outcomes even though they don't end in divorce.
- samscully 12y ago
  > The most salient finding from this analysis is that women whose intimate premarital relationships are limited to their husbands—either premarital sex alone or premarital cohabitation—do not experience an increased risk of divorce. It is only women who have more than one intimate premarital relationship who have an elevated risk of marital disruption. As far as I can see this suggests that believing in cohabitation is not a strong factor when it comes to divorce.
- thret 12y ago
  I think this is a very important point that is often overlooked.
SiVal 12y ago
As I see the data in those green bars (the chart in your linked article), the chance of your marriage surviving ten years falls with each non-marital sexual partner you had before marriage in the way you might expect if your current partner had to go on competing with all your previous partners simultaneously. If she's the only one, she's the best. If she's one of two, the chance of her remaining the best is 1/2. If one of three, only 1/3 chance that she goes on seeming like the best of the lot, etc. (And substitute "he" where appropriate and note that the same calculus is being applied to YOU, too.) Of course, maybe the marriage survival doesn't require being the best but just >= the past average or some other variation, but that still leaves a curve dropping in a sort of 1/n Zipf Law descent into too-bad-for-you-ness where the competition with the "ex"es never ends. Yikes.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

js2 12y ago

Computer person here, married to the third person I dated. We met our senior year of high school, fell in love, got married a few years after that. This year will be our 20 year anniversary. I dunno, you meet someone you like, why date more people just because? I never really understood the survey-the-field strategy. Seems like a recipe for disappointment.

cm2012 12y ago

Yep - I married the woman I've been dating since I was 15. We've been together 8 years now (not married the whole time).

pinaceae 12y ago

well, the pessimistic view, as also expressed by michel houllebecq in his books: ugly, weird, fat (and come on, look at our industry) people tend to stick to their partners because they know that the alternative is not another partner - but being alone. truly attractive (varies by gender, between pure aestethics and power, wealth) humans tend to have more relationships - because of pure availability. it is one thing to stay loyal if there is no one actively going after you, but a whole other ballgame once you have suitors. "is there someone better out there for me?" is the key question that defines longevity of marriage. and fear of being forever alone is a strong bond. think about it the next time you see a morbidly obese couple living "happily" together.