5 ms·

A couple of subjective thoughts - the only two points that don't jive for me are that spending huge amounts on a wedding significantly increase the likelihood o

A couple of subjective thoughts - the only two points that don't jive for me are that spending huge amounts on a wedding significantly increase the likelihood of divorce, while having 200+ people at your wedding severely decreases it. It seems likely to me that the amount of people who attend the wedding is insignificant, but it can be a good indicator of the importance of close family and community of friends. The only other thought is how church comes in to play. This is a touch of a sore spot, because my parents stayed in a bad marriage for probably a decade longer than necessary due to religious stigma. As it is, my mother still won't acknowledge her divorce to the church because she would be denied certain things that are important to her, personally. So I'm not sure that religion makes a marriage stronger, it just places a higher degree of shame and stigma on divorce. But again, these are just my personal observations, from someone happily married for a decade who has a big family, spent less than $10k on a wedding with less than 50 people, and is (and whose partner is) agnostic.

smoyer 12y ago
"So I'm not sure that religion makes a marriage stronger, it just places a higher degree of shame and stigma on divorce." But perhaps any social pressure that encourages marriage would do the same thing? I've got quite a few friends that have had arranged marriages - they marry strangers and work to build a happy marriage from it because their families expect it. On the other hand, "staying in a bad marriage" is a misnomer - there's not really such a thing as a bad marriage so much as selfish participants. When one more both of the partners refuse to work towards a better marriage, it's practically impossible to make that marriage last.
- Xcelerate 12y ago
  > there's not really such a thing as a bad marriage so much as selfish participants Exactly. See, I never worry about myself being selfish, but my biggest fear is that I will get married to someone who just quits caring about me or who "gets bored" (I can't stand that phrase) and leaves me.
  - freditup 12y ago
    Not to be a jerk, but if you never worry about yourself being selfish, there's a good chance you're missing something about yourself. I haven't met a human in all my days who has no unnecessary self-centeredness! Going into a marriage completely confident of your own dedication while questioning your partner's won't end well in my opinion. That being said, I've never met you and have no idea who you are, so don't take this too seriously, just some random advice
    - Xcelerate 12y ago
      Sorry, my phrasing was off there. Kind of tired this morning. What I meant is that I don't worry about myself "getting bored". In other words, I would keep working at a marriage rather than abandon it just because I was tired of it. I'm sure I have selfish moments, but the goal is to minimize how many of them I have!
      - freditup 12y ago
        Ah gothcya, sorry if I came across unnecessarily aggressive or self-righteous. Hope that if you do get married, you and your spouse have such admirable commitment to each other! And I hope the same for myself haha, I'm sure it's one heck of a challenge
  - smoyer 12y ago
    I don't like the "gets bored" phrase either ... it's right up there with "he/she changed" (which is a minor variation on "I thought I could changed him/her). "People don't change" is kind of a funny phrase too - there's some truth in it, but I'm certainly not the same person I was when I married over twenty-seven years ago. My wife has changed too - we're not young anymore and yet our love (and devotion) to each other is more multi-faceted because we love who we were together as well as who we are now together. One piece of advice for the nerds out there ... don't stop doing the things you did when you were wooing him/her. It's easy to say "I've caught him/her" and figure that's the end of the project. Just like in software development, at least 80% of the work is maintenance after release/marriage.
- shawnz 12y ago
  > there's not really such a thing as a bad marriage so much as selfish participants. I think this is a pretty bold statement. Is it not possible that two people might just never be able to get along with each other, no matter how hard they try?
  - smoyer 12y ago
    "I think this is a pretty bold statement" And I'm going to stand by it - I actually believe the statistics presented in the parent post and, would those two people (who "just might never be able to get along with each other") have discovered their incompatibility if they'd dated for more than a couple years?
    - shawnz 12y ago
      > would those two people have discovered their incompatibility if they'd dated for more than a couple years? Of course they would. But we were discussing arranged and religiously motivated marriages, where that opportunity might not be afforded. Is there still "no such thing as a bad marriage" even when you "marry strangers"?
      - smoyer 12y ago
        I don't think we were discussing "religiously motivated" marriages but rather that a shared religion (presumably one that both participants had before the marriage) was an additional social pressure "like" arranged marriages. In any case, I think that social pressure can be a pretty strong force and that it tends to counteract the sort of selfishness that leads to a "bad marriage". Of course bad marriages will statistically happen but I don't think you can claim the huge number of divorces we're seeing are all "bad marriages" - my premise is that many could be cured if both participants cared to work a bit.
        trendroid 12y ago
        >both participants cared to work a bit. How do we measure whether the amount of caring done was enough or not? Considering it varies based on personalities and other convincing capabilities of a partner, how do we know for sure apart from just getting information from the partners themselves who say that they tried a lot to make it work. Its important to remember that there is lot of suffering involved when one of the partner keeps working due to societal pressure while the other continues to mistreat them. This is more prevalent in developing countries like India and China. There is only so much a person can try on their own(they cant stand shaming so dont share oppression with other family)
- themartorana 12y ago
  > there's not really such a thing as a bad marriage so much as selfish participants This is absurd. It's constructed of a series of suppositions, only a few of which I'll address. First is that people are static. This simply isn't true. We all know that we all change - not just in age, wisdom, and so on, but in tastes, politics, religious dedication, and the lines we draw between wrong and right, just to name a few. In just these ways, people can grow apart. The distance between these changes can, in fact, cause "irreconcilable differences." Sometimes these changes are brought about by dramatic stress events, from the death of a child to major swings in financial stability. The way in which these events change the unwilling participants can again lead to incompatibility where once there was compatibility. But worst is the idea that if people just "work on it" they can overcome anything. Sometimes overcoming growing apart - be it over time or rather quickly - is best done by removing yourself from a situation that is no longer positive, and has little ability to become positive again. This is where I find religion quite often inserts itself negatively. While I agree with a poster above that regular attendance at religious gatherings does often help a couple share a support network, share common beliefs and similar circles of friends, etc., religion often tells you only divorce or failed marriage is an abomination, and a personal failure requiring lifetime penance. It then follows by labeling that person as an outcast, no longer worthy of the community they had once belonged to. These are just a few reasons (not to mention physical/substance abuse, and so on) that marriages can fail without it being personal failure. Your assertion does nothing but pile on further stigma to those who have gone through divorce. No one wants their marriage to fail, but when it does, it isn't always personal failure that requires additional shaming from outsiders.
  - jasonparker 12y ago
    Gotta disagree with you: marriage is a contract, forsaking all others, so long as you both shall live. Divorce means your word is worthless, and that your own wants are more important than your word. It IS a personal failure, but go ahead, rationalize all you want.
    - ska 12y ago
      One part of what marriage is, is a contract between two people. But remember that you don't get to decide the terms of that contract for them.
- king_jester 12y ago
  > On the other hand, "staying in a bad marriage" is a misnomer - there's not really such a thing as a bad marriage so much as selfish participants. When one more both of the partners refuse to work towards a better marriage, it's practically impossible to make that marriage last. Uh, there are totally such things as a bad marriage. If, say, your spouse became abusive over time from the perspective of the abused spouse it most certainly a bad marriage. Marriage isn't a one time negotiation and you are stuck with whatever happens after that. Relationships require constant work and growth over time. If two people find themselves in a place where that relationship isn't working for them and even is outright harmful to their well being, they have all rights to end that relationship.
aidos 12y ago
On the wedding one, I would have thought that the size of the wedding is possibly more of an indicator of the initial circumstances that anything else. If you were looking at weddings of 200+ people vs weddings without anyone else there you could probably take a fairly good guess that the couples involved are in totally different situations.
lotharbot 12y ago
There are a lot of non-spiritual reasons being serious about religion could strengthen a relationship (in this era, being a "regular attender" is a signal of seriousness; in the 50s, maybe not.) It's a shared interest/passion that both people are investing time into, both can participate in, and both can discuss. It gives the couple a lot of friends in common, and a circle of social support. It connects younger folks with older mentors and positive role models -- if your primary childhood example of marriage was a crumbling parental relationship, but you joined my grandparents' church and got to see them interact on a weekly basis, you might develop healthier relationship habits. And yes, it places a stigma on divorce -- and places a huge emphasis on the importance of marriage, so in a way it's like attending a marriage seminar on a regular basis. Even a religion without any "supernatural" or "unseen" value would still very likely have these effects.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
yummyfajitas 12y ago
The 200+ person wedding is likely an indicator of a culture with strong family values - most of the 200+ are distant cousins, etc. Such cultures frown on divorce.

smoyer 12y ago

"So I'm not sure that religion makes a marriage stronger, it just places a higher degree of shame and stigma on divorce." But perhaps any social pressure that encourages marriage would do the same thing? I've got quite a few friends that have had arranged marriages - they marry strangers and work to build a happy marriage from it because their families expect it. On the other hand, "staying in a bad marriage" is a misnomer - there's not really such a thing as a bad marriage so much as selfish participants. When one more both of the partners refuse to work towards a better marriage, it's practically impossible to make that marriage last.

Xcelerate 12y ago
> there's not really such a thing as a bad marriage so much as selfish participants Exactly. See, I never worry about myself being selfish, but my biggest fear is that I will get married to someone who just quits caring about me or who "gets bored" (I can't stand that phrase) and leaves me.
- freditup 12y ago
  Not to be a jerk, but if you never worry about yourself being selfish, there's a good chance you're missing something about yourself. I haven't met a human in all my days who has no unnecessary self-centeredness! Going into a marriage completely confident of your own dedication while questioning your partner's won't end well in my opinion. That being said, I've never met you and have no idea who you are, so don't take this too seriously, just some random advice
  - Xcelerate 12y ago
    Sorry, my phrasing was off there. Kind of tired this morning. What I meant is that I don't worry about myself "getting bored". In other words, I would keep working at a marriage rather than abandon it just because I was tired of it. I'm sure I have selfish moments, but the goal is to minimize how many of them I have!
    - freditup 12y ago
      Ah gothcya, sorry if I came across unnecessarily aggressive or self-righteous. Hope that if you do get married, you and your spouse have such admirable commitment to each other! And I hope the same for myself haha, I'm sure it's one heck of a challenge
- smoyer 12y ago
  I don't like the "gets bored" phrase either ... it's right up there with "he/she changed" (which is a minor variation on "I thought I could changed him/her). "People don't change" is kind of a funny phrase too - there's some truth in it, but I'm certainly not the same person I was when I married over twenty-seven years ago. My wife has changed too - we're not young anymore and yet our love (and devotion) to each other is more multi-faceted because we love who we were together as well as who we are now together. One piece of advice for the nerds out there ... don't stop doing the things you did when you were wooing him/her. It's easy to say "I've caught him/her" and figure that's the end of the project. Just like in software development, at least 80% of the work is maintenance after release/marriage.
shawnz 12y ago
> there's not really such a thing as a bad marriage so much as selfish participants. I think this is a pretty bold statement. Is it not possible that two people might just never be able to get along with each other, no matter how hard they try?
- smoyer 12y ago
  "I think this is a pretty bold statement" And I'm going to stand by it - I actually believe the statistics presented in the parent post and, would those two people (who "just might never be able to get along with each other") have discovered their incompatibility if they'd dated for more than a couple years?
  - shawnz 12y ago
    > would those two people have discovered their incompatibility if they'd dated for more than a couple years? Of course they would. But we were discussing arranged and religiously motivated marriages, where that opportunity might not be afforded. Is there still "no such thing as a bad marriage" even when you "marry strangers"?
    - smoyer 12y ago
      I don't think we were discussing "religiously motivated" marriages but rather that a shared religion (presumably one that both participants had before the marriage) was an additional social pressure "like" arranged marriages. In any case, I think that social pressure can be a pretty strong force and that it tends to counteract the sort of selfishness that leads to a "bad marriage". Of course bad marriages will statistically happen but I don't think you can claim the huge number of divorces we're seeing are all "bad marriages" - my premise is that many could be cured if both participants cared to work a bit.
      - trendroid 12y ago
        >both participants cared to work a bit. How do we measure whether the amount of caring done was enough or not? Considering it varies based on personalities and other convincing capabilities of a partner, how do we know for sure apart from just getting information from the partners themselves who say that they tried a lot to make it work. Its important to remember that there is lot of suffering involved when one of the partner keeps working due to societal pressure while the other continues to mistreat them. This is more prevalent in developing countries like India and China. There is only so much a person can try on their own(they cant stand shaming so dont share oppression with other family)
themartorana 12y ago
> there's not really such a thing as a bad marriage so much as selfish participants This is absurd. It's constructed of a series of suppositions, only a few of which I'll address. First is that people are static. This simply isn't true. We all know that we all change - not just in age, wisdom, and so on, but in tastes, politics, religious dedication, and the lines we draw between wrong and right, just to name a few. In just these ways, people can grow apart. The distance between these changes can, in fact, cause "irreconcilable differences." Sometimes these changes are brought about by dramatic stress events, from the death of a child to major swings in financial stability. The way in which these events change the unwilling participants can again lead to incompatibility where once there was compatibility. But worst is the idea that if people just "work on it" they can overcome anything. Sometimes overcoming growing apart - be it over time or rather quickly - is best done by removing yourself from a situation that is no longer positive, and has little ability to become positive again. This is where I find religion quite often inserts itself negatively. While I agree with a poster above that regular attendance at religious gatherings does often help a couple share a support network, share common beliefs and similar circles of friends, etc., religion often tells you only divorce or failed marriage is an abomination, and a personal failure requiring lifetime penance. It then follows by labeling that person as an outcast, no longer worthy of the community they had once belonged to. These are just a few reasons (not to mention physical/substance abuse, and so on) that marriages can fail without it being personal failure. Your assertion does nothing but pile on further stigma to those who have gone through divorce. No one wants their marriage to fail, but when it does, it isn't always personal failure that requires additional shaming from outsiders.
- jasonparker 12y ago
  Gotta disagree with you: marriage is a contract, forsaking all others, so long as you both shall live. Divorce means your word is worthless, and that your own wants are more important than your word. It IS a personal failure, but go ahead, rationalize all you want.
  - ska 12y ago
    One part of what marriage is, is a contract between two people. But remember that you don't get to decide the terms of that contract for them.
king_jester 12y ago
> On the other hand, "staying in a bad marriage" is a misnomer - there's not really such a thing as a bad marriage so much as selfish participants. When one more both of the partners refuse to work towards a better marriage, it's practically impossible to make that marriage last. Uh, there are totally such things as a bad marriage. If, say, your spouse became abusive over time from the perspective of the abused spouse it most certainly a bad marriage. Marriage isn't a one time negotiation and you are stuck with whatever happens after that. Relationships require constant work and growth over time. If two people find themselves in a place where that relationship isn't working for them and even is outright harmful to their well being, they have all rights to end that relationship.

aidos 12y ago

On the wedding one, I would have thought that the size of the wedding is possibly more of an indicator of the initial circumstances that anything else. If you were looking at weddings of 200+ people vs weddings without anyone else there you could probably take a fairly good guess that the couples involved are in totally different situations.

lotharbot 12y ago

There are a lot of non-spiritual reasons being serious about religion could strengthen a relationship (in this era, being a "regular attender" is a signal of seriousness; in the 50s, maybe not.) It's a shared interest/passion that both people are investing time into, both can participate in, and both can discuss. It gives the couple a lot of friends in common, and a circle of social support. It connects younger folks with older mentors and positive role models -- if your primary childhood example of marriage was a crumbling parental relationship, but you joined my grandparents' church and got to see them interact on a weekly basis, you might develop healthier relationship habits. And yes, it places a stigma on divorce -- and places a huge emphasis on the importance of marriage, so in a way it's like attending a marriage seminar on a regular basis. Even a religion without any "supernatural" or "unseen" value would still very likely have these effects.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

yummyfajitas 12y ago

The 200+ person wedding is likely an indicator of a culture with strong family values - most of the 200+ are distant cousins, etc. Such cultures frown on divorce.