Marriages that last and ones that don't

[Austin]

The last wedding I went to was the youngest wedding I've ever been to easily. The guy couldn't even say the vows where people could hear and he looked at the ground the whole time even when walking down the aisle. Also the groomsmen and bridesmaids were all very young 20 somethings.

They were both very young and it was clear to me and my younger bros that the only reason they had this formal wedding in the nicest church in Houston was because all their family insisted upon it. Half the groomsmen looked like they were from high school and you just got this sense that this was a very awkward forced type ordeal, as if they were forced to go to this big church by their parents expectations. Me and my bros didn't think it would last long because they were so young, not even 23 yet.

Oddly enough though a few years before this I went to another wedding and it was a much more mature one, all the people involved were mature 30 somethings with careers and very stereotypical and all from the looks of it. I figured this couple would surely last and go places by the maturity of them and their numerous life experiences, both were very good looking and all that, very eligible. They had a son together and then shortly after that somewhere down the line she cheated on him with a doctor who she worked for, though it was odd because he owned his own business so they were well off to begin with. She had been divorced once before and this was his first marriage but still their wedding was so picture perfect as were they it just got to me in some way.

Anyways this has always intrigued me because at the older more mature wedding it was so built up, big production and all with clearly mature people being involved, yet it was the union that ended in the most degenerate of ways whilst the youthful, young, too embarrassed to say the vows couple are still together.

I think something is wrong with western culture that young marriages are frowned upon nowadays because from seeing this I am not convinced waiting garners any real benefit other than envisioned ones.

[anonymaus]

I think something is wrong with western culture that young marriages are frowned upon nowadays because from seeing this I am not convinced waiting garners any real benefit other than envisioned ones.

I agree completely. We'd be better off as a society if more young people understood ideas like commitment and devotion. I've actually noticed over the last 6-8 months that pro-marriage, and pro-young-marriage, messages have been growing on TV and in films. I would not normally notice a trend such as that, but it's quite apparent. I like it.

[Nglund]

:love:I wanna get married to My Valkyrie:redface_002:

[Sahson]

Austin I agree with you. I think in some cases, as some people get more mature, they are use to being more independent, and more fussy about they're ideal partner. They will probably loathe some of their idiosyncrasies, and I do believe younger people will put up with idiosyncrasies of their partner far more easily.


:love:I wanna get married to My Valkyrie:redface_002:

I wish I had a valkyrie :(

[Nglund]

I wish I had a valkyrie :(

Dw you will one day...somehow:(

[Radojica]

:love:I wanna get married to My Valkyrie:redface_002:

Why don't you ask her then? I know for the cases where couple were asking each other in marriage durin Quake III tournaments, why not use Apricity for that :thumb001:?


Anyway, back to the topic:

Until all that mess which happened in the Balkans, couples were getting marriage very young, before their twenties and those who were getting married later were consider grandma-girls/grandpa-boys. I would be grandpa-boy according to those views now :D.

Now, things are changed. Now couples are rarely getting married before 25, or even 30.

:chin:, Westerners are starting to act like we, and we like You :loco:

[Guapo]

:love:I wanna get married to Romanqueen:redface_002:

[anonymaus]

This thread is in the Society sub-forum, not The Lounge, and posters should consider that before they click "Submit."

[Aemma]

I do agree to a point that the younger one marries, the better the chances for a marriage's survival. But as with everything, an individual's mileage varies on this one. I do think however that there are hints as to whether a couple has made a good match and will stay together for the long haul. In my humble experience, the less ostentatious the wedding itself, the truer the commitment. Some people dream their whole lives about "The Perfect Wedding" but without giving much consideration to the part that really matters: the marriage.

[Radojica]

:love:I wanna get married to Romanqueen:redface_002:

Me too :(, I am in love with her and she will be my wife, although she don't know that yet :shy:


I do agree to a point that the younger one marries, the better the chances for a marriage's survival. But as with everything, an individual's mileage varies on this one. I do think however that there are hints as to whether a couple has made a good match and will stay together for the long haul. In my humble experience, the less ostentatious the wedding itself, the truer the commitment. Some people dream their whole lives about "The Perfect Wedding" but without giving much consideration to the part that really matters: the marriage.

Learn from teh master ;).

My wedding is going to be only with god-father's, my bellowed better half and the closes family, nothing big and tasteless....

[Curtis24]

Well, people nowadays have unrealistic expectations about long-term relationships. They want it to be romantic and "natural" forever; but at some point the relationship will start taking work in order to be sustained. This is what our grandparents' understood, and they were willing to put in the work and fight through strain. Not so much nowadays.

YOu could also argue the breakdown of marriage is tied to increasing rights for women... a lot of times in the past, women were under intense social pressure to stay married. Yet now, they initiate something like 75% of all divorces. The well known evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa has argued that marriage was invented by men to dominate women, that it benefits men more.

[Aemma]

Well, people nowadays have unrealistic expectations about long-term relationships. They want it to be romantic and "natural" forever; but at some point the relationship will start taking work in order to be sustained. This is what our grandparents' understood, and they were willing to put in the work and fight through strain. Not so much nowadays.

Yes this is true however I don't think that everyone is cut out to be married either. It still comes down to having a good fit between two people and an incredibly strong commitment to one another. Luck sometimes does have a hand in things as well believe it or not. :)

I've never been one to say "a marriage needs work." It sounds too much like actual work to me (and no fun!). :D But nurturing! Now that is something else! Like anything else one tries to grow, be it a friendship or a long-term relationship or a marriage, it needs nurturing, just like a kid does, or your favourite plant, or your dog or cat or goldfish.


YOu could also argue the breakdown of marriage is tied to increasing rights for women... a lot of times in the past, women were under intense social pressure to stay married. Yet now, they initiate something like 75% of all divorces. The well known evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa has argued that marriage was invented by men to dominate women, that it benefits men more.

Well let's face it, in the past, the institution itself hasn't always been a very positive force for women. I think though that women my generation and younger have been able to enjoy a certain (well-deserved) freedom of being in a marriage because they want to be there and not because they belong to their husband. This is a good thing that women can initiate divorces if they need to. It keeps the marriage honest.

[Austin]

While I think it is true a marriage very much needs nurturing, that can basically mean almost anything really. In general from what I see people get lost in the translation of what nurturing a marriage actually is and or what they "deem" it personally to be and end up sabotaging their marriage with grandiose expectations that were never realistic for their partner.

I see divorce becoming absolutely epidemic in the west and I agree it likely has much to do with the fact that women have now total freedom and in large part men (and) women have not adapted to this reality relationship wise where it actually works.

I mean for instance my generation --expects-- you to let them see and remain friends with their ex even when they know it bothers you, men are now just as bad in these respects as women, neither will compromise at all on anything. If you protest you are officially a social "oppressor" and are surely far too controlling and immature in their words. The idea that perhaps they should reach a compromise or try to see where that person is coming from at least is completely alien, an immediate argument ensues usually. The concept of personal compromise is alien to my generation it is either complete liberty to do what they want when they want how they want or they will simply choose 24/7 party mode rather than settle. Usually ending up worse off but retaining their ability to do whatever to their own detriment.

[Osweo]

YOu could also argue the breakdown of marriage is tied to increasing rights for women... a lot of times in the past, women were under intense social pressure to stay married. Yet now, they initiate something like 75% of all divorces. The well known evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa has argued that marriage was invented by men to dominate women, that it benefits men more.

Hmmm.... well, it probably ought to be said that modernity's unfortunate social trends are also making more men than ever before into useless/spoilt arsewipes/wimps/swine. :strokebeard:

[Sally]

Marriages that last and ones that don't

Good topic, Austin! :)

Nowadays, I think that it's considered (either explicitly or implicitly) okay to divorce and/or remarry under any circumstances. Sadly, this has many terrible consequences for the family unit and society at large.

Marriage is serious business for all people, and especially between baptised Christians (it's a Sacrament). Marriage should not be contracted based on the whims of romantic attachment. A true marriage is characterised by a lifelong commitment, fidelity and openness to new life. If a couple freely (i.e., they are not coerced) consents to this version of marriage on their wedding day, only death can sever the marriage bond. They can civilly divorce and even remarry, but the first bond remains.

[Alison]

Well said, Sally. My sentiments exactly.

[Magister Eckhart]

They had a son together and then shortly after that somewhere down the line she cheated on him with a doctor who she worked for, though it was odd because he owned his own business so they were well off to begin with. She had been divorced once before and this was his first marriage but still their wedding was so picture perfect as were they it just got to me in some way.

Looks can deceive, personal histories reveal the truth. I would venture a guess she cheated on her previous husband. An adulturer is an adulturess is an adulterer is and an adulturess. They do not change and their personalities make their disloyalty pathological.

A good rule of thumb for a happy marriage? In my experience, don't marry a divorcee if you aren't one yourself.

Ultimately, though, it's difficult to nail down what a happy marriage is and whence it arises. The real key is that you have to care about the other person as much or more than you care about yourself, and in this modern world where #1 comes first and "if you love me you'll do what I want", that rarely happens. There is only one real reason why marriages and families fall apart, namely that they were never marriages or families to begin with; there was no union between man and woman, no drive to make their interests and goals singular, no sacrifice of the self for the whole.

Then again, it could be argued that this has never been the case, and the real cause of unhappy married life is women not knowing and keeping their place in the house. No offence, ladies, but the social fabric was terribly torn by that change, and I'm not entirely sure that our society has or ever will recover from the "emancipation" of women.

I have heard the blame go back to the broad legalization of divorce itself, but I think it's deeper than that. It's a rejection of social mores that demand a fulfilment of duty; even where there isn't love in a marriage, if there is a sense of duty the marriage is held together. This sense of duty of woman to man and man to woman and father to son and son to father and son to mother and mother to son and daughter to father and daughter to mother and mother to daughter and father to daughter and brother to sister and sister to brother forms a web and a fabric that is as hard as steel in the face of adversity and hardship. Where loyalty and duty are sacrificed, families fail, because they were never truly "families". That web of loyalty and duty is necessary to make a family, and, in the pre-natal stage, to make a marriage.

[Moonbird]

I think something is wrong with western culture that young marriages are frowned upon nowadays because from seeing this I am not convinced waiting garners any real benefit other than envisioned ones.

Well, I think very few people around 20 are mature enough to be able to choose their partner for life. If I for instance had married the guy I dated when I were 20 it would surely have turned into a disaster.

IMO the age between 25 and 30 is the best one for getting married.

[Austin]

Looks can deceive, personal histories reveal the truth. I would venture a guess she cheated on her previous husband. An adulturer is an adulturess is an adulterer is and an adulturess. They do not change and their personalities make their disloyalty pathological.

A good rule of thumb for a happy marriage? In my experience, don't marry a divorcee if you aren't one yourself.

Ultimately, though, it's difficult to nail down what a happy marriage is and whence it arises. The real key is that you have to care about the other person as much or more than you care about yourself, and in this modern world where #1 comes first and "if you love me you'll do what I want", that rarely happens. There is only one real reason why marriages and families fall apart, namely that they were never marriages or families to begin with; there was no union between man and woman, no drive to make their interests and goals singular, no sacrifice of the self for the whole.

Then again, it could be argued that this has never been the case, and the real cause of unhappy married life is women not knowing and keeping their place in the house. No offence, ladies, but the social fabric was terribly torn by that change, and I'm not entirely sure that our society has or ever will recover from the "emancipation" of women.

I have heard the blame go back to the broad legalization of divorce itself, but I think it's deeper than that. It's a rejection of social mores that demand a fulfilment of duty; even where there isn't love in a marriage, if there is a sense of duty the marriage is held together. This sense of duty of woman to man and man to woman and father to son and son to father and son to mother and mother to son and daughter to father and daughter to mother and mother to daughter and father to daughter and brother to sister and sister to brother forms a web and a fabric that is as hard as steel in the face of adversity and hardship. Where loyalty and duty are sacrificed, families fail, because they were never truly "families". That web of loyalty and duty is necessary to make a family, and, in the pre-natal stage, to make a marriage.


It did indeed have something to do with her career and her not being a stay at home mom. She worked for the doctor as an assistant my mom said. I think somewhere down the line she mentally decided the doctor was better than the small private business guy she married.

The young couple are very conservative and were both raised in a socially conservative Texas-country, Christian setting. I didn't get the impression the 30 something couple came from the same background, they seemed the superficial city type which I think they were. The young couple had/will vote republican the rest of their lives this I know (as much was said in an amusing drunk rant at their after-party). I'm convinced there is greatness in simplicity over deluded substance after going to that wedding, the guy was no great intellect clearly but she was and her father was a very wealthy corporate Houstonite yet both had stronger morals already than the 30 something established career couple. There is definetely a difference between being raised in a secular setting and being raised in a nonsecular one. I notice this more and more by which of my cousins marriages fail or succeed.

For instance the young couple just wanted to get the church vows and ceremony over so they could go to the place their dad rented and get wasted with their friends whilst the 30 something couple super-hyped the vows and the ceremony with a carriage and all yet they didn't clearly mean it in retrospect even though they had twice as much pomp and took 3x as long.

[Captain Nemo]

The Russian poet Yesenin wrote that love is not to look at one other, but to look in the same direction.


The reason marriages fail so much, from a social point of view, is that society has lost "vertical" values, the values integrating individual aspects of life to various levels of collective ones, and the feedback loops between them.

The only "vertical" values that we have are not systemically explicit, but are still implicitely embedded inside idiosyncratic systems of beliefs and rigid idiosyncratic social forms.
Unfortunately, both those beliefs and those forms are challenged in modern times, and by rejecting them, we have not found any functional replacement for the vertical systemic software that they contain.

The baby was thrown away along with the water of the bath.

The systemic solution is to develop a new philosophy that would integrate into a scientifically explicited model, the relationship between the individual aspects of life and the collective ones, and how they integrate into systemic meaning trough their feedbac loops.

What modern society lacks is a philosophical systemic overview, a higher perspective on the relationship of the individual and collective dimensions (family and marriage being part of that collective dimension).
There is no correct understanding of human life from a higher complete systemic point of view, and all higher points of view that we have are historic idiosyncrasies, that cannot sustain explicit questioning.

Instead of that we have an ideology of reductionist individualism, completely horizontalizing human relationships, reducing them to market interactions without a higher common purpose.

This philosophical deficiency is the cause of all evil.

We could argue that certain social or even ethnic groups favour that deficiency for their own selfish interests.
This is true, but on the other hand, there is still no systemic explicit articulation that could replace the implicit and today rather inneficient vectors and recipients of verticality that are religions and traditional values and social forms.

Systemic verticality must explicitely and scientifically pierce inside the mental models of the modern man.

See also: http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=306374#post306374