This is the first of a series of occasional articles about marriage today. It is intended as a primer for young women who hope to marry.
“I don’t want to be married anymore.
In daylight hours, I refused that thought, but at night it would consume me. What a catastrophe. How could I be such a criminal jerk as to proceed this deep into a marriage, only to leave it? We’d only just bought this house a year ago. Hadn’t I wanted this nice house? Hadn’t I loved it? So why was I haunting its halls every night now, howling like Medea? Wasn’t I was proud of all we’d accumulated – the prestigious home in the Hudson Valley, the apartment in Manhattan, the eight phone lines, the friends and the picnics and the parties, the weekends spent roaming the aisles of some box-shaped superstore of our choice, buying ever more appliances on credit? I had actively participated in every moment of the creation of this life – so why did I feel like none of it resembled me? Why did I feel so overwhelmed with duty, tired of being the primary breadwinner and the housekeeper and the social coordinator and the dog walker and the wife and the soon-to-be-mother, and – somewhere in my stolen moments – a writer?
I don’t want to be married anymore.
…I will not discuss here all the reasons why I did still want to be his wife, or all his wonderfulness, or why I loved him and why I had married him and why I was unable to imagine life without him. I won’t open any of that. Let it be sufficient to say that on this night, he was still my lighthouse and my albatross in equal measure. The only thinking more unthinkable than leaving was staying; the only thing mor impossible than staying was leaving. I didn’t want to destroy anything or anybody. I just wanted to slip quietly out the back door, without causing any fuss or consequences, and then not stop running until I reached Greenland.”
Elizabeth Gilbert, Eat Pray Love
So begins Gilbert’s blockbuster memoir, a chronicling of the “healing journey” she undertook after leaving her husband Michael Cooper, who has said he thought his marriage was rock-solid, the divorce unexpected and the result devastating. With a sweet book deal from Viking, Gilbert set out with several hundred thousand dollars to gaze at her navel in Italy, India and Bali.
In a recent post I referred to the trifecta of doom concerning the future of marriage – declining marriage rates, declining male college enrollments, and overly optimistic female beliefs about fertility. Much of this is beyond any one person’s control, but if you hope to marry you must understand the contemporary environment for marriage, which includes considerable disincentives.
While the average age at marriage has been increasing for both sexes, the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia found evidence that men are more interested in delaying marriage than women are. From a study exploring men’s feelings about commitment:
The men in this study express a desire to marry and have children sometime in their lives, but they are in no hurry. They enjoy their single life and they experience few of the traditional pressures from church, employers or the society that once encouraged men to marry. Moreover, the sexual revolution and the trend toward cohabitation offer them some of the benefits of marriage without its obligations. If this trend continues, it will not be good news for the many young women who hope to marry and bear children before they begin to face problems associated with declining fertility.
The ten reasons why men won’t commit are:
1. They can get sex without marriage more easily than in times past.
2. They can enjoy the benefits of having a wife by cohabiting rather than marrying.
3. They want to avoid divorce and its financial risks.
4. They want to wait until they are older to have children.
5. They fear that marriage will require too many changes and compromises.
6. They are waiting for the perfect soulmate and she hasn’t yet appeared.
7. They face few social pressures to marry.
8. They are reluctant to marry a woman who already has children.
9. They want to own a house before they get a wife.
10. They want to enjoy single life as long as they can.
According to the study, “[Men] fear that an ex-wife will “take you for all you’ve got” and that “men have more to lose financially than women” from a divorce.
Like other young adults, these young men are highly critical of divorce. They think couples are too willing to call it quits without trying to work through difficulties in a marriage. As one observed:
“One fight, and it’s like ‘I’m out of here.”‘
Some attribute the readiness to divorce as part of a societal trend toward narcissism, consumerism, and “too many choices.”
“You used to fall in love with the girl in your high school English class. Now you have more choices and you get married and then three years later, a better one comes along,” commented one man.
Others believe that both men and women are more independent and need each other less:
“Now women are making as much as their husbands so they can say ‘see ya,’” one said.
Finally, these men cite the legacy of parental divorce as a factor con- tributing to a persistently high divorce rate: “We figure ‘hey my parents got divorced, so we can get divorced.’”
Clearly, men’s fear of divorce is real and is reflected in the falling number of marriages. To understand why, it’s helpful to look briefly at the history of divorce, beginning in the mid-60s. From Brad Wilcox’s The Evolution of Divorce at the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia:
The divorce revolution of the 1960s and ’70s was over-determined. The nearly universal introduction of no-fault divorce helped to open the floodgates, especially because these laws facilitated unilateral divorce and lent moral legitimacy to the dissolution of marriages. The sexual revolution, too, fueled the marital tumult of the times: Spouses found it easier in the Swinging Seventies to find extramarital partners, and came to have higher, and often unrealistic, expectations of their marital relationships. Increases in women’s employment as well as feminist consciousness-raising also did their part to drive up the divorce rate, as wives felt freer in the late ’60s and ’70s to leave marriages that were abusive or that they found unsatisfying.
Divorce rates doubled between the mid-1960s and the mid-1970s. In fact, divorce rates are lower today than they have been since 1970, but that’s on a smaller base of marriages.
In a study aptly named These Boots Are Made for Walking: Why Most Divorce Filers Are Women, Brinig and Allen (2000) stated that women file just over two-thirds of divorces. (They cite the anticipation of custody as the most statistically significant factor in women initiating divorce proceedings at any given point.)
Another study by Amato and Previti (2003) looked at People’s Reasons for Divorcing. It’s the only data I could find, which is not surprising, since no-fault divorce laws have been around since the 1970s and require no justification for filing. This study was done with 208 subjects (77M, 131F) over a 17 year period, 1980-1997. One limitation of the study is that they spoke with only one member of each divorced couple, so there is bound to be some personal “rewriting of history” that is embedded in the results. The table below shows how men and women reported the reason for their divorce. Please note that this data does not address who initiated the divorce.
|
Men % Cases n=77 |
Women % Cases n=131 |
|
| Infidelity | 15.6 | 25.2 |
| Alcohol or drug use | 5.2 | 13.7 |
| Physical or mental abuse | 0.0 | 9.2 |
|
Financial/Employment problems
|
3.9 | 6.9 |
| Physical or Mental Illness | 1.3 | 3.1 |
| Other/EPL*: | ||
| Incompatible | 19.5 | 19.1 |
| Personal growth | 3.8 | 1.5 |
| Grew apart | 9.1 | 9.9 |
| Personality | 10.4 | 8.4 |
| Unhappy | 2.6 | 3.1 |
| Loss of love | 6.5 | 3.1 |
|
Lack of communication |
13.0 |
6.1 |
|
Immaturity |
2.6 |
1.5 |
|
Interference from family |
2.6 |
2.3 |
|
Failure to meet family obligations |
1.3 |
4.6 |
|
Don’t know |
9.1 |
0.0 |
| Other | 6.5 | 2.3 |
| Total Other/EPL | 87.0 | 61.9 |
*Note:
1. Because some individuals provided more than one cause, the percentages for individuals sums to more than 100.
2. The selection of Other reasons as frivolous, or EPL, is mine and is entirely subjective. Obviously, legitimate divorces can occur within these categories, YMMV.
From the study:
Consistent with expectations, women in this study were more likely to report problematic behavior on the part of their former husbands (infidelity, substance use, mental and physical abuse), and men were more likely to report that they did not know what caused the divorce. These gender differences replicate findings from several prior studies (Bloom et al., 1985; Cleek & Pearson, 1985; Kitson,1992; Levinger, 1966).
Contrary to expectations, however, men were no more likely than women to refer to external causes, and men were more
likely than women to report problems with communication. The latter finding appears to clash with the assumption that women are more relationship centered than men (Thompson & Walker, 1991) and that wives are more sensitive than husbands to marital problems involving emotions and communication (Cleek & Pearson, 1985). Nevertheless, this result is consistent with a study showing that communication problems (such as avoiding problem-solving discussions) predict marital unhappiness more strongly among husbands than wives (Roberts, 2000).Although it is possible that men are becoming more sensitive to relationship dynamics in marriage, we suspect that some men used general references to poor communication and other relationship problems to avoid admitting that their own misbehavior undermined the marriage.
I assume, though I have no data to support my suspicion, that women are also using references to male misbehavior to obscure their EPL motives for initiating divorce.
Another important variable is socioeconomic status. The National Marriage Project puts the divorce rate among college educated couples at only 17% during the first decade, half the rate of their less educated counterparts:
College-educated Americans have seen their divorce rates drop by about 30% since the early 1980s, whereas Americans without college degrees have seen their divorce rates increase by about 6%. Just under a quarter of college-educated couples who married in the early 1970s divorced in their first ten years of marriage, compared to 34% of their less-educated peers. Twenty years later, only 17% of college-educated couples who married in the early 1990s divorced in their first ten years of marriage; 36% of less-educated couples who married in the early 1990s, however, divorced sometime in their first decade of marriage.
This growing divorce divide means that college-educated married couples are now about half as likely to divorce as their less-educated peers. Well-educated spouses who come from intact families, who enjoy annual incomes over $60,000, and who conceive their first child in wedlock — as many college-educated couples do — have exceedingly low rates of divorce.
Back to the Amato study on socioeconomic status:
Several studies suggest that socioeconomic status is correlated with people’s reasons for divorce. Kitson (1992) found that high-SES individuals, following divorce, were more likely to complain about lack of communication, changes in interests or values, incompatibility, and their ex-spouses’ self- centeredness. In contrast, low-SES individuals were more likely to complain about physical abuse, going out with the boys/girls, neglect of household duties, gambling, criminal activities, financial problems, and employment problems.
These results suggest that as SES increases, individuals are less likely to report instrumental reasons and more likely to report expressive and relationship-centered reasons.
It would appear, then, that the Eat Pray Love phenomenon is largely centered among the most educated and affluent Americans. Certainly Elizabeth Gilbert fits the bill. So do those who prioritize female concerns. Oprah Winfrey liked Eat Pray Love so much she devoted two segments to it, and has supported Gilbert with additional appearances since. Oprah has also supported frivolous divorce in other ways. Her website featured the article, She’s Happily Married, Dreaming of Divorce, which was linked by CNN.
Ex-blogger Novaseeker took her to task for championing a woman who decided to stay in her marriage while getting her own apartment at her husband’s expense:
What are the other compromises I’m questioning? I’m shy about telling you, because I’m afraid it sounds as if I’m looking a gift horse—my decent, basically good enough marriage—in the mouth. Maybe I am. But here goes: I want a physical space where I can see myself reflected without the influence (both aesthetically pleasing and overpowering) of my husband. I also want to create a distance between my husband and me specifically for the purpose of coming together with the intention of…being together.
Fifty years ago… divorce was taboo and few women had the guts, let alone the financial means, to brave the social stigma of walking out on a decent husband simply because she felt there must be “something more”. Until recently, with nearly half of all marriages ending in divorce, the most commonly cited reason was infidelity.
But times have changed. Last week, a survey of 101 family lawyers conducted by the consultancy firm Grant Thornton revealed that adultery was no longer the principal reason for break-ups. Instead, the most popular explanation was couples saying they were simply “no longer in love” and had “grown apart”.
That survey was done in the UK, and doesn’t necessarily reflect American divorce, but Smith believes that Eat Pray Love is at the root of it:
What does this say about our society? Is it a shocking indictment of our narcissism that we are ignoring “Until death us do part”? Or is it a triumph of feminism that women whose mothers would have put up and shut up in return for a roof over their heads have decided that they refuse to live out their years with a man whose idea of an enjoyable night is dinner on his lap in front of Top Gear?
Women initiate seven out of 10 divorces. Divorce is also soaring among the over-45s, with break-ups in that age bracket increasing by 30 per cent in a decade. The writer Fay Weldon recently said: “Women in their fifties instigate divorce because they are bored and want to be free and single again, not because they want the emotional and sexual excitement of another man.” They’re encouraged by a recent vogue of “finding-yourself” literature, headed by the international best-seller Eat, Pray, Love, which recounted author Elizabeth Gilbert’s decision to divorce her husband and embark on a round-the-world odyssey of – depending on your view – inspirational self-discovery or nauseating navel-gazing.
Some readers have suggested that in good conscience I should withdraw my support for marriage. I disagree, because I am a firm believer in the power of marriage. The National Marriage Project’s statement reflects my own support of the institution:
Marriage is a fundamental social institution. It is central to the nurture and raising of children. It is the “social glue” that reliably attaches fathers to children. It contributes to the physical, emotional and economic health of men, women and children, and thus to the nation as a whole. It is also one of the most highly prized of all human relationships and a central life goal of most Americans.
However, I do not pretend that all is well. In addition to the malignant Eat Pray Love trend, men fear the financial consequences of laws guiding custody, child support, alimony, and the division of marital property. There’s also the very real loss of economies of scale that occurs in every divorce, as one household splits into two.
Men will decide whether to marry based on their own personal assessment of the risks involved. Those risks are legal, financial, emotional and physical. A man contemplating marriage will bring his own tolerance for risk and uncertainty to bear on his personal risk/benefit analysis.
As a woman, it behooves you to be fully informed about about the risks men face, and the benefits you confer in your relationship. You will need to demonstrate that you are low risk, high value, and of sterling character. That means, among other things, willingness to take your wedding vows dead seriously, and to speak out against divorce as a means of personal growth and self-expression.
{ 1122 comments… read them below or add one }
1 2 3 … 8 »
Great stuff, Susan.
Shit storm in T-minus 10..9..
Im not gonna lie, all this time I though Eat Pray Love was about a woman who just travels across Europe having a good time. Thats it. I had no idea she was married and selfishly dumped her husband to “find” herself.
Oprah put this on her book list? I would say its shocking but I feel it might come from a bitter place of HER never having been married. I dont get why women would take advice from a woman who isnt even in their situation. But they worship her like a God.
Elizabeth Gilbert was probably unhappy because she just went through the motions and did what society expected her to do. She had it “all” and yet wasn’t happy. Why? Because people have a hard time realizing that “all” doesn’t equal happy.
I worked with a girl once, and in her home country when people go to file for divorce, they ask what the problem is and can and will tell you: “Go home and work it out with your husband/wife.” They wouldn’t give them the paper work. I thought it was hilarious. Maybe we need to get more of that attitude in the US.
This post, however, makes me feel like Im never getting married. Its hard not to become jaded from reading this stuff Susan.
I have my revenge, or I think I do. I’m remarried from my first marriage/divorce. She is still single.
Reasons for her leaving: 1. She was unhappy. 2. I was unhappy, but she made the relationship hell from all her demands. 3. She was barely at home. Often away from her projects and staying with her parents. 4. She pursued an additional degree that went nowhere. Tuition down the drain. 5. I don’t know. There problems were not unfixable, but she was unfixable. She didn’t want a solution. She wanted out. 6. No kids. No reason to stay really. And very little sex.
I saw the movie “Eat Pray Love” with my new wife. She wanted to see it. It was very lame. I could see why she wanted the divorce. Her husband wanted to pursue another degree, but thus making her the breadwinner. That’s no way to have a marriage. Yet she isn’t the mother type.
Lesson: A man should not marry if he or his wife both do not want children. It is advanced dating. It’s too easy to leave without children.
Yet in “Eat Pray Love,” what’s the cultural significance of ordering spaghetti in Italian? I don’t see the benefit. Going to India is like a step backwards. Religious training in Bali was a waste for the woman. She was impatient and didn’t want to follow the rules. Only after a series of misadventures with her self created crisis’ did she have an epiphany.
SHE WAS IN LOVE AGAIN. May this new man have his own epiphany.
The last paragraph hit home. I thought I had chosen a woman of character who cherished marriage. She derided divorce, and actively worked to save marriages of friends. Some very successfully. I found out later that the whole time she was seeking the “courage” to leave our marriage. She was trying to force me into a position to leave her, so she didn’t have to bare the shame of leaving me. This went on for over 10 years of our 14 year marriage. Marriage is all that you say, and I believe that there are so few women deserving of the honor in modern western cultures that men should abstain until not only the laws change, but the atitudes of women do as well.
I commend you on an excellent article. Your perspective is cogently presented and the sources you cite in support of it are diverse and articulate. Furthermore, your perspicacity in finding and employing them shows scholarship. You offer a provocative argument with such compelling momentum that by the time the reader reaches your conclusion it seems so inevitable it’s as if he’d already drawn it. I tip my hat as one professional advocate to another.
Care to clarify, Jonny?
Watch what you say.
Ssuan
I did not mean to imply that your writing was “professional advocacy’ i e sophistry. You care deeply. I meant its rendering was professional.
Excellent work Susan. A prime foundation for future discussions.
These 3 cases for divorce strike me as particularly interesting:
1. “Physical or mental abuse” – Men report 0%.
2. “Lack of communication” – Men report 13%, women 6.1%.
3. “Don’t know” – Men report 9.1%, women 0%.
Were I to theorize about these stats, I would say…
1. I have to presume this is due at least in part to men not wanting to appear weak by reporting abuse. (Or wanting to avoid being laughed at. Maybe both.)
2. Aren’t women going on about communication? Regarded as the gender that loves/needs/wants to communicate? And yet we have men indicating LACK of communication fueled a divorce. Hmmm…
3. Women clearly know when they intend to divorce. That’s quite telling.
You could have stopped right there. Truer words…
For the record, I agree with one point: Children are best raised in a stable two-parent household.
However…
I find these statements abhorrent. Go to any family court and watch a father fight for access to his children during divorce proceedings. If marriage was all that bound him to his children, then why do men fight to see them post-divorce? This statement is nauseatingly oversimplified, and relies on an image of men as something akin to a chimp with a head injury.
(Mind you, I like chimps!)
Very good sentiment. And, from a social perspective, a strong base upon which to build relationships.
However, as is my wont, I must point out that you’d need more than just this. You’d need to understand the legal risks men still face, and be willing to fight against them *yourselves*.
As HeligKo has just indicated (my sympathies sir), the laws and the attitudes of women must change en masse.
To all the young men I encounter who ask (most do) about my advice regarding marriage…I have only one answer.
If both you and she are committed Christians (meaning pay 10-20% of your gross income to God, devote 24 hour period per week to sabbath observance, study and pray daily, etc), AND intend to start a family, then it is a good idea. And preferably not an American.
If any of the above conditions don’t apply, I tell them I think they are effectively a foolish, moronic, pussy for considering it for more than 1 second with any woman. No matter how hot, sweet, or caring she may be. And then I explain why.
Most were already leaning that way, they just needed someone with a wise reputation and a successful married life to give them the truth. Someone with credibility.
Sorry Chickees, but the fruits of your feministic attitudes are now being harvested. Take a big bite. Sweet, isn’t it? Now get back to your important job, make some more powerpoint slides, and enjoy your retail therapy.
What is sad is when I (more gently) point this out to my female friends who are still single, what kind of prospects THEY are facing in the marriage market. They logically accept the truth of my message, but cannot emotionally accept it. So,….
@SayWhaat
Gilbert’s trip to India appears contrived. There’s nothing wrong with the country, but to try to derive understanding from another country while not understanding your own (the U.S.) is backwards.
As Bali, their religion is patriarchal. For a woman to look for her religion there and not follow the rules seem very arrogant, which is my main point.
As for “Watch what you say”, what are you going to do?
“As a woman, it behooves you to be fully informed about about the risks men face, and the benefits you confer in your relationship. You will need to demonstrate that you are low risk, high value, and of sterling character. That means, among other things, willingness to take your wedding vows dead seriously, and to speak out against divorce as a means of personal growth and self-expression.”
I might respectfully add the following:
1. You will need to show that you bring something of value to a possible marriage besides your physical attributes. In the unlikely event you are the primary breadwinner, expect it to continue indefinitely. If you are not, develop your domestic skills. Learn how to cook if you don’t know how. Yes, most of this work usually falls to the wife. That’s the way it is.
2. You must show pleasantness, kindness and optimism to a potential husband, and sustain it as best you can.
3. Be an open book about your attitudes toward marriage. Be honest with yourself and possible husbands about the core areas of compatibility: sex, religion, children, finances. If he asks, be ready with a complete, honest, well-considered response. A reform Jewish man is probably not the ideal match for a devout Catholic. A woman who wants children will be grindingly unhappy with a man who knows he never wants them. A spendthrift and a tightwad might have problems.
4. Be flexible about your employment situation. If your husband is the primary breadwinner, his employment situation will probably be far less flexible than yours. You might have to adapt or change jobs. After you have children it might actually be more economically advantageous for you to be a SAHM than continue working. Or you might have to work after having children even if you don’t want to.
5. You can live on far less than you think you can.
6. You are not going to get everything you want in a husband.
7. He is not going to be everything you want all the time.
8. Do not confuse “wedding” with “marriage”.
9. Do not marry him unless you are head over heels in love with him. If you marry someone you are NOT head over heels in love with, you will believe you have settled, and you will be correct.
*(NOTE: “Settle” does not mean the same thing as “compromise” in this context. Settle means “meh” and you gave up without getting anything in return. Compromise means you and he both give a little and get a lot more so that the sum is exponentially greater than its two parts. Compromise, but DO NOT SETTLE. I would give the exact same advice to men looking to marry.)
10. Sterling character: Low partner count. Feminine. Trustworthy. Loyal. Kind. Cheerful. Thrifty.
11. If you fail to follow any of these suggestions, and your marriage is hard, or grinding, or you are not compatible, or you have problems, you may not get divorced unless one of the following happens:
a. He cheats on you.
b. He is physically abusing you.
c. He has abandoned you.
d. He’s become a hopeless, sick addict, he doesn’t want to get better, there’s no end in sight, and his sickness is completely destroying you and your children.
A very interesting post. Thank you. Anecdotally, I think many men view a woman having parents who divorced as a warning sign. Would as many women seek divorce for EPL reasons if they knew it meant making their daughter less likely to ever marry?
Bravo Susan. A great reminder that the most important thing to screen for in a marriage partner is character. Though I can’t help but wonder, as an early 30′s never-married male, if even that is good enough to prevent an EPL divorce.
With women being the more emotional gender and prone to acting on those emotions, it seems that both the man and the woman in a marriage are at the mercy of her emotions. Keeping the woman emotionally satisfied is then a sin quo non of sustaining a relationship.
And if, like many men, EG’s husband was blindsided by her request for the original EPL divorce, what’s your prescription for a solution here?
The only thing I can see is for the husband to man-up further and in addition to being alpha and otherwise on top of his game in all respects, to also be more emotionally in touch with his wife. And that hardly seem like a possible course in this day, age and SMP.
Reasons why men won’t commit are:
- They can get sex without marriage more easily than in times past.
- They can enjoy the benefits of having a wife by cohabiting rather than marrying.
- They face few social pressures to marry.
- They want to enjoy single life as long as they can.
These reasons are mostly about the same thing to me: they don’t have to. What’s the point?
Honestly, Susan, do you think it’s become too easy for young men to continue with casual sex and date around without it leading anywhere? I have often thought that promiscuous women ruin things for others, but I would never say it out loud as it is a forbidden thought these days, freedom of choice and all.
I remember reading an interview with one of my favourite authors. He married and had children quite late. He’s an artistic type, known as a bit of a “man’s man”. He said something interesting: “a lot of the best things in an adult man’s life are things he’s been forced to”. I don’t think he meant forced as in violently led into or deceived, but simply having a woman pressuring him, and having to move out of his comfort zone.
I think his main point was that if he as a young man had continued to follow his own desires 100%, he’d ended up miserable. You need some sort of lecturing, from parents, or the women you date.
I’m in the “don’t advocate marriage in good conscience” camp. For the same reason that I wouldn’t want the president to have the power to order warrantless assassinations of American citizens without judicial oversight, no matter what a saint he is (gotta love some of that Hope and Change), I can’t advocate allowing any woman the power that divorce gives her, no matter what an angel she is. Some power should simply not exist. After all, I don’t think most folks get married thinking, “Well, it’s fifty-fifty,” or “Haha, in four years, his wealth is mine!” People change, and what would have been unthinkable five years ago can seem inevitable in the now. People, even women, marry in good faith – but there is nothing to hold them to that faith. Worse, there is the illusion of a promise, to keep the future hapless (most likely male) victim from being prepared.
Speaking of change, re: the last paragraph, about what women should do to entice men into marriage. There’s an old saw, “Men marry women hoping they’ll never change, and they do; women marry men hoping they’ll change, and they don’t.”
Here’s a starter (but by no means is this all a girl has to do): marry him for who he is, and expect it to stay the same, and love and respect that. Then do everything you can to stay the girl he fell in love with. Don’t turn into a housefrau, or his mother, or get fat, or start making demands you wouldn’t have made when dating. Don’t think that he’s going to magically start doing his laundry “your” way now that he’s married.
Make that commitment. That’s the easy part. Now come the two hard parts: can you live up to that until you die? And can you convince him that you will, in the face of how many of your sisters are lying through their teeth?
As a last note, a fun bit of schadenfreude for the college guys out there: if the subject ever comes up, try mentioning that approximately one-third of all girls with college degrees will simply be unable to marry a man with a degree in the next ten years. It may actually set enough of a fire under them to start them on the path of helping themselves and being better wife material; failing that, the look on their faces is priceless. If you can’t solve the problem, no reason not to enjoy it.
@ Sunofagunforbeer
I’ll second that. Even if someone convinced me to get married at some point, under no circumstances would I consider any girl with frivolously divorced parents – and even non-frivolous divorce would warrant a lot of scrutiny. Also: no single mothers, divorced women, or any girl who I know for a fact has been with one of these super-alpha 100+ notch guys (I’m okay with her having a history, even into the low double-digits, but alpha-chasing is right out – and those guys are easy enough to spot).
I think that narrows eligible females down to about 10% of the population, but meh.
Magnificent, Susan.
I’m not sure how many women realize just how infuriating that book is to men.
Deti also raises some good points.
Men are constantly being told to Man Up. It’s time someone told women to Grow Up.
Great post Susan. I hope that things remain peaceful around here, for the most part. We’ll see how that goes.
Solid research. Well written. Great job, Susan!
@Anna
“These reasons are mostly about the same thing to me: they don’t have to. What’s the point?”
Because the vast majority of men ultimately want children and want daily involvment with their children, and the best way, by far, to do that is in a marriage. But with the punitive nature of divorce settlements for men (assuming the wife isn’t an equal bread winner), even the college educated and upper class men may have to rethink the notion of marriage. All of those other things you mentioned will make that “rethinking” a bit easier.
As an engineer, one thing we talk about is life-cycle management–the process of shepherding something from the time it is dreamed up to the time it dies (maybe or maybe not when intended). Each phase (the longest and hardest arguably being the middle–maintenance) has its own quirks. What I find interesting about this article is how it might fit into understanding the life-cycle of a marriage, which might be summarized as:
1) Meet other
2) Fall in Love
3) Plan and Execute Nuptials
4) Maintain the marriage
5) Terminate marriage either by death of one/both spouses or divorce
6) Clean up the aftermath of marital termination
There are a few hints about why men might not want to marry. Okay. Assuming they do, then they’re into step (4)–maintenance. That 60-80% of causes of divorce are listed for reasons that are EPL (with the appropriate caveats) suggest most divorces are due to failure to conduct proper marriage maintenance, into which the “Eat, Pray, Love” phenomenon fits.
This to me begs the question of where in the marriage value-chain the focus really needs to be: selecting better mates more likely to not cheat, abuse, etc, or helping both partners understand what it takes in terms of processes to conduct marital maintenance.
@ Passer_By
I assume this list is for American men? I’d be interested to see it for…you know, the rest of the world? Because divorce is particularly financially difficult in the US, more than many other countries. I wonder if European men worry about paying for their women in a marriage, even if they don’t end up with unfair settlements. Or if the list is pretty much the same minus the financial worries.
But you think children is the main factor here? So a woman should not wait for a man to become a “one-woman man” but rather until he wants a family. Which could take some time…
Susan, are you familiar with the Taxi theory?
I know this is from SATC, but it’s actually one of the few things mentioned there I think have some substance.
It basically means that men operate like taxis, when they are ready to settle down, the light goes on on top and the first reasonably attractive woman taking the cab, gets the ride (and the man). But they can drive around with their lights off for years and years and not be available, and if they’re just not there, it doesn’t matter how amazing you are. On the opposite of women, who’s been lit pretty much since birth.
It can sound a bit extreme, but it basically means that with men and marriage, timing is a HUGE part of it.
I’m sure this has been debated before I knew of HUS though…but do you agree?
Excellent article Susan. You are a voice of sanity. Sadly, though what the statistics describe above a part of a recipe for civilizational collapse. Europe has been playing around with types of anti-marriage/anti-male laws and institutions for decades. The result of which is countries like Italy with fertility rates at 1.3 children per woman, well below replacement rates of around 2.0. Italy is a goner economically and socially, so too Greece, and other European nations. The US isn’t too far behind. I fear it may be too late. Hello Dark Ages 2.0.
Just one more bit of advice gentlemen on a rare but real risk. If you have children with your wife, a paternity test immediately after birth is mandatory else you face these real financial, emotional, and legal risks;
“Sixteen months after his divorce, Richard Parker made a devastating discovery. A DNA test revealed that his 3-year-old son had been fathered by someone else.
Mr. Parker immediately filed a lawsuit claiming fraud by his apparently unfaithful ex-wife. He took his case all the way to the Florida Supreme Court.
Last week, the Florida justices ruled 7-0 against him. They said that Parker must continue to pay $1,200 a month in child support because he had missed the one-year post divorce deadline for filing his lawsuit. His court-ordered payments would total more than $200,000 over 15 years to support another man’s child.
“We find that the balance of policy considerations favors protecting the best interests of the child over protecting the interests of one parent defrauded by the other parent in the midst of a divorce proceeding,” writes Justice Kenneth Bell for the court.
“We recognize that the former husband in this case may feel victimized,” he writes. He then quotes a scholar to explain the ruling: “While some individuals are innocent victims of deceptive partners, adults are aware of the high incidence of infidelity and only they, not the children, are able to act to ensure that the biological ties they may deem essential are present.”
In effect, the high court is saying it’s partly Parker’s fault for trusting his wife…”
Link: http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0209/p01s01-usju.html
Until anti-male/husband/father laws like this are removed, I see less and and less incentive to marry.
What is that something more that women are looking for? I just do not get it. If you know yourself before you get married; and are a healthy functional person then what is there to look for. Most people are accustomed to being responsible for themselves and getting their needs met and working with others to share and compromise – as well as taking time for their own interests. In short a fully developed person with a life and mind of their own so what changes after marriage?
This makes it sounds like people marry and suddenly like in a bad sci-fi movie they have their personalities, minds wiped – and you are someone different? I mean are people pretending to be something they are not until they marry then suddenly the masks come off and reality hits.
Well this explains why I am single – this is just too crazy.
@Anna
Re your taxi theory – I think one of the observations in modern urban america is that the women don’t have their light on until late 20s or early 30s (or, more accurately, it’s only very dimly lit until then and then it suddenly grows much brighter).
Sue,
Great article.
Anna,
Here’s the part that trips women up: “it doesn’t matter how amazing you are.”
Sure it does. It’s just that most women aren’t as amazing as they think they are.
@Susan:
Great article. Plenty of background and the right tone.
@Anna
I think you’re assigning your own meaning to his quote. Truth is that most women will try to pressure a long term boyfriend into marriage. Whether that marriage turns into the “best thing in his life” is definitely not a given. That’s a big reason why we are having this discussion at all. For that author, being “dragged to marital bliss” worked out for him. For many guys it’s obviously not working out to be so pleasant.
Anna,
Yeah, SATC is stupid, but that “Taxi theory” actually makes a lot of sense. A lot of people recommend seeking guys in their mid/late 20′s, and I imagine that it’s because of similar logic.
Anna,
It’s become too easy for the young men that women find attractive to continue with casual sex without it leading anywhere. There are guys who aren’t getting casual sex who’d be more than willing to commit. But a lot of women don’t want them.
That’s why men need to get game.
And I’m *so* glad that Susan banned Doug before posting this. If she hadn’t, I’m sure this thread would have been an absolute gong show.
The other side of the coin, the negative implications our editor describes, were portrayed a 1/3 of a century in “Kramer v Kramer”. It opens with Dustin Hoffman drinking after work in the office with his boss, an obvious ritual of manly bonhomie played many tines before. He arrives home, late, to find Meryl Streep waiting for him , keys in her hand. she explains she is leaving him and her son, she doesn’t know where or for how long, she’ll let him know blah blah-Dustin stands bewildered as she’s out the door in almost the same time it takes you to read this.
It’s all on him, and he’s overwhelmed. I forget how he explains this to his son. His new emphasis on home life costs him his job (there’s an implication he still did his work ok, but not palling around with his boss is the real reason). His boss fires right before an important hearing; without a job, he’ll lose his son and the boss knows it. Dustin’s 3 last words to him -”shame in you”-are some of the best he’s ever delivered.
But he gets a job, selling his soul to a firm at their Christmas party. He’s so ecstatic he kisses a total stranger. And he and his son get ti figured out; a great scene shows them each reading the back of a cereal box, Dustin’s over-imagined attempts at cooking french toast for breakfast giving way to a realistic couple of bachelors existence.He starts a romance; a very funny scene has his girlfriend walking naked to the bathroom only to be confronted by the 7 year old boy who asks her”do you like fried chicken?” Returning to bed she tells Dustin “I just met your son.”
But Meryl returns from “finding herself”, probably having found herself being gang banged by the Bay Area chapter of the Hell’s Angel’s. A momentous trial scene; Howard Duff, playing Dustin’s attorney(Dustin also has to pay for Meryl’s), tears into Meryl and her facile decision to leave so cavalierly. Duff bores in on her, ruthlessly cross-examining her life, her decisions; at one point Duff asks her bluntly if she was an unfit to be mother: Hoffman, with tears in his eyes, shakes his head “No”.
He loses. The “child of tender years” doctrine trumps all; as Duff puts it “the court went with motherhood all the way.” Now he’ll lose his son, and more or less what’s left of his life.
But Meryl has a change of heart. She’s seen the change in him, and decides to leave their son with him and return to wherever it was she went (probably in time for the Sturgis Rally, contemptible little whore). It works out on the screen.In real life-you need to ask?
Kramer shows everything Susan discusses in terms of loss; boy loses mom; Dustin out major $; gratuitous destruction premised upon “finding oneself” (somehow this always involves newer vehicles, often motorcycles, and fucking younger people).
I used to ask myself if we’ve kicked the can down the road any further since Kramer. “Tender years” doctrine has been abolished here, dunno’ about anywhere else. I think the laws as written are more favorable. but laws only go so far, do so much. The real destruction caused in Kramer, and what Susan describes (that and the “EPL” syndrome) is done through decisions reflecting the narcissistic, consumerist culture we inhabit. That culture has less and less competition everyday. What a world (WWW “Oz”).
@Jim
You think every American man should ask for a paternity test for his child when its born? Hm…on one hand, its safe (obviously) but on the other it shows lack of trust. Where does one draw the line?
I hit submit too soon.
I wanted to add:
I’d resent that if my husband did it.
@Deti: ” If you fail to follow any of these suggestions, and your marriage is hard, or grinding, or you are not compatible, or you have problems, you may not get divorced unless one of the following happens:”
I would like to add to your list of acceptable reasons to divorce:
6) If he’s abusing the children. If a woman stays with a man that abuses the children, the negative consequences would be far too damaging than getting a divorce. A good mother will not allow anyone that hurts her children to be in their presence.
I noticed you stated physical abuse, but I think any type of abuse that can’t be eradicated (sexual, verbal, emotional, financial) is grounds to break a marriage.
Yea, I couldn’t see asking for a paternity test. Unless I had a reason.
The way around that, of course, is just to mandate paternity tests in order to have the father’s name included on the birth certificate.
@Jesus
Could you imagine how backed up the system would be if everyone got paternity tests for their name on birth certificates? Thats not realistic at all.
@warmwoman
“, but I think any type of abuse that can’t be eradicated (sexual, verbal, emotional, financial) is grounds to break a marriage”
The problem is that those terms are pretty nebulous, and people (and, in my experience, women in particular) have a tendancy to view justice as that result which maximizes their interests. So, for example, even though women often constantly berate their men, the one time he shouts back and intimidates her becomes verbal abuse. Emotional abuse? WTF is that? It’s whatever you want to define it to be. Financial abuse? Doesn’t let her buy whatever she wants? Buys stuff for himself, thereby being “selfish”, even though most disposable income is probably spent on her? Not to turn this into an MRA gripe fest, but many women will find “abuse” in whatever they deem unfair or displeasing to them.
Charm,
Idk. I don’t even know what system is used to test paternity. Do you?
@charm
“Could you imagine how backed up the system would be if everyone got paternity tests for their name on birth certificates? Thats not realistic at all.”
If done as a matter of course at the hospital, it would start to be pretty efficent. Their are plenty of companies that would do it for about a 100 bucks in that context. As it is now, you can buy a kit at the drug store for 30 bucks, and then mail it in and get results (for an addition 150 or so) online. So, if you had the power of a large contractor like the state or an insurance company, the rate would come way down.
As an aside, that mail in option would be fine for most guys, but feminists are working to make that illegal.
Thanks, Passerby, for passing by at the right time. Saved me a google search.
Charm: When a man is about to make a financial commitment for EIGHTEEN YEARS, what exactly is the problem with a little verification? Do you think the seller of a home resents that the buyer wants to carefully inspect the goods before agreeing to purchase it? I can appreciate that trust is important in a relationship, but these are not exactly small stakes; and please keep in mind that you are not the one that would be suffering in this instance if this bond of trust was broken.
@ Charm
If it helps, think of it this way: technology has finally given men all the same amount of certainty in their offspring that women have taken for granted since time began. It’s a gift to him and his subconscious, not an affront to you.
@Passerby
Absolutely. Women can be some of the most vicious emotional/mental abusers as well. I didn’t mean to imply that I was referring to men only. If a couple can admit their faults and work on those problems, then it’s not necessary to break things up over verbally aggressive arguments or financial issues. I think the key to a sucessful marriage is when both partners are willing to grow and nurture the relationship. You can disagree with each other, but still respect each others’ differences.
I’ve seen in couples counseling where one partner is desperate to work on the marriage, and the other partner could care less. Those types of situations fail, and they end up divorcing or staying miserable.
“Men marry women hoping they’ll never change, and they do; women marry men hoping they’ll change, and they don’t.”
Single and reluctant to marry for fear that the person I marry will change for the negative from the person they are or get bored with me remaining true to my core self even though my tastes may change and interests shift. I mean I expect peoples taste to change and for them to grow but not for their core personality – character to change; life, situations, circumstance, emotions and situations ebb and flow like the tide but character remains constant like the ocean. The ocean is still the ocean even with the shifting waters.
People are like houses if they do not have the characteristics that you love and want from the start keep looking do not even attempt to “change” the core person, i.e. you can adapt the color of the drapes or the carpet but if you have to remake it to be happy i.e. convert a rancher to the colonial you have your heart set; keep looking or prepare for heartache.
I have to wonder if as the popular notion goes I have to change a man why would I want to marry him? Character content versus surface characteristics – substance over surface style and there will be nothing to change.
Sad part is so many men have been burned they are rightfully gun shy; A woman who takes folks as she finds them and accepts their humanity and takes responsibility for managing her emotions and life i.e. she is a grown up do not stand a chance. Discouraging.
Excellent post Susan
I searched a bit online and it seems they can be court ordered or done from home or sent in to labs which takes a few weeks to get back. Ive thought about your suggestion and I wonder if there is a more fast track way to test partial DNA at the hospital at the time of birth, you know along with all the other blood tests they run. If it was possible and they mandated that I don’t think anything would be wrong with that at all.
Kind of like a built in shit test for men. If shes sweatin’ when that baby is born you might one to reconsider signing the birth certificate.
#30
I’m glad doug ism’t here too; he’d “site” Kramer v Kramer as some of his “primary legal research”; at least he’d get part of the title right. BTW nothing prevents Streep from coming back and doing it all again except her word and maybe 45 bikers.
@Passer_By
Seems like we were on the same page. Though you got there before me. LOL
@Bully & Odds
I think you’re trying to rationalize feelings. Do I know that men are taking a HUGE risk? Yep. If I was a man would I probably consider it especially in todays world? Absolutely.
I know this all. Its a reasonable argument. It would appeal greatly to the logical part of my brain. But still…there is small place that would harbor resentment towards him. I wouldn’t appreciate being put on trial like that.
And I feel like this cant be compared to a house. Personal feelings are involved.
I can also empathize with how the divorce court is a nasty world to men. It breaks my heart to see moms coach the kids to hate the father and see him as a bad man. They take the case to court to revoke visitation rights. Don’t they realize that they’re putting down a part of the child? Parent bashing doesn’t do anyone good.
“Because the vast majority of men ultimately want children and want daily involvment with their children, and the best way, by far, to do that is in a marriage.”
Exactly. This is what many MRA sites tend to ignore.
Easy for many of them to say “Go your own way and don’t marry”
Some of these men themselves are happily married with children (hence they have not taken their own advice)
Whilst others are understandably bitter having been dragged through the courts by some unscrupulous females who have taken them to the cleaners.
Many men DO want to marry and have kids.
Better to accept this fact and arm them with information and provide help and guidance.. For example the qualities to look for in a prospective partner.
Certainly a damn site more helpful than posting flyers in latrines .. (rolls eyes) warning men of marriage.
Most men, as do women, have a biological imperative to reproduce. It is as God and nature intended it to be.
Very well researched, thoughtful, even handed and helpful (especially to men) post Susan.
You are a realist as well as an advocate for good marriages.
“Some readers have suggested that in good conscience I should withdraw my support for marriage. I disagree, because I am a firm believer in the power of marriage”
As am I. There are many couples who have long and enduring marriages.
Providing the neccesary tools to help young men discern what will be in their best interests and to make better choices is the way to go.
Warm woman:
“Abuse” is too vague to serve as a ground for divorce. Basically “abuse” currently means “anything he does or says that I don’t like at this moment”.
Sexual abuse fits under physical abuse. Agree on child abuse.
My problem with the word “abuse” is that it’s too much of a weasel word now.
@WarmWoman
“Parent bashing doesn’t do anyone good.”
You’re wrong. Im pretty sure the woman in this instance is damn satisfied with herself. She probably got the house, a car, the kids, alimony and child support for the rest of her life or until she remarrys later. Sure she destroyed the life of her ex-husband, and her children, but in mind its just a means to an end.
Thats the fucked up part.
I meant to say: but in her mind its just a means to an end.
I had never considered Elizabeth Gilbert to be selfish before. I suppose mainly because there were no children involved. Is it better to stay in a marriage when you no longer your partner, or is it more noble to leave so they can find someone who does love them? I have often thought my mother should have left my father instead of tolerating his affairs but then infidelity doesn’t fall in the realm of EPL does it? I would hate to be on the receiving end of an EPL divorce though – but can it really be that her ex husband was so clueless to not realise she was unhappy?
Deti:
Yes, twisting the word “abuse” for one’s own personal gain and manipulation isn’t right. Maybe a better term is an “unhealthy or toxic relationship that can’t be saved.”
@Babydoll
“but can it really be that her ex husband was so clueless to not realise she was unhappy?”
I feel like the blame is going completely on him. Should he have realized it? Yes, and no. To me thats irrelevant. I find Im more offended with the way she went about it. Leave him. Travel the world. Write a book about it. Nah, thats not humiliating in the least. I hate her lack of shame. That bitch.
@Charm,
hey, hey, hey…look, I didn’t create this anti-male/marriage financial and environment, I’m just a realist about it. Are there some really great women out there who would make great wives and mothers? Sure. I’d love to meet them. However, there are also some awful women out there as well. I’ve actually met them and they are the reason why I’m as wary as I am.
“Lesson: A man should not marry if he or his wife both do not want children. It is advanced dating. It’s too easy to leave without children.”
+1
This is usually one of the first things I discuss with a man I’m dating. I have yet to be struck by the desire to have children and everyone I’ve dated has said they would like them, but later. So makes sense that I’ve never been married. I would only have children if I was married though. Just can’t imagine not being married to the father of my children.
Although I find Gilbert (or her character) to be narcissistic (and indulging in behavior that would be shamed in men), her divorce is not a very good example of the real problem. If we can take her at word, she didn’t commit divorce theft. And she certainly didn’t take any children from her husband, etc.
But part of the problem is that her story seems to be used as inspiration for other women to do those very things. Also, as I mentioned, what rankles a lot of men isn’t that she did what she did, but that it is so celebrated in the media, whereas comparable male behavior is shamed.
I also wonder if part of what made her “inexplicably feel trapped and want out” was that she made more money than her husband, thereby causing her to subconsciously lose all attraction and respect for him.
@Charm
Karma will hopefully catch up to her when the kids grow older and find find out that mom lied. These women made the choice to procreate with these men, so why take your kids away from something that was a result of your decision making?
@Jim
I didn’t create it either. Some over privileged bitch with no real problems in the world did. A bunch of other privileged bitches joined in,Complained, took over, and shit on a system that worked pretty well. Id really rather not pay for it.
I swore in a comment. If thats againist the rules, my bad. It wont happen again.
@Jim
I sent you another comment but its stuck in moderation, so Ill clean up the language and hope this one makes it through.
I didn’t create it either. Some over privileged woman with no real problems in the world. A bunch of other over privileged women joined in, complained, took over, and screwed up a system that worked pretty well. Id rather not pay for it. I feel like people want a one size fits all approach. I dont think thats possible.
@Anna
” I have often thought that promiscuous women ruin things for others, but I would never say it out loud as it is a forbidden thought these days, freedom of choice and all.”
I say it all the time to my friends, including the promiscuous ones. They all agree. Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? Women are the gatekeepers to sex, we have this power yet so many throw it away for next to nothing. I find this very frustrating.
@Joey
Wow, I do believe this is a first. I’m so happy to see you here, and I hope all is well xoxo
@WarmWoman
I absolutely agree. I don’t get it. I think thats where the real cruelty comes in. They take the kids. They already wanted their freedom, and they got it. They already wanted to live on someone elses dime, fine you got it. But taking the kids away is salt in the wound. These women lose nothing by allowing a man to see his kids. It shows contempt. When a man does nothing to deserve that contempt, it makes me wonder about this womans character and the women who champion them on.
My karma get the ALL. Really really good.
Babydoll-I concur. IMHO, I think waiting to have sex will lead to a higher chance of securing a lasting commitment and emotional intimacy.
But, my promiscuous friend had a hard time understanding the “Why buy the cow when you get the milk for free?’ concept. She wanted others to jump on the bandwagon with her when she was having sex too soon and with various people in just a month.
I’ve never read the book (and I have no intention, thank you), but what strikes me about the excerpt Sue cited is when Gilbert says of her husband, “he was still my lighthouse and my albatross in equal measure.”
It’s a nice line (though personally I would’ve replaced lighthouse with anchor), but it says an awful lot about her that’s not so nice. Mainly, it suggests a recognition that she’s a flighty little bitch who married a man for stability, and then, since the stability no longer suits her, cut him loose.
*suited. I hate when I fuck up.
JM,
Lol you’re such a writer.
Susan,
Thanks for bringing a new perspective to the divorce issue, one that isn’t about what should happen after the divorce, but about what should happen so the divorce doesn’t occur in the first place. After that custody law debate, I can’t promise I’ll be frequenting this thread much unless it goes OT, but it’s a good post!
@Jim
Don’t know if anyone pointed this out, but, did you know that in some places parents must pay child support regardless of whether they are the biological parent? I know that is the case in Canada. Your spouse cheating is irrelevant if you acted as the parent for at least 1 year. Which means that you are also liable for child support to step children after divorce, or children of common law relationships. I have heard of parents who are liable for child support even though the biological parents is known.
Check out page 19 of this: http://lss.bc.ca/assets/pubs/livingTogetherLivingApart.pdf
Its says :
“The terms step-parent and legal parent mean the same
thing. You become a step-parent if you and the biological
parent of the child:
• are or were married, or
• lived in a common-law relationship for at least
two years,
and
• you have contributed to the support and
maintenance of your spouse’s or partner’s child
for at least one year.”
Fact is, you are that child’s “parent” and can’t just abandon them. I mean, its not the kids fault the mom was a cheater…. Plus any man that won’t financially support a child after having an relationship with a child, based on the fact they aren’t biologically related, seems really dirtbag in my opinion – no offense. Sounds more like some parent using their kid to get back at their ex for cheating.
On a personal note, my dad tried to get back at my mom in a similar way. He stopped paying child support for my sister, although not based on infidelity. And although it did “punish” my mom for divorcing him I can tell you 100% it negatively affected me and my sister way more. No child deserves to be some pawn in their parents quest for revenge. There is damage done to our relationship because of his spitefulness that will never be repaired. Why put vindictiveness before your children, biological or not….
May karma get them.*
I agree. I can’t imagine dropping out on a child with whom I formed that kind of bond. And yet… conceivably, the mother in that situation would know who the biological father was (unless she was really that big of a slut). Why not get the support from him, while still allowing the “dad” visitation?
It’s not only women – it’s really just people nowadays. Look at all the male-written travel-memoirs from guys previously stuck in cubicle farms. Existentialist funks fueled by delusions of grandeur, unfulfilled expectations, rampant narcissism, and having life too fucking easy. I guess women are even more apt to fall into this because they’ve collectively got a bigger collective ego than men do today.
Besides, when guys feel that way they don’t usually blame their spouse. Some guys I know fixed this by traveling. Others joined the military. Others never figure it out, or figure it out much later than everyone else.
Oh and Joey, I owe you a hat tip for “trifecta of doom.” One of the best phrases I’ve ever seen from another writer.
Jonny,
Lesson: A man should not marry if he or his wife both do not want children. It is advanced dating. It’s too easy to leave without children.
Hold on a minute there. Marriage isn’t about kids. If two people who have no desire to have kids are both happy, in a good place mentally/emotionally/etc., in love, compatible, etc., then I don’t see a reason why they shouldn’t marry.
But I do understand that there’s more of a risk of a divorce when there’s not the added complication of kids.
I have an aunt and uncle who are happily married (been married for years) who don’t have kids or want any. But….I have another aunt and uncle who divorced years ago (don’t know how long they were married). They didn’t have any kids either.
What a terrible sentence. I miss having an edit feature!
Word
@Charm #58
I see your point. That wasn’t a very nice thing to do. I would hope such conduct is rare.
In EG’s case, she sounds like she was mentally distraught, sleeping on the bathroom floor many nights in a row and sobbing. Her husband must have known she was unhappy, but my guess is that he believed, based on their marital commitment, that they would weather the storm. She was too selfish for that – she wanted out, after apparently having pretended to like their life for some time. Her narcissism is off the charts, IMO.
I’ll confess something here – I read this book in 2006 and while I didn’t empathize particularly with Gilbert, I didn’t judge her either – I didn’t recognize the insidious nature of her frivolous divorce, and that it would cast a long shadow like it did.
By the way, Michael Cooper is, I believe, an esteemed law professor at Georgetown and enthusiastic human rights activist. He may have made less money than she did, but he was no loser. Happily, he is remarried and has a child. He had a book deal with Hyperion to tell his side of the story, but balked when they demanded that he include racy material about their sex life.
Once, long ago, there was this thing called a “dowery”. It was the sum of money that the brides family pre-paid to the grooms family to make a marriage actually happen. No cash/gold/land transfer to the husband to be; no wedding.
Once, long ago.
Women have made it easy. As for your forbidden thought, I’ve expressed that sentiment many times here. Women have a vested interest in preventing other women from being promiscuous. At this point, slut shaming wouldn’t work, but that’s what kept women in check for hundreds of thousands of years.
After this I won’t derail this thread anymore with all the possible permutations of “abuse”.
The only divorce grounds I can think of which fall under abuse are:
1. He’s beating you or the kids. “Beating” means physical assault and battery. Spanking is not “beating”.
2. He has raped you. That means actual penetration or sexual contact which is CLEARLY against your will meaning you have told him to stop and he has not.
Loud disagreement in which he raises his voice to you is NOT abuse.
Verbal fighting is NOT abuse.
You having sex with him, giving every indication of nonverbal consent, and then changing your mind afterwards and deciding you really didn’t want to have sex with him is NOT rape and is NOT sexual abuse.
Your husband running game on you is NOT abuse.
Telling you that you cannot buy that thing you want because you cannot afford it is NOT abuse.
Putting you on a budget and insisting you stick to it is NOT abuse.
Asking you what you spent that money on is NOT abuse.
Asking you to explain a checkbook entry is NOT abuse.
@ Charm
I skipped ahead after comment 50 or so but yes paternity tests can be fast-tracked.
In Ontario (Canada) we screen for 36(or 38?) genetic diseases at birth. Some of these involve the same technique used to determine paternity.
The result is sitting infront of someone in a lab. If its non-paternity the customary response is to ignore it. And when its non-paternity its VERY obvious.
All that would be required is to add an extra tick box saying “True Paternity” or something of the like.
Note: The tests required would involve the need to also test the father but some do both parents ahead of time to screen for complications.
Its all at the gentic level.
@ Susan
Great article.
Sue,
Then it’s a laugh as well as a hint to her character that she referred to herself as the “primary breadwinner.”
@WarmWoman #69
Yes I have had a similar experience. I dropped her due to lack of shared values. I heard through a mutual friend that she is now delaying sex i.e. not sleeping with them the same night she meets them. Turns out she is now looking for a relationship. I feel loath to congratulate her though – somehow the thought of a man now settling down with her turns my stomach.
@Odds
Good advice. I’m still reeling from that statistic, and I’ve posted about it. When I tell women about it face to face, they look truly panicked. As well they should.
Unless, of course, enough of the 2/3′s that DO find a degree-bearing husband get divorced and allow the remaining third a shot at happiness.
@JQ
Great question. I think both are essential. I suspect that a lot of people marry without having done due diligence on their mates, or worse, having spotted and ignored multiple red flags. My SIL did that, because at 26 she worried she would never marry. The first time I met her husband (soon to be ex, for adultery) I knew he was bad news. She had to have known it too.
But I also think the fairy tale ideas about marriage to a soulmate, where the sex is great, the money flows in, no one ever gets sick or stressed and the kids are above average is extremely destructive. I think women are more susceptible to this via popular culture, and their weakness for romance. It sets up a very difficult dynamic where men often sense they’re not measuring up, but can’t pinpoint why. Meanwhile, she’s got a head full of ideas about Mr. Big and gentle vampires and the latest rom com.
I think parents need to take a more active role in raising daughters. They need to actively deprogram the unrealistic and narcissistic expectations that most teen girls develop by participating in our culture.
@Anna
Re the taxi theory, I’ll share with you what I’ve learned from male readers. When they don’t want a relationship, they don’t want it, and they generally don’t change their minds because someone great comes along. They have all the time in the world, and they know the sea is full of fish. Guys who get a lot of girls delay monogamy, as shown in the list in the post. Lots of beta guys see a sharp rise in their SMV during their 20s, so they may prefer to wait until they’ve got some career success under their belts and have more cards to play.
I don’t think guys go for the first attractive woman once the timing is right. They have every reason in this SMP to take their time and shop around a bit. Especially with the risks of marriage, few men will be eager to jump at the first attractive woman they meet. On the other hand, once they decide they’re ready, some woman might get lucky real fast. There is an element of timing and luck. Right place, right time.
Babydoll-
Good for you. Having such friends can be dangerous, because they will impose their values on you. This friend was an old roommate of mine.
Deti-I do agree about the examples you gave. But, I hope “verbal fighting” doesn’t include name-calling or anything that deteriorates the partner’s self-esteem. It’s normal for couples to get angry at each other and fight, but at least know how to fight. If partners engage in name-calling, I would imagine that there is remorse for it and understanding how it can impact someone.
+1
“I think parents need to take a more active role in raising daughters. They need to actively deprogram the unrealistic and narcissistic expectations that most teen girls develop by participating in our culture.”
What about parents that pressure their daughters to marry ASAP, or discourage their daughters for taking their time? If my mom had her way, I would have been married overnight to the first rich man that was nice to my parents. I’m sorry, but that is a dangerous situation in my eyes. You really have to get to know someone to feel safe enough to tie the knot.
Reading this has made me incredibly grateful for my parents’ marriage (and old-school upbringing).
They never expected life to be like a fairy-tale: There were jobs lost, miscarriages, illnesses, temporary hardship and I’m sure lots more that I was never aware of. And yet there was never a second’s doubt that they were devoted to each other and in it for the long haul.
One incident stands out in my mind: My dad had a brain tumor when I was quite young. The operation was risky and there was a very strong chance that he would end up as a vegetable. My mom had 3 young children and was a stay-at-home mom. Her spine was pure steel, though. I still remember her holding my dad’s hand and being ready to take care of him, of us and find a job, somehow, if things didn’t work out. (Thank God they did and my dad recovered!)
Thanks, Susan, for an excellent article with some great research. I’m going to call home and say Thanks first thing tomorrow.
@Munson
Kramer vs. Kramer is a favorite of mine. Best Picture in 1979. I hadn’t even thought of it, but you’re right – it’s the perfect illustration of frivolous divorce.
This came straight from feminism, make no mistake.
@Passer By
FYI, I plan to do a post on the Violence Against Women Act, and how easy it is for women to get men thrown in jail with zero proof.
@Susan, tvmunson
“This came straight from feminism, make no mistake.”
I had the exact same thought when I read about that case. And also that I felt so sad for the father when the courts went the mother’s way.
We discussed mandatory paternity in a recent thread, and it’s a pretty complicated issue. For one thing, it puts the government in your bedroom. However, I approve of the idea in theory. Yes, women will feel offended by it at first, but if it becomes customary, not something a suspicious husband requests, that will take the sting out of it. And I think it would eventually lead to fewer cuckold births.
My wife has definately been on the EPL train. She was raving about the movie shortly after moving out. The pursuit of happiness outside of marriage once you have taken the vows is the problem. Women are sold the idea that the stable, loyal, hard working guy deserves their bad treatment. Under the current system, men like me put up with it, because we don’t want the jack booted thugs knocking on the door because we raised our voice and scared them. Sadly there is an entire system designed to destroy marriage. The very things that make a woman good at wifely things are the very things that are being used to draw her away from the marriages they are in, and the machine behind it makes sure there is at the very least maintain the illusion that they will be taken care of. These things are being actively attacked by tradionalists and MRAs and others, but for now they see.
1) Female preference in child custody
2) Child support rates designed to replace alimony until the children are in some cases now, out of grad school in the worst cases.
3) They will get an eqitable split in property at the least, and usually more because they need the property for the children.
4) Are not going to be punished for anything they do to the father and his relationship with the children.
They are given a promise of immense power. What they aren’t told is the power is bequethed to them by the government. They truth is they had more power when they were married witht the influence held. They would have had even more power if they chose to be charming and loving with that husband. The saddest thing I see in my life and other mens is they were willing to do just about anything for ungrateful wives, so how much would they have given for a grateful wife.
My advice would follow what others have said. That don’t marry a woman who comes from a broken home. For that matter don’t marry a woman who’s mother treats her father poorly. Marry a woman that comes from a home like you want. My parents have been married for 40 years. They love each other very much. My father has cancer and will likely die in the next few years from it or the treatment. My mother, who is still quite beautiful hasn’ flinched in caring for him. She cries not about what she has to do, but about what she will do without him someday. Even without his physical strength and sometimes his full mental function, he is her rock. Even when she has to be a rock for him, he is her rock. This is a choice she made a long time ago, and has lived it every day. There are few women I have met of that character in the modern era, and I have no idea how to weed them out from the rest. I have demonstrated that once already. I have no plans to take that risk again. It would be too costly for my children in my opinion.
Sorry for the long post, I had a lot on my mind.
@Passer By
Exactly! I feel like women embracing her is almost worse than her selfishness. Oprah has endorsed this kind of soul searching, without regard for the feelings of her husband – he is considered collateral damage.
I believe her recent book about her second marriage bombed. In an interview she gave regarding the prenup she insisted on, she said, “It makes sense to have an exit strategy.” I give the marriage 5 years tops.
I mentioned before that the best way to “sell” mandatory paternity testing is making “parental security act” or something allong those lines with both parents making sure the baby is theirs to avoid confusion or kidnapping of the baby. If you appeal to motherly fear “imagine if someone steals your baby?” I mean is harder know a days but we still have cases so telling her that among the routine test they can have a brand DNA recognition that the baby is theirs and we need both parents to be 100% sure, it wouldn’t look as a way to assure paternity, YMMV.
Oh great article Susan!
@SW
“Another important variable is socioeconomic status. The National Marriage Project puts the divorce rate among college educated couples at only 17% during the first decade, half the rate of their less educated counterparts”
Really good summary of the state of things. However, only about half of single men say they either won’t marry or aren’t ready yet. The statistic on college educated divorce is pretty amazing (17% after 10 years of marriage) considering the fact that most divorces occur between years 2 and 7 of being married.
Yes, that line is very damning. (is that a word?)
@Jesus
Well, it’s been a really long time since you showed up as Anonymous
Oh I must add that in my case. I knew she wasn’t happy. She also wasn’t all that unhappy. Life was boring, and it was clear that I never met the mark of what she thought I should, whether it was the food I might cook, the money I made, etc. When I made a strong effort at the end to meet some of her desires/demands, I was answered with the fact she was demanding things that she thought I wouldn’t do to justify leaving. She had no intention of staying. I lived under the constant threat of do this or divorce being told to me for half my marriage. The problem was there were constant catch-22 situations where I couldn’t do all the things she wanted. The problem was our life wasn’t the fairy tale, and she married me because in her own words “I didn’t think anyone else would ask.” Women who do this to traditional men whe save themselves for marriage not because there wasn’t oportunity, but because they value the idea that sex is for marrage do an extreme disservice. Desparation is the worst reason to marry, and it is unfair to the other person. If someone does marry for these reasons they need to be prepared to love that person. There are a tremendous amount of people that have very successful loving marriages that were arranged. Surely women who have the oportunity to choose can make sure they are committed to the vows they take or to back out if they don’t believe that can make it work.
@Rum
Re the dowry, marriage has been an economic or political transaction through most of history. I think the “love match” only goes back to 17th c. Europe.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200505/marriage-history
@deti
I agree with all of your terms of what does not constitute abuse.
@Jesus
And of course, women can look to older men. It’s going to be a Ponzi scheme of sorts, and eventually it will run dry, but we won’t see the effects for a while.
@Warm Woman
Is that a cultural thing? Would your parents like to arrange your marriage? Most American parents have zero control over that.
@Jackie
Thanks for your comment! You’re a lucky woman to have had such a role model for marriage in your parents. I’m glad you’re going to tell them that. Our kids tell us that, and it’s so gratifying to hear.
@HeligKo
That is so beautiful. I hope if I am ever called to nurse my husband, I can do as good a job.
Susan,
Yes, they’ve tried to. The pros are that you know that both people want to get married, instead of dating for a year or two and wondering “Is he going to propose to me or is he too scared to take that step?” For those lamenting about how they can’t find a man to marry or commit, the arranged marriage market could be beneficial. I’ve seen white-American women put their ads on Indian marriage sites. The next question is if you will be happy to the person you are marrying. I think I’m more happier with Western style dating.
@Megaman
It really is, and it’s very relevant here because the vast majority of HUS readers are in this demographic, or are studying now. On the other hand, the percentage of EPL divorces is highest in this group, so it’s something I feel that women should be aware of, and men should screen for, as best they can, before marriage.
@HeligKo
What a bitch! Seriously, I am thoroughly disgusted. I am very, very sorry you had to endure that. It makes me ashamed for my sex.
“That’s why men need to get game.”
The solution to all life’s problems, huh? I’m skeptical that it would make everyone happy who’s looking for a lifelong commitment. Not sure how it’s going to discourage sleeping around. If anything it might have the opposite effect. It’s also putting all the onus on guys to change in order to accomodate women.
Many women who want to marry (or already are married) know what kinds of men are best cut out for it. Maybe those women having trouble need to wake up and change their priorities in a mate? Change can happen on both sides. If you don’t appreciate a guy for who he is (game or not), why marry him anyway?
“We discussed mandatory paternity in a recent thread, and it’s a pretty complicated issue. For one thing, it puts the government in your bedroom”
48 states have mandatory disease/disorder testing for newborns. I haven’t heard the libertarians complain yet.
I intend to paternity test all of my children, just out of principle. Then I’ll forward of a copy of the results to the centipede and write “You inspired me to do this.”
“The problem was our life wasn’t the fairy tale, and she married me because in her own words “I didn’t think anyone else would ask.”
This is why I don’t believe in settling- the kind of settling that Deti described (compromise is different). Women are hurting their partner when they marry just for the sake of getting married, and not because they’re ecstatically into their partner.
I’d like to second the idea of women not realizing how offensive EPL is to men. I really find it sickening when a woman mentions it. I’d compare it to my reading “the game” on the subway but i think some women might be into that.
I do think most men (including me) want to marry but requiring essentially unconditional love is a very high bar.
@Megaman
Yes, this is an inherent problem in Game.
Yes, this is my main focus. I’m encouraging change mostly on the female side, though I do support men learning about female psychology in order to relate better to women.
I firmly believe attraction triggers are malleable. Women will change when they realize they have no choice. The pendulum will swing the other way. I hope I live to see it.
@GudEnuf
I didn’t know that! Well, if we have a precedent, let’s do it! (I happen to know for a fact that feminists are dead set against it, as an invasion of female privacy.)
@SW
“On the other hand, the percentage of EPL divorces is highest in this group.”
To the woman who’s story inspired this post, thanks for nothing. I really don’t like people with poor marriage skills giving the institution a bad name. It tends to encourage questions about marriage’s usefulness. The nuclear family is what allowed human civilization to grow for thousands of years… until about 1980. That almost sounds like a Monty Python sketch.
Too bad marriage isn’t a members-only club. Because there are a lot of people I wouldn’t let in : )
I didn’t know that! Well, if we have a precedent, let’s do it! (I happen to know for a fact that feminists are dead set against it, as an invasion of female privacy.)
I read that as “female privilege”. Sound more appropriate.
I honestly don’t see how you can call yourself pro-choice if you’re in favor of forcing men to adopt babies they didn’t create.
@GudEnuf
Are you talkin’ to me? Because I’m not in favor of that at all. And I’m reluctantly pro-choice, for the record.
Hey,
Thank you for this post. While I completely disagree – I do appreciate the thoughts. Gilbert basically pisses me off.
Cheers, Kim
@Rum (comment #83)
Hi Rum,
Would you consider this a modern-day dowry: A lump sum of money purposely set aside for marriage? Because that is what I have been doing for some time; it’s an automatic withdrawal from my pay each month into a separate account.
It could be put towards a house or the wedding or something towards the marriage. Hopefully my future husband will be pleased!
@Jackie
That shows a lot of ingenuity and commitment on your part. What a great way to signal you are serious about commitment and building a life together.
Susan: Are you talkin’ to me? Because I’m not in favor of that at all. And I’m reluctantly pro-choice, for the record.
No I’m talking to Schwyzer, FigLeaf, Marcotte, and any feminist who chooses to belittle paternity fraud survivors.
@SW
“Women will change when they realize they have no choice. The pendulum will swing the other way.”
From what I’ve observed, people change over time and out of need. What else can you do when happiness continues to elude you? But with ~30% of women not having children at all, 1/3 having to settle for men less educated than themselves (wow), and probably the highest male virginity rate in history, there’s a lot of change to get used to.
I’ve a minor in history, and like the idea of a swinging pendulum. When monogamous guys interested in commitment are no longer considered boring jokes, we can share a toast : )
@ Susan (comment #113)
Wow, thanks for the response! That is really neat about your kids appreciating you as well.
The ironic thing is, all the things my folks did to prepare me for a successful marriage don’t seem to have much value in the SMP. No guy has ever said, Wow, look at the delayed-gratification and thriftiness on her!
And I’ve been dumped lots for not having sex. Oh well! I don’t need tons of guys, just one man of good character!
Thanks again and I look forward to learning more from HUS.
@Jackie #128
I think that is a great idea! I’m sure your future husband will be very pleased, lucky man
I look at my peer group and a lot of us live for today, have multiple credit cards and are very impulsive re spending. It’s very refreshing to see someone like you who is thinking and acting for the future.
@Megaman #131
I don’t know where you live but in my city in Australia, such men are definitely not seen as boring jokes. Most of the women I know are in the 20-40 age range and those who are single are on the lookout for an LTR. We like commitment-minded monogamous men.
@ Babydoll #133
Thanks, Babydoll!
I wonder if the impulsive spending is linked to how *fast* everything is available to us, esp. with the internet. Maybe that makes delayed gratification seem even slower in comparison?
One of my mentors gave me a book “Your Money or Your Life” that you might like. The author is Joe Dominguez.
@Heligko #101
I come from a broken home/broken family and Ive turned out pretty well. I agree that often people learn bad behaviors that will plague them throughout their lives, but in my case those bad behaviors had the opposite effect on me. It taught me how not to be. My parents were never married, my father never took care of me or my siblings, and yet look how Ive turned out. Id hate to be judged negatively for coming from a “broken” home.
@Ms. Babydoll
I’m across the really big pond in California, U.S.A. It’s like 9pm out here, so I’ll with you a good afternoon : )
Don’t take this the wrong way, but I remember reading that Australia was one of the more promiscuous Western countries. Or maybe that was New Zealand? I’d think that would make it difficult to find any monogamous men. Maybe it’s just in the really big cities like Sydney or Melbourne. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Let me take a second to comment on the taxi theory. (Satc is on now and i’m still kicking myself for not taking it as a sign to short the market).
I went to college expecting to meet my future wife there. After freshman year i realized that women didn’t want a guy into ltrs and i started getting into the hookup scene. I realized that no woman would take me seriouslyu until after grad school or until i was 25 so why not have fun. It’s not that men don’t want ti get marriwd until a certain tu
#134 Baby Love
Once a jolly swagman camped by a billabong
Under the shade of a coolibah tree….
(Love Banjo, fellow “Esq.”)
Need to clear up about Kramer. It was 1979 Picture of the Year and Hoffman won an Oscar; his speech was kind of off putting, saying how the other contestants didn’t actually lose. Yeah? Well why are you the one with the statue? Anyway I don’t think a divorce was granted; I think it was a physical custody determination solely, not a full on trial on the merits. And while I think Meryl’s “need to find myself damn everyone else” impulse was a feminist-style one, I don’t think feminists advocated for retention of the “tender years” doctrine by and large. DNR, but back in the (and her) day, if Gloria Steinem was talking I was listening.
Z
Sorry, phone issues: it’s not that men don’t want to get married until a certain time buat that they are looked down on if they are.
“Id hate to be judged negatively for coming from a “broken” home.”
I’m with you on that Charm. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but let’s just say some of the posters feel that people’s family backgrounds “lower their value” in the relationship/SMV world. My opinion is that who you are today matters and how much you have overcome a troublesome past and rise above it.
@Jackie #135
I agree. Instant gratification all round. I want those shoes, a new haircut and a weekend away. All this and no savings to speak of.
I will look up that book, thanks for the tip
@Cheerful #97
Read wrong; you had the right year.
@charm my comments on choosing a spouse who has had good examples in their parents stand as the best predictor. My wife was very vocal about doing things different from her parents. She was deliberate in how she treated me up until the very first day of our marriage. Things changed quickly. I never saw how her mother treated her father, because she was sick with MS. I saw how her stepmother treated him though, and it wasn’t good, so I should have reasoned what she expected a husband to be like. I willingly acknowledge that there are some that will do better than their parents, perhaps even despite their parents. My mother is one of them. Her father had a mistress her entire child hood, and wasn’t shy about it. I worry about my daughters. The chances for them to have a strong marriage in this culture with a mother who treated marriage so cheaply are very bad. It will take extreme determination and continual will to overcome the legacy they are left with coming from a divorced family. The same is true for my sons for that matter.
I think parents need to take a more active role in raising daughters. They need to actively deprogram the unrealistic and narcissistic expectations that most teen girls develop by participating in our culture.
+1000. I”m not a parent so I might just be talking out of my ass here. I think with boys there is more attention paid to “keeping them out of trouble” where that means making sure no juvenile delinquency, fighting, etc. Very outward stuff of “going bad”. I think when girls “go bad” it is different. It is less active like fist fights at school or shoplifting. It is more about engaging in the sorts of behaviors and habits that are corrosive to personality and turning someone who on outward signs is “doing OK” but is really a rotten, narcisstic, self-entitled person. That said, with the masculinization of women, you are seeing more of the outward stuff like physical fights.
@Megaman
Good evening
Yes I’ve read that Australia is way up there in the promiscuous stakes. I’ve lived here for almost a decade but not in those big cities you mentioned and I do think it’s true, but for a subset of the population only and probably for a limited time too. Eventually everyone I know who has gone through the promiscuous phase wants to settle down. We are a lot more casual here and I think that attitude spills over into our sex lived. We are also fond of the drink and not just in the big cities.
Maybe I should move to a more traditional and conservative culture?
Aint that a cue for “there´s no sparkle anymore, he´s too (…) ” beta?
No guy has ever said, Wow, look at the delayed-gratification and thriftiness on her!
These are very good traits that set you apart. They probably come into play more though in the compatibility stage of a relationship. They really don’t make you more attractive per se. In other words, they don’t boost your SMV but do boost your MMV.
“It really is, and it’s very relevant here because the vast majority of HUS readers are in this demographic, or are studying now.”
I don’t really consider 1 in 6 couples divorcing to be an amazingly low number. That’s still a massive risk (in point of fact, “risk” is not the chance of something happening, it’s the chance of the event times the cost of the event if it happens, or in probability terms, the expected value of the cost of the event.)
I was apprehensively awaiting this post and Susan has done a very good job. My advice/warning to the young women reading (hi to the Badger fan club!) is that they need to be honest with themselves about all this, that the system has been built in their favor, and be prepared to be honest with their men about why they’re not going to become another statistic. Guys are really worried about this stuff – I wouldn’t call it “fear” as much as justified, rational anxiety. You need to have an answer to these worries that’s better than the passive-aggressive “what, don’t you trust me?” Plenty of guys have “just trusted” women who wound up destroying them.
The best answers are actions, not words – so not building your social circle with flighty, perpetually single and (when you’re old enough) frivolously divorcing friends goes a long way. Taking the man’s side in third-party relationship disputes when appropriate (“I told Sally she was doing wrong by her man and should apologize”) is another good step but I suppose that’s unrealistic, and unnecessary if you follow the first tip. Showing respect and admiration for the basic maleness of your man, and visibly appreciating him for his good qualities, is not only going to insulate you against the frustrations of relationship low points, it’s going to have infinite payoff in making your man devoted to you. (Another thing: NEVER cut down your man in public, especially not in front of your family or his. If you think this makes him “too sensitive” or his ego “fragile,” get a pet instead.)
So appreciation and understanding go a long way. But if women fliply dismiss men’s worries by shaming them as “unromantic” or as fearful boys “afraid of commitment,” or by telling them it’s going to be OK because their chance of divorcing is only 2 in 10 instead of 4 in 10…
Well, that’s a huge sign that, down the road, you are going to shout and scream and invalidate his very reasonable concerns about anything when it doesn’t perfectly align with what you imagine your interests are.
Any wise man is going to be healthily skeptical of the marriage system we’ve built in America, and any woman worth marrying is going to show some empathy with his situation.
@Babydoll
“Maybe I should move to a more traditional and conservative culture?”
I don’t know if you have to go that far. And you don’t have to settle for a promiscous partner if that’s your concern. There countries with real gender imbalance problems (more men than women) like China and India. But in the West, we seem to have problems mating successfully even though there are enough men and women.
I’ve heard that Israel and France (of all places) seem to have cultures that are highly conducive to marriage and family.
1 2 3 … 8 »
{ 1 trackback }