Per Ms. Melinda French, she was uncomfortable with Mr. Gates' meeting with Jeffrey Epstein. Mr. Gates, Mr. Bezos, Mr.Facebook, and the rest of the world's richest men are not very moral people. These men are just a figment of capitalism. Do you really think Elon Musk cares about Poverty, Climate change. They all don't and they use women like parasites.
> What can we learn? Undoubtedly, we need better marriages.
Having recently gone through a divorce I didn't want, and subsequently spending a lot of time in therapy learning many skills I didn't know I even needed, I find myself surprised nearly every day by how incredibly unprepared I was for that relationship.
I've learned more in the last six months about attachment, communication, and emotional management than I learned in my entire life before that.
Furthermore, none of the people in my social circle seem to have received any of this kind of instruction before, either. Nearly all are middle-upper to upper class with stable backgrounds. So, I don't know who's getting any of this kind of info from their parents or peers or any non-professional setting.
Learning all of this earlier in life might not have changed my particular outcome, but it sure would have made the intervening time better.
I'd say start by researching attachment theory^1 and attachment styles.
Here's the gist: Children need to form secure attachment bonds to their parents/caregivers at an early age. To the extent they don't get that, they form habits, assumptions, and adaptations to compensate. Those habits/assumptions/adaptations tend to persist (because we don't even realize we're doing them) and cause problems in close relationships in the future. By learning more about yourself you can start to see those patterns in your own behavior and learn to change them.
Beyond that I've found many of the emotional regulation exercises that are a part of CBT to be very helpful.
I've also found Enneagram to be very helpful in studying myself. It's not a particularly scientific framework, but it can be a helpful lens for identifying patterns of behavior, and realizing that other people are very different, with different assumptions, thoughts, and feelings, all of which are perfectly valid.
Articles like this, that mostly ask questions about (or otherwise explore) what about divorce is ineffective or inefficient or unjust always cause me to feel a bit disappointed that they don’t acknowledge another glaringly obvious question: why get married in the first place?
This is not the same question as “why become involved in a committed relationship in the first place”; the two concepts are not mutually exclusive.
The older I get, the more I see (with the advantage of hindsight) those close to me jump into marriage essentially unprepared for all its ramifications. In many cases they would have faired much better by simply committing to their partner without getting married, as it is wholly possible to live a full, complete, (be)loved life with another person without a legal certificate.
For most people, marriage doesn't have many ramifications (unless one party has significant assets or something). Having children is the part with ramifications.
> as it is wholly possible to live a full, complete, (be)loved life with another person without a legal certificate.
It is possible, but it comes with a lot of complications, as has been thoroughly documented (for instance) by the gay rights movement in the years prior to legal same sex marriage (and before mostly-marriage-equivalent civil unions.)
"Children of divorced parents are on average unhappier, more anxious, and more likely to be depressed. They’re also less likely to graduate from high school and college, typically make less money, and are more likely to ultimately get divorced themselves. But: The same is true of children whose parents stayed in a high-conflict marriage. Relationships that breed severe conflict can be as hard on children as breakups. Chaos is the culprit, not legal status."
The term “high-conflict marriage” is subjective. If one wanted to make the stats for the two sets of kids equivalent, it’s trivial to do so by tweaking the definition of “high-conflict.”
It’s also meaningless without some data regarding the number of “high-conflict marriages.” To illustrate the absurdity, assume there is exactly 1 such marriage in the US; it would be silly to say, “the millions of kids of divorce are no better or worse than Mr. and Mrs. Jones two children!”
The author’s mention of this ‘statistical’ argument, in light of its vapidity, says more about the author than the topic.
I'll also add that poverty rate for female-householder families (usually divorce or no marriage) is more than more than twice as high as the national average.
Divorce is grueling.
> The official poverty rate declined 0.5 percentage points from 12.3% to 11.8% in 2018, the U.S. Census Bureau reported today... Poverty rates for all people in all female-householder families dropped by 1.7 percentage points, to 26.8%, the lowest rate for this group on record.
Is marriage and divorce just a preference? Like: I shouldn't have bought the blue car, I'll sell it and save up for the red car?
That's what this post feels like. Where is the education and personal growth? Where is the judgemental advice that we don't want to hear (and is probably politically incorrect), but we really should hear anyway? Where is the religion and values?
This was the most sterile article about marriage I've ever read.
You get married because you reached a level in your relationship which makes marriage the logical next step.
I'm not sure what you mean with 'political incorrect'. What advice would you reference which is probably political incorrect?
And religion would be interesting indeed. Like arranged religious marriages. Peer pressure or just an easier but dependent life? Just follow your leaders they will tell you what is right?
The article does make a short note on that thought. For whatever ret in our society it was more important to have stable relationships the potentially the well being of people.
It's probably a quite young achievement of our time that marriage is no longer the answer but we as people and our well being is recognized and not just the reason to have successors.
>> Where is the judgemental advice that we don't want to hear (and is probably politically incorrect), but we really should hear anyway?
> I'm not sure what you mean with 'political incorrect'. What advice would you reference which is probably political incorrect?
Not the OP, but working backward from "politically incorrect," an example may be advice that assumes or advocates for aspects of traditional general roles. Such advice could be both politically incorrect yet valid and useful for a large majority of couples.
Only child of divorced parents here, who both remarried and fought endlessly with their new spouses. I will be married 40 years this August. I was just lucky enough to marry a person who turned out to be my best and closest friend in life. My goal in life was always to "not be my parents". At the age of 62 I'm about ready to say "I did it".
It is not impossible, regardless of your experiences as a child. It really helps to be self-aware enough, even at an early age, to realize parents are doing it wrong and instead of emulating them (as children so often do) instead realize a toxic approach to relationships when you see it and make a mental note to "don't do that". It worked for me.
18 comments
[ 3.9 ms ] story [ 43.9 ms ] threadHaving recently gone through a divorce I didn't want, and subsequently spending a lot of time in therapy learning many skills I didn't know I even needed, I find myself surprised nearly every day by how incredibly unprepared I was for that relationship.
I've learned more in the last six months about attachment, communication, and emotional management than I learned in my entire life before that.
Furthermore, none of the people in my social circle seem to have received any of this kind of instruction before, either. Nearly all are middle-upper to upper class with stable backgrounds. So, I don't know who's getting any of this kind of info from their parents or peers or any non-professional setting.
Learning all of this earlier in life might not have changed my particular outcome, but it sure would have made the intervening time better.
[Edited for spelling]
Here's the gist: Children need to form secure attachment bonds to their parents/caregivers at an early age. To the extent they don't get that, they form habits, assumptions, and adaptations to compensate. Those habits/assumptions/adaptations tend to persist (because we don't even realize we're doing them) and cause problems in close relationships in the future. By learning more about yourself you can start to see those patterns in your own behavior and learn to change them.
Beyond that I've found many of the emotional regulation exercises that are a part of CBT to be very helpful.
I've also found Enneagram to be very helpful in studying myself. It's not a particularly scientific framework, but it can be a helpful lens for identifying patterns of behavior, and realizing that other people are very different, with different assumptions, thoughts, and feelings, all of which are perfectly valid.
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attachment_theory
This is not the same question as “why become involved in a committed relationship in the first place”; the two concepts are not mutually exclusive.
The older I get, the more I see (with the advantage of hindsight) those close to me jump into marriage essentially unprepared for all its ramifications. In many cases they would have faired much better by simply committing to their partner without getting married, as it is wholly possible to live a full, complete, (be)loved life with another person without a legal certificate.
It is possible, but it comes with a lot of complications, as has been thoroughly documented (for instance) by the gay rights movement in the years prior to legal same sex marriage (and before mostly-marriage-equivalent civil unions.)
I liked my wedding, i invited my whole family and made sure they had a great time.
A friend divorced a few years back it was not a big deal to talk about it and the why.
Of course it can be messy but it probably depends on the people who married.
For me it was emotional and a mental step. Does a couple miss out on a potential relevant emotional experience?
"Children of divorced parents are on average unhappier, more anxious, and more likely to be depressed. They’re also less likely to graduate from high school and college, typically make less money, and are more likely to ultimately get divorced themselves. But: The same is true of children whose parents stayed in a high-conflict marriage. Relationships that breed severe conflict can be as hard on children as breakups. Chaos is the culprit, not legal status."
The term “high-conflict marriage” is subjective. If one wanted to make the stats for the two sets of kids equivalent, it’s trivial to do so by tweaking the definition of “high-conflict.”
It’s also meaningless without some data regarding the number of “high-conflict marriages.” To illustrate the absurdity, assume there is exactly 1 such marriage in the US; it would be silly to say, “the millions of kids of divorce are no better or worse than Mr. and Mrs. Jones two children!”
The author’s mention of this ‘statistical’ argument, in light of its vapidity, says more about the author than the topic.
Divorce is grueling.
> The official poverty rate declined 0.5 percentage points from 12.3% to 11.8% in 2018, the U.S. Census Bureau reported today... Poverty rates for all people in all female-householder families dropped by 1.7 percentage points, to 26.8%, the lowest rate for this group on record.
https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/09/poverty-rate-...
The study supporting the statement is linked and is based on longitudinal survey data. http://grammar.ucsd.edu/courses/hdp1/Readings/Amato-Sobolews...
That's what this post feels like. Where is the education and personal growth? Where is the judgemental advice that we don't want to hear (and is probably politically incorrect), but we really should hear anyway? Where is the religion and values?
This was the most sterile article about marriage I've ever read.
You get married because you reached a level in your relationship which makes marriage the logical next step.
I'm not sure what you mean with 'political incorrect'. What advice would you reference which is probably political incorrect?
And religion would be interesting indeed. Like arranged religious marriages. Peer pressure or just an easier but dependent life? Just follow your leaders they will tell you what is right?
The article does make a short note on that thought. For whatever ret in our society it was more important to have stable relationships the potentially the well being of people.
It's probably a quite young achievement of our time that marriage is no longer the answer but we as people and our well being is recognized and not just the reason to have successors.
> I'm not sure what you mean with 'political incorrect'. What advice would you reference which is probably political incorrect?
Not the OP, but working backward from "politically incorrect," an example may be advice that assumes or advocates for aspects of traditional general roles. Such advice could be both politically incorrect yet valid and useful for a large majority of couples.
It is not impossible, regardless of your experiences as a child. It really helps to be self-aware enough, even at an early age, to realize parents are doing it wrong and instead of emulating them (as children so often do) instead realize a toxic approach to relationships when you see it and make a mental note to "don't do that". It worked for me.