Marriage: is it being mis-sold?

[OrmIrian]

There have been a few threads recently about infidelity and being the OW. And I have seen the sentiment uttered many times that it's better to end one relationship, before starting a new one. In principle I totally agree.

But that makes the assumption, doesn't it, that there has to be something wrong with a marriage for infidelity to happen. It seems to me that these days, marriage is sold as a romantic ideal, between two people that will remain 'in love' forever, have amazing frequent sex, always want to be together as much as possible, always laugh at each others's jokes and never fart in each other's company . Whereas actually marriage is not really romantic long-term. It's a contract to make two people stick together through all the crap that life throws at us, to bring up children in stability and make a stable economic unit. The in-love thing is great but not essential and probably won't last. Gilt on the gingerbread. If the divorce rates keep on rising, is the problem with marriage, or with our expectations of it?

If that is the case, surely there doesn't have to be anything fundamentally wrong with a marriage, for the prospect of sex with someone else to be an attractive prospect. It doesn't mean that the marriage is on the rocks, it just means that the passion has faded somewhat (as in most cases it does).

Not stating my opinion, just thinking out loud really. Do we mis-sell marriage. Or is monogamy an impossible modern ideal?

Affection isn't the same thing as passion or lust though.

anniemac - I completely agree.

Mutual affection gives an awful lot of strength, IMO.

I haven't read the whole thread. I think that marriage has to be looked at in the context of modern culture. The media is selling us a dream based on individualism and consumption. You only have one life, you should have it all and you're a failure if your don't. It's all about the pursuit of pleasure and very little about old-fashioned morality and real happiness and contentment.

Marriage should be presented with a note about the fact that sometimes sacrifice and compromise is required in the pursuit of something better. The satisfaction, security and contentment that can be achieved if and when you've ridden out the waves and weathered the storms. It's about deferred, not instant, gratification. It's about responsibility and commitment.

Society is less structured than it used to be. There is much more opportunity to have affairs. Life is fast and short and stressful, especially when you pursue material goods and consumer 'experiences' above anything else and need to work to pay for them. Many people don't believe in anything after death. We are under pressure to grab what we want and be a 'winner', or 'miss out'. We feel that if we don't have everything we want, we are a failure.

I sound judgmental but I'm just the same as everyone else. It's hard to keep things in perspective sometimes.

Well put, Sky. I totally agree.

Nicely put sky as usual - you said what I wanted to - only 100x much better expressed.

sky - i agree with what you say too.
We are no longer taught that it is ok ot sacrifice things for the longer gain.

When having children we tend to understand that a bit more, we also tend to get the chance to really think about what we want from now on.

I think it is hard today to promote marriage with the 'quick fix' society and you can have it all attitude we send out.

I totally agree sky. But the question remains, if society is the way you dsecribe, is marriage in the traditional sense still valid. Is it going to become a niche activity, a bit quaint and old-fashioned.

OI - in all highly-developed economies, divorce is becoming easier and marriage less common. Serial monogamy is becoming an accepted norm.

So maybe marriage in the "till death do us part" sense is becoming a niche activity. People still seem to want to live in a couple/family, though.

Hmm, but if life is, in some ways, getting harder, isn't it the case that we need marriage, the security of it, even more than ever?

I have read the whole thread now and I agree with a lot of what has been said. I do think that the lack of community, many of us living away from our extended families, does add strain and makes it harder to sustain a marriage and prevent family breakdown. Ditto for other stresses of modern life but there have always been difficulties to life, just different ones.

I'm not sure that I am qualified to pronounce on all of this as I am a single parent. I have to add that both people need to be committed to the relationship / marriage, not just one. And it helps (a lot!) if you choose wisely in the first place (I think other people have made this point). I agree that getting married when you are in the first lush of a romance is not a good idea. It does take time to know someone and other areas of compatibility can be more important than sex. Of course, there has to be that spark but a similar sense of humour or a similar background is probably more important in the long term.

I can remember when I was young and I thought that it was a bit crazy to get married in your early twenties when there was so much more of life to be experienced. I'm not so sure now. It is easy to waste time on a series of romances with Mr Right-Now, that break-up once the excitement is over. The more relationships you have like this, the more jaded you become.

I just don't think we should be sold the idea that, if it is 'right', everything will fall magically into place. That compatibility is a 'suck it and see' thing. It encourages us to keep 'trying' different people rather than looking at ourselves, working out who we are and what we want and what sort of person we will fit well with. What we can improve about ourselves that will help us to make strong relationships.

We hear this argument that people used to have shorter lives and so marriage for life really only meant 15 years or whatever. That, therefore, marriage is outdated because we change over time and may need a different relationship for different times in our life. I think there is something to this but it doesn't nullify the concept of marriage. There is still something to be said for working at it and adapting and renewing the love.

First 'flush', not first 'lush' ('Gavin and Stacey' on the brain!)

LOL at first lush

I've been with my DH forever. We have lived together for 21 years, the last 15 married. I think we did everything right in the sense that we definitely didn't get married 'in the first lush', we were good friends as well as everything else, we share many values etc etc. I can't imagine ever being without him, but sometimes that thought doesn't being me joy, but a sinking feeling. And I am the most head-screwed-on non-romantic you could ever meet. In my case marriage is doing it's job - I'm not going anywhere, regardless of how unsettled I feel. I just wonder if my expectations are being influenced by society as it is now, or whether it's normal to feel this way 20years in.

What about the fact that all women hate all men sometimes and vice versa of course? I'm going through a stage with my H where I feel divorce would be easier than the sacrifices I have to make. Men sometimes make very poor lovers, and cannot provide the protection women grave. In that sort of a situation it is only human to grave comfort, somebody to lean on and take a bit of the pain away, no?

"I have to add that both people need to be committed to the relationship / marriage, not just one."

That is very true.

But I think that great material wealth and women's economic (and psychological) independence has weakened the material/economic commitments of marriage, leaving only the romantic/psychological ones.

Salla all women do not hate all men sometimes, what a strange opinion to have. I've never hated all men, I've never hated any man in fact .

I haven't read the whole thread, but I don't agree with the OP. In fact in some ways I think the opposite. I believe that most of us settle for something like the kind of marriage you describe, when we all can have the ideal.

For years I thought relationships were as described, all romantic in the beginning and then settling into companionhip, but I now know I was wrong. I have been married twice, the first time was ok, it was just as you describe and I wouldn't have ended it. Luckily for me my ex realised that there was more to life and decided to finish the marriage.

I have now been with my dh for 10 years and every week/month/year we get better and better. That includes our sex life. We are very much in love, still romantic he is my best friend and vica versa.

Of course we have times when we get on each others nerves, but the day we settle into just companionship will be the end.

I think the notion that marriage is something that everyone should strive for is wrong... some people are not suited to it, certainly the traditional ideal of marriage being a for life, monogamous relationship.

i think that sometimes people fixate on the wedding day and not the married life.

i remember a girl i used to work with years ago, getting married at the age of 19 or 20, and saying if it didn;t work out, she was young enough to make a go of it with someone else... hardly the best start , although perhaps a more realistic one?

maybe if there were the same legal safeguards given to long term co habiting partners as to married couples, it would make a difference

monogamy, is not impossible, IMO and IME, but if you have a low boredom threshold, are easily swayed and someone for whom the grass is always greener, then it is easy to see how affairs come to be.

people seem more likely to start a relationship or fling with someone else, than to work on their marriage

have been with DH for 11 years, married for almost 10, have had some hard times, lots of good times, 2 DCs, don;t have that same giddy, heady love/lust thing that happened when we first me, but still love him and am in love with him, and no matter how much we argue, i know i want to grow old with him.

i think sometimes the banality of married life and parenting, once the excitement of the wedding has been and gone can be a shock

marriage itself is not some magic insulation against real life, you still have to put the effort in and make it work.

That's wonderful scanner I know that marriages like yours do exist. But I think they are few and far between in the very long-term. I would find it hard, in my position, to justify ending this in order to search for the 'right' one. I also have to say that when we had been together for 10 years I did feel as you did. But so many things have happened to us over the last decade or so, that although our bond has strengthened, the nature of the relationship has changed fundamentally.

OMDB, yes I wrote it from a female point of view because I am a woman and didn't do the politically correct thing of stating it can be seen from a man's point of view, too. Sorry about the lapse, I agree it doesn't have to be the man only that plays away but I referred to the Asian world where IME the man usually is the breadwinner and controls the family set up and purse strings as he's financially in control. These are hundreds of years old traditions. But no, it doesn't need to stop there, women might seek to love more than one person but the position of a mistress, concubine, harem girl or maitresse de titre is a FEMALE position. It makes sense to have a couple of women at hand, also in muslim marriages where the idea of 4 wives was built up to secure (male) offspring. This set up is referred to as polygyny. A man can inseminate as many women as he chooses to whereas a woman is physically limited (9months, looks after baby, etc etc.) The reverse, polyandry, is prohibited in most cultures as men want to make sure the offspring thei feed and pay for is their own.

Look at how quickly everyone descended on Tilda Swinton (actress, Oscar) when it was revealed, that she lived with her husband and another, younger man and all were happy. Somehow even nowadays the described values are still instilled in us to some extent.

A man is a stud, a woman is a slut scenario.

(Not my opinion but thought I'd state it.)

As for arranged marriages, yes in our times the young man and woman are introduced and go on a few (monitored) dates to see if they might like each other. If they do, the family heads agree a dowry and the engagement is announced followed by the wedding a few months later.

In my Dad's time, 50's, early 60's his youngest sister fell in love with a young German doctor, she was learning German and studying to become a nurse in Germany. As word reached her family in London she was immediately sommuned back to the UK and checked by a doctor (to see if she was intact) and then betrothed to a young doctor in the UK, 12 years her senior and not quite so handsome a chap as the young German. She did marry him, he dotes on her, she lives in the US now, plush wealthy life and a great companion for a husband. She said it was the best thing that ever happened to her but it took her over a year for love to develop. In her words she said she wanted to be loved and respected and not to be lusted after and then discarded for a younger model. It worked out well for her.

In Chinese and Japanese culture there are still betrothals in place to strengthen family ties and 'up' your status. I see nothing wrong with it as long as there's mutual trust and respect. Love can be learned and even after years of lust and passion what stays is a warm fuzzy comfortable feeling, so both ways, the romantic one and the arranged marriage do level at some point.

It's just the expectations you go in with, which make a difference.

OrmIran, I could have had an arranged marriage had I wished for it. I was already being eyed up by my aunt mentioning to my dad I was going to end up on a shelf (I was 26 then...ahem). Ultimately, I'm very western and a bi unruly so I think I wouldn't have made an obedient wife..hehe. Seriously, I didn't want to marry in an arranged way because it would have tied me into a community I'm too western and ouvert for, I speak my mind and am not happy being measured by my housework skills or cooking abilities. And whoever says you can still study and contribute to your marriage wealth...I know it doesn't work long term. Once the baby is there you are being pressured into staying at home, unless you didn't marry well in the family's eyes and are financially pressed. I didn't want to live in a fold of family pressure and am very happy with my English darling partner.