Let's talk about cognitive dissonance ...

[colditz]

My relationship with my children's father broke up because he lied about money and hit me, and I finally, after many years of misery, refused to tolerate it. But why did I tolerate it for as long as I did when I was miserable?

I believed that children need their parents to stay together and that I would not cope alone. The facts were that children do not need one parent to be abusing the other, and that my life would have been easier without him merrily fucking it up.

The stress caused by the gap between my own personal beliefs and the reality of my situation was causing an uncomfortable feeling, often described as cognitive dissonance.

Is this the reason that people who consider themselves fair minded nevertheless perpetuate an unfair system? Intelligent women who do all the housework and childcare 'because he goes to work' must see the difference between theirs and their husband's exhaustion levels - why do they accept it, and decide that 'going out to work is really hard' when they surely must remeber the time when they went out to work and had no home responsibilities as being a darned sight easier than the life they live now?

I think it's bcause cognitive dissonance is a very uncomfortable state of being, and if you cannot change your situation, you must change your way of thinking to bring it in line with your situation or suffer the misery of inner conflict.

Which brings me to the rejection of feminism.

Why do so many women reject feminism when it would clearly improve their lot to be treated fairly?

Is it because they cannot easily become fairly treated individuals, not without huge conflict and arguments in their home and at work, so they decide, unconsciously, to believe that they are already treated fairly? And therefore feminism is defunct in their minds.

Intersting.

Venus, I think you have to try for long enough to be able to say to yourself that you really did give it a try and exhausted all the options. Otherwise you'd be forever wondering if you did the right thing. That seems to have worked for your parents.

'How can we tell what is low-level compromise and what is genuinely destructive?'

I don't know. It must be wonderful when you suddenly stop deceiving yourself (or whatever) and see a situation clearly. Then you would know what to do. But it's difficult to get enough distance from your own situation to be able to see it clearly.

Maybe it's when every other possible scenario seems so much better than the one you're in. But fear of finding something worse keeps a lot of couples together, and that is so sad.

sunny, my problem is not that I haven't met the right man, it's that marriage, as an institution, does not suit me. I had the feeling that was the case before I married and being married has confirmed it. God knows why women who don'T want kids ever get married (well apart from the Big Lie)
And I've been thinking about Footlong and his spoilt wife. Footlong thinks his wife is lucky because she can do lots of shopping and have coffees while she's doing the drudgery of child-rearing. BUt the truth is that he is lucky to have a wife and children. Men who are the real dregs of the society often don't have a wife and children, because it's a privilege that not all men get. The nonsensical idea that Footlong's wife is getting more out of their marriage than he is just beggars belief and if he continues along that line of thinking he may be in for a suprise when he hits middle age.

re. men doing the shitwork. I think they are up to it. Men in the army, priests and monks all have to do it themselves. DH does it, he's neater than me and more of a homebody at heart, whereas I've always been a sloven disorganised. BUt I have brought other important things to the marriage (apart from his children!) such as spontaneity, creativity, things that he doesn't have as much. But, when the kids have grown it's going to be more stifling than it already is, so Sunny's advice of swapping this husband for another one is not good advice at all, I don'T think. Maybe DH and I will make it, maybe not. If we don't it wouldn't be because he wasn't doing the shitwork (he does), it would be because even if a man does the shitwork, marriage is still not that good of a deal for women compared to being single.

I don't agree that marriage isn't as good a deal for women compared to being single.Some women,yes - I think you're generalising from your experience and feelings in the same way that Sunny is generalising from hers - and I am as well, I expect.
I think marriage can be a toxic institution,but for me all the "advantages" of being single which you mentioned upthread are things I didn't want then,and don't want now.For me marriage is a good deal.
I like having someone to share my life with long term(God,how twee that sounds)I know that doesn't have to be marriage,but for me it is.Like venus I've seen my Dad caring for my Mum ,gradually taking on more and more of running the house,cooking,laundry,when he'd been brought up not to do that.I'd had times when I really wondered about their relationship,but seeing that changed my take on it - I'd always thought Mum was putting more in than Dad,but the moment she needed him,he was there.That was only visible looking at the whole picture.

I think sometimes you only know the difference between low level compromise and what is genuinely destructive after the event,either when you are looking back and realise that a shitty time has passed,or when you realise that you can't carry on as you are. Which is not in the least bit helpful...

BUt is a compromise good enough considering we've all only got one life? I mean, people put so much effort into making their marriages work, keeping the spark alive etc, which is important when kids are small, but when the kids have gone, why? I mean, what's the point? Why not just throw in the towel and grab the world by the horns?

I think my feelings are coloured by having very strong female friendships, when I was single and even now... But maybe we all have to make compromises in life...I think my problem is that marriage is seen as the default way to live and we should all strive for that...when it benefits men more than women, I would say. My grandad died a few years ago. Since them my nana has gone globetrotting . She visited me in Japan the year she turned eighty. She would never have done that living with my grumpy grandad

Sakura marriage isnt for everyone and I dont think it should be. Although it isnt normal for marriages to be boring or uninteresting. Life is what you make it and you said yourself you married someone who was unexciting so that probably makes life unexciting.

My parents have been on 5 overseas holidays since January, a couple of years ago they did a 6 month round the world trip, they are always out etc. I dont think marriage just benefits one gender but if it does it is because it isnt a normal marriage. Its the same as if a friendship only benefits one friend then it is dysfunctional and not normal. I think it is a problem when women (or men) think I am married now and then it becomes boring and drudgelike. That is how people end up getting walked all over and living in shit situations.

Ah...but I turned down the exciting men on purpose. Everyone knows what happens if you marry an exciting man...marriage becomes too exciting.

IF marriage didn't benefit one gender why is it that until recently men had to bribe women to marry them? Wife rape was legal until 1991 in the UK. Adultery was punished by execution (if it was the woman doing it) in many countries. TO say that marriage wasn't created for the benefit of men is naive. Now we've come a long way since those days, thank GOd, (1991 was a long time ago!) but if marriage was originally created to control women, then why is it still regarded as the default. The single middle-aged women on this thread sound happy, genuinely sincerely happy.

"Although it isnt normal for marriages to be boring or uninteresting."

THat's factually incorrect.

"Sociologist Lawrence Kurdek, for example, looked at 500 marriages over a ten-year period in an effort to determine 'the trajectory of change in marital quality'. What he found was absolutely astonishing... to anyone who hadn't been married for ten years. Kurdek's findings have established that the quality of marriage for both spouses sinks rapidly after they say, "I do", and continues downward throughout the next four years. Finally the couple reaches a plateau of discontent. That lasts about three years. Next, they experience yet another precipitous plummet into marital misery, which starts at around the infamous seven-year mark and doesn't finish until about year ten. These second-tier declines are even steeper when children are present. From that point on, Kurdek surmises, things start to look up. Then again, how would he know? HIs study stopped after ten years . KUrbek's findings are corroborated by numerous other researchers. "

So sunny, your marriage is highly exceptional (and I believe there are exceptions). But you have to admit it's exceptional, that marriage is, on the whole, not a Good Thing.

Have to agree that the medical evidence is that marriage is better for men...

I think if your whole life is a compromise,then no,it isn't good enough.
But I do think if you can achieve a happy relationship over a life time with one person by compromising at certain times,that is OK.If that is what you want.

I also - I think!- think that working to keep the spark alive while the kids are small is different from doing that later,because having small children can overwhelm a relationship.

But if you have happy with someone for a long time,why not put some effort into keeping that relationship? My long term relationships with my friends have had ups and downs too,I think that is normal and if you want a long term relationship with someone there is going to be an element of compromise and persistance.

In what way do you think having strong female friendships affects your take on marriage?

Because, Sakura, it usually takes a long time to change the societal default (generations often, not years) and it always relies on a few people to be brave enough to be the trailblazers. It is starting to happen - many people do now reject marriage, or long term monogamous partnership - but it will be a long long time before marriage is seen as just one of many options equally available rather than the default.

I think marriage/long term monogamous relationship is about compromise, because when you are in close proximity to somebody (physically and emotionally) you can't expect things to go your way 100% of the time and have your relationship survive (although as we have noted many men do think this). But I think the tipping point comes as wukter says when it is only one person making all the compromises. So at a low level at the moment, DH is making more compromises than me by doing much more than his fair share around the house. But then I am the one who is heavily pregnant so have a good reason. And as I am the one who has compromised my career for our children, it is the least he can do at the moment, and I am wary of me making even more compromises without seeing similar from his side at some point. The compromises from each side don't have to be temporally in sync - it is more of an equilibrium I think when the balance tips one way it needs to start tipping back at some point - DH is doing his bit at the moment to tip that balance back although it is still overall heavily weighted in his favour at the moment. But I am aware of it and he is aware that in some point in the future I will expect the balance to tip more towards what suits me. If that rebalancing doesn't happen, then I think that is when you really get cognitive dissonance happening. And for different people the timescale over which they are happy for the imbalance to be there is very different than for others.

It sounds like venusandmars parents were happier with a different timescale for this than other people, and there is no right or wrong, so long as the rebalancing happens.

And if you are somebody who does not wish to compromise for another human being then you are probably better off not being in a couple long term. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Sorry - disappeared a bit mid-thread as fretting about being overdue but have been reading and trying to keep up, and now I'm 41+1 and bored out of my brain, I need decent thought-provoking conversation to keep me sane!

And I should emphasise that I am not unhappy with the equilibrium being out at the moment and it being me making the bigger compromises. Because I see willing from DH to make the smaller compromises where he can, and I take a longer term view on this than "what is my level of pure contentment on a scale of 1 to 100 today". This is because I know that on the days when my marriage is absolutely wonderful I am much happier than I ever was as a single person, so I'm willing to take slightly crappier days/periods to have those high points.

But I was lucky. I had a best friend for 5 years who I then discovered had fallen in love with me at the same time as I had fallen in love with him, so our long term relationship is built on more than just man-woman lust turning into love turning into trying to make some kind of long-term relationship work. We had the long-term relationship before we had the love and lust, so we have that companionship and sense of there being nobody we'd rather laugh with in the world as our bedrock rather than having to have build that from scratch. So I guess that is what I remain largely optimistic about my marriage and willing to make some compromises now. But I am conscious that that could change if the compromise all comes from me over a long long period of time so am trying to protect myself - and hence my relationship - from that before it happens.

well..I've had powerful female friendships.. you know the kind of friends who can make you stomach ache from laughing every time you see them. A man has never been able to do that in the same way. And yet our culture tells us that men are supposed to meet all our needs. Well, frankly, they don't.
And you do have to give up the closeness to other females because you share an abode with a hulking great man. If the man is brilliant then perhaps marriage is worth it for women. There are positives for women, such as having a shoulder to lean on, sharing life experiences with the same person you share children with...but something tells me that women give up more than men when they marry

Can't remember what it was like when we'd been married 10 years! DD was 3 - no,we were OK then.
We've had some pretty low spots since though,but on current evidence not throwing in the towel was the right decision.
(why do I feel now as if I'm jinxing my marriage??)

I think because marriage has been until recently the default many people have married for less than ideal reasons and this obviously affects how well marriage appears to work.
I'm not saying at all that everyone should do it,or that you can't be happy as a single woman - wouldn't even dream of saying that.Just that it has some plus points for some of us.

Maybe I'm an idealist, maybe the truth is that life is just one big compromise. The problem I have is how do I know

So if I'm feeling stifled in marriage, should I be grateful my marriage is okay as opposed to hell on earth, and look to the positives... or should I risk leaving because there may be an entire undiscovered world out there that I'M missing out on.

Funny that,I've been holding off posting because I think I'm too idealistic...

I don't think being grateful that your marriage is OK rather than hell on earth is quite what I was getting at.

Don't feel you have to answer - but why did you get married?

It's the 'grass is always greener' thing, isn't it? Some people think the grass is greener so break free; whereas other people say "well the grass is never greener" so stay. And we don't have the advantage of being able to live the two lives in parallel to know if we made the best choice. And to be honest, life is made up of so many little choices that rather than being able to live two lives in parallel, we'd need to live at least 500 lives in parallel to see which was the best set of choices to have made.

So I think it ends up coming back to doing something that you, and you alone, feel comfortable with and being true to yourself, rather than what society or any other person expects of you. At the moment, for example, for SGB that is being single, for you Sakura that is being married now but open to the possibility of not being later, for me that is being married and trying to stay that way because I would lose my best friend as well as just a partner and that to me is a compromise too far. But for each of us there may be something in the future that changes that view and we just need to be aware and alert to this so we can react if the circumstances change.

Good post,meg.That's how I feel too.It's a shame we can't have 500 lives to try every option and then decide what has worked best,it would eliminate that "you only have one life...no pressure,then" feeling.

it makes you wonder how any long term relationships ever get off the ground!

(to paraphrase Marvin the Paranoid Android - the first 4 years were the worst - and the second 4 years,those were the worst too - after that we just stopped counting )

Lifelong monogamy is wonderful when it works. There should be no disgrace, though, in accepting that it doesn't always. Just because Venusandmars's parents have found their way over a lifetime together to mutual support through good and bad times, does not mean that Sakura, for example, ought to stay in a relationship that doesn't give her the same things. (I realise neither of you were suggesting such a thing!)

If both partners want the same things out of life, including each other's company, it's no sweat for either partner to make relatively small compromises in pursuit of a greater end result. Just as you have to go through the nappy-changing and snot-wiping years to get your children to civilised human beings, so a marriage may need to get through a certain amount of grot to reach the point where you can both do what you both want to do, either together, because you like being together, or separately because a bit of space works for you both.

Say that one partner loves globe-trotting and the other doesn't. They have a few choices: (a) the globetrotter stays at home frustrated (b) the homebody accompanies their spouse to places they don't want to be (c) one goes globetrotting while the other keeps the home fires burning (d) they split up and do their thing alone (e) they split up and each finds another partner who prefers the same lifestyle they do. Sure, life isn't straightforward, but adults should surely be able to negotiate which options suit them and what's practical within their means. On the other hand, when those choices are denied to one partner, where the other rides rough-shod over their wishes, especially when the system allows and even encourages them to, well, that's what feminism is all about, innit?

Now we're in a position (in this country - let's not forget it's different in other parts of the world, sometimes for the better but more often for the worse) where the law no longer lays down that a male partner gets to call all the shots. But we are still in the depressing mindset that tells us maybe he should, and we should be comfortable when he does because it's "natural" and "traditional" and all sorts of pointless concepts. Here's where we get to either stand up and say "Oi! This is not fair and it's not right, renegotiate or hop it", or to squash down our reservations and keep carrying the burden.

Er, think I lost my point somewhere in the middle there...

I got married so I could have a family. I did love my husband, but I would just have co-habited if I hadn't wanted children. I think there is something psychological in the marriage certificate that forces people to stick at it a bit more...and I think children benefit from having 2 parents who are will cooperate (as long as there's no abuse). I also think maybe I married so that my parents would regard me as an adult. IT worked. Perhaps that's another feminist issue.

Annie, there was a lot of sense in your third paragraph. It would be nice if my husband and I could go down that route. I disagree with sunny's other point that you can be married and have sex with other people. For me that's not a marriage, that's just denial, or using. Time to know when to call it a day, sometimes, integrity intact. I reckon open marriages cause a lot of pain in reality

I mean I am open to the idea of sex with others whilst married like swinging. I havent done it but know people who have and dont see anything wrong with it. I dont think it causes pain either if you are both in agreement just different things that people like that works for them really.

I think as well if one of you ones to do it then go do it as well when its comes to different interests. Just because you are married or in a long term relationship doesnt mean your interests have to change from when you were single. Thats something I find really frustrating in RL when people do that and I have no idea why they do it.

There are certainly lots of happy couples who are swingers, or have been swingers, or have had spells of mutually-agreed non-monogamy in their relationships. It doesn't work for everyone, but I think the reason it works so well when it does work is that the people doing it have spent time thinking and talking through their options.
A lot of marriages go wrong (not hideously wrong ie abuse or addiction) but just don't work out, because one or both partners kind of sleepwalked into the marriage- 'Everyone's gotta settle down at some point/I want children/Everyone else is getting married/S/he really loves me and is desperate to marry me/S/he will do' The younger you are when you start this sort of marriage, the greater the odds of it going wrong simply because you change over the years, most people under 25 or so haven't really worked out who they are or what they want. And, particularly in the case of women, early marriage stops this happening, because they become their husband's wife and everything's all about the man and The Relationship.