Why are Americans so hell bent on saving their marriages?

January 27, 2008

It gets kinda lonely in here sometimes.:D

It does indeed! As the French would say, "Vive la difference!":bunny:

January 27, 2008

With the divorce rate being as high as it is in the US, why do people in America always insist on "working on the marriage, get counseling, stay away from affairs" and on and on and on... It has become somewhat of a cliche on these boards.

Again, why this fervent persistence on upholding the institution of marriage at whatever cost? At times with devastating results, no less.

I just don't get it. Some things are just better not being saved.

Why not just tell someone who is absolutely miserably stuck in a marriage to dissolve the marriage and seek happiness elsewhere?

Life is too short to waste. I just don't get this trend. Honestly, I'd like to know.

I agree 100%.

Is another stupidity of people.

People are raised duty bound, and they feel that they cannot change their minds no matter what.

They are hammered with that since they are born. Like robots.

They just think that they are doing "the right thing."

January 27, 2008

The number one factor to consider!

But, let's be honest now!!! Just because a marriage is still valid on paper does not necessarily mean that parental responsibilty is being undertaken!

I totally agree but why aren't parents legally being required to share equal responsibility in the raising of their offspring?

January 27, 2008

Lovelybird,

I understand what you are saying but how "thick and thin" can "thick and thin" be?

People change. Life and the years change them. We are not at 50 who we were at 25, let's say.

For the sake of argument, let's say that the man/woman you married at 25 was kind and generous and loving and yes you shared the same values.

But at 30 years down the road, this man/woman has turned into a stranger who has no resemblance at all to the person you married. He/she, to cite an example, has become abusive on all levels.

Or, not to go such extremities, you not only cease to have feelings of love for that person but you actually despise him/her! This, right or wrong, is the way you feel.

What do you do?

Stick it out because you married 25 years ago?

Do you decide to live a wasted life of misery because this is what is expected of you?

so problem here wouldn't be "why people stick with their marriage", it is a good and noble thing to work through thick and thin, the problem for me would be "how can find a person who willing to work through thick and thin".

Yes, people change, you are right. we all learning. I only hope to find that person who suppose to have same belief as me, so we can pray together each day, and ask God reveal to us through Holy Spirit where we should improve about ourselves. many successful couples did so, if we put God in our centre of relationship, God will hold it strong

think about those resentment for their spouse expressed here, if each day they pray to God, and release those resentment, and rivive their love for each other each day, and check on self rather than another and improve self, what an amazing thing can it be!

Past is past, what you can do about past? Now your goal is to find one who are humble enough to realize he could make mistakes and so willing to improve himself for your relationship:), not someone who don't take responsibilities and only seek chemical romantice, such a man is not trustworthy

January 27, 2008

but there are also instances where the one person (or both) in the couple is just too damned lazy to think past "me" and be willing to work on "us." And this is far more common in my opinion than abuse or true incompatibility.

I agree! But the question is: can you force a person to be willing to think past himself when he is not willing to think past himself? No, I think not! It is an oxymoron! One concept cancels out the other!

Either one is willing or one is not. Period. Coercing willingness is a contradiction in terms.

Am I making any sense?

January 27, 2008

Also,

Most people are afraid of changes.

And will do most anything to keep things as they are, familiar.

Not to face their fears.

January 27, 2008

They are hammered with that since they are born. Like robots.

Collective identity!

You stand out, Ariadne!

January 27, 2008

Why not just dissolve the institution of marriage

Given the statistics on divorce, it is dissolving itself. We have little say in the matter.

Nature's revenge, perhaps.

January 27, 2008

As for infidelity, why would anyone be in any committed relationship, if they can't keep to exclusivity. We all make choices in life. Either go the mile or walk away. Thinking with your crotch isn't the most intelligent way to lead your life.

TBF, with all due respect, not all people think with their crotches or c****. Some feelings originate from the heart with or without a marriage certificate.

I requoted myself, because the entire quote states my views on infidelity. I don't see why people who don't believe in fidelity, get involved in committed relationships, unless they've arranged some form of open relationship. When I say open relationship, it's with conscious and voluntary consent v. lying by omission or pressured consent.

Why must people have their cake and eat it too? Infidelity is like emotional rape.

Given the statistics on divorce, it is dissolving itself. We have little say in the matter.

Nature's revenge, perhaps.

I am one of the statistics and yet, I still strongly believe in the institution of marriage. I hope it never goes away but not for personal security but because it's a beautiful thing when two people want to commit to each other for life. Whether it happens or not that it remains for life is up to the individuals and how much they honour and value those vows to each other, whether the words are spoken before God or spoken before a legal authority.

January 27, 2008

Why do you ask specifically about Americans? Is the attitude different elsewhere?

It is very different in my country too, and in other countries I have stayed. Much more like Europe. I think some Asian countries may be like America though, they are more conservative in many ways and religion is often more of an issue there than in much of Europe, Africa, Australasia etc.

Here certainly divorce is quick, it's strictly no fault (all based on "irreconcilable differences") and the State has no investment in forcing people to stay together against their will so makes it "easy" for them to part. Yes there are MCs and some are specifically linked to religious groups but the others are as focused on a civilised split as they would be on a civilised staying together. It's all about finding out what the individuals in the M want, and the best way to achieve the best compromise for all involved.

The "save the marriage" brigade here tend to be people beyond retirement age. Younger people who are generally still economically active refuse to settle for misery and there is no stigma attached to divorce (as there may have been in their grandparents' day) so they take that option. Maybe it has to do with our history - taming a wild country, there's no room for parasites not pulling their weight - or the wide mix of options so many cultures and traditions offer us?

January 27, 2008

I requoted myself, because the entire quote states my views on infidelity.

But I am not talking about ONLY infidelity as a cause for splitting up. There are numerous reasons why two people may not want to living together any longer such as incompatablity or lack of feeling just two mention two of the most common.

And even if there is infidelity, all the more reason to want to end the marriage. Nobody goes into a marriage thinking "one day, I am going to to have on a affair on my wife/husband." Given the fact that time changes people, this is just likely to happen, that's all. It's a fact of life is all. Anyone with a mature and realistic approach to marriage can undrstand that.

In my country, the divorce rate is not as high as it is in the US. Still, if one does choose to go down that road, it is very simple. Divorces are no -fault like OW said and are just legally decreed as "due to irreconcilable differences."

Again like no OW said, most young people today do not stubbornly persist to stay together because of religious reasons or because of any kind of stigma on divorce because no such thing exists. If they have "irreconcilable differences", they get out early on instead of wasting away years of their lives trying to reconcile the impossible.

To me, this is a good thing. I am glad they do not feel any pressure to be together when they simply do not want to be.

I feel sorry for people in the past (say my parents/ grandparents) who were miserably stuck together for a lifetime simply because society or religion looked down upon divorce.

I much prefer things to be the way they are now.

Edited January 27, 2008 by marlena

January 27, 2008

I guess that what I am trying to say is that I would like to see more posters suporting someone who knows he wants out rather than flagellating him/her for wanting out. I just don't understand this "save the marriage" brigade as OW so accurately put it.

January 27, 2008

The institution of marriage and the ideals that go with it is something I struggle with. People can say we are becoming more of a ME society and the divorce rate is high because people are more selfish; there is some merit to that statement.

My grandparents are still together. 60 years. Some people see that as a sign of hope and a representation of ideals that seem to be disappearing.

But due to my grandfather's deterioration with Alzheimers, I am learning things about their relationship that were hidden from me my whole life. He used to beat my grandmother and all four of their kids. I knew he was capable of being a real ba**ard, but I never saw this in him. He doted on me. My view of what my grandparents marriage and what it's longevity represented has been tarnished. My grandmother is very religious and stayed because "God hates divorce". She took vows and that is that. How is this something to aspire to?

I use to feel somewhat guilty for not staying with my alcoholic ex husband. Key words being USE TO. I find it funny that to my grandfather, anyone who drinks is worthless. He doesn't even have alcohol to excuse his violent behavior.

It just makes me wonder how many of those marriages that stood the test of time were comprised of one tyrant and one victim who kept their mouth shut and took it.

January 27, 2008

It just makes me wonder how many of those marriages that stood the test of time were comprised of one tyrant and one victim who kept their mouth shut and took it.

Sally, the answer is MANY I am sure. I herald the beginning of a new era where women/men do not believe in taking vows and keeping them no matter how wretchedly unhappy they become in their marraiges. People should remain together for as long as they are BOTH content with being with one another. And, yes, thank goodness, more and more people, both men and women alike, are refusing to keep their mouths shut and just "grin and bear it."

January 27, 2008

My husband and I have been together over 25 years. We split up a couple of times and we went to counseling to save the relationship. Why? Because of our Individual need to know ourselves and our own ideas of the type of people we want to be. Neither of us wants/wanted to be one of those people who fly from relationship to relationship with periods of being alone and have no anchor in our lives. Not because of some misguided idea that a vow had to be upheld. We knew during the hard times that it was possible to divorce, but our own inner beings didn't want to be that way.

Plus we each loved the other person too. Their happiness plays a big part in our own happiness. I didn't want to be someone who would sacrifice another person just for selfish reasons. I couldn't be happy with myself if I were someone like that. That's where the vows came into play. Part of that vow was like an oath to myself to not be a selfish person.

The only personal experience I can think of to use as a comparison is when we bought our house. I worked with a woman, in her 40's, who was always bragging on the things she had. Her house and her car and how her parents were always there to give her the downpayment or co-sign for something. How she had 20 different credit cards and that she and her husband worked hard to pay for them, but that she always had her daddy to fall back if times were tought. We had no one to loan us money for those things. When we were saving for our house we were asked by the realtors if our parents could help us with the downpayment. We didn't - we did it all ourselves. There is nothing wrong with getting financial help from your parents - I wish we had that too; but we were and still are, proud of ourselves for doing it by ourselves. It was the other woman's attitude about how she got everything that was so sad to us. Her commitment wasn't to herself as much as it was to getting something knowing she had a fall-back. We made the commitment to ourselves and to each other and we did it. That accomplishment carries into our own attitude about saving and building our marriage. We are proud of what we have accomplished and what we continue to accomplish. It's a personal and individual commitment.

Had the marriage ended I might have gone on to find other happiness in life, but it would have been a surface happiness - apparent to others, but not to me because I wouldn't have been happy in my own heart having failed at something that once was so important to me. It would take a lot - more than I can imagine - to have come to terms with that in my own life. Getting over personal failure is difficult.

Not all counselors are non-caring people. We went to several before we found one that we felt could help us and we felt did this because they did care about people as a whole and their own reasons for being counselors were not wholly selfish.

Good counselors help people find their own answers because the counselor is Not mired in the emotional upheaval. They help people learn about themselves and determine rationally what it is they want and why they want it. They give us steps to follow that have no personal agenda, unlike family and friends whose caring, but often one-sided, advice has its own agenda. It is helpful to know that someone else is not going to influence or add to the emotional stress of the time.

Having worked through all of that to save my marriage has made ME a stronger person. More confident in myself and in how I approach life. The same for my husband. We love each other and are closer now than ever before. That is why I personally recommend conseling to others. Not to save a marriage for marriages' sake, but for the individual to be able to move forward with some of their personal dignity and mores intact. Without losing self to societies pressures.

I do think that our social structure devalues the institute of marriage and that the reason the divorce rate is so high is because the marriage rate is so high. The last few generations have lost the ability or knowledge or strength of character to impart that to their children so each new generation of adults has less to fortify them as individuals. Less direction and less self-worth. They want the 'dream' but they don't have any realistic idea of what the 'dream' really is anymore.

The sexual revolution of the '60's is still heavily influenced by the religious standards of the generations before. Those two ideals are in conflict. Marriage may ease or take away the guilt of pre-marital sex, but it doesn't mean anything anymore. The last few generations don't know that to their grandparents and great grandparents marriage was a totally different institution than it is to them. The words may be the same, but the value of marriage has gotten lost in the passion and romance and free sex of today's society. "Just do it" is being applied liberally to every aspect of life nowadays and personal commitment is getting lost.

If one doesn't know what commitment really means - don't commit.

Edited January 27, 2008 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

January 27, 2008

Marlena, I'm probably going to get blasted for this, but more and more I feel marriage benefits men more than women.

Generations ago, divorce was less common. I feel (and felt this before I knew of my grandfather's violence) that marriage worked because women then were more willing to just go along with whatever their husbands decided. They were the bread winners and there were mouths to feed, so women felt obligated. They were raised to keep their mouths shut and be glad some man chose them and gave them children.

Divorce became more common when women began to work outside of the home too. Now marriage has more pitfalls to hurdle because now it's two people with wants and needs and feeling equally entitled to have them met.

Men still remember when men had their way, but I don't think they think of it that way. I think most are just frustrated over how much harder it seems to have become for them. Wondering why it can't be as simple as it use to be.

Women still remember it too and worry about becoming invisible through marriage. We still feel the programming of the past trying to influence us into giving in to the "old" ways. Too many times, I think marriages fail because women are still afraid to speak up to their partner. The stay quiet and grow cold and resentful. Then the husband gets resentful for the coldness till all thats left is two resentful people unwilling to compromise.

I think the only chance for a successful partnership to last is if both people realize it isn't just their duty to stay, but to also voice what they need to want to stay and see the benefit in helping each other attain these things.

January 27, 2008

Hi,

I feel sorry for people in the past (say my parents/ grandparents) who were miserably stuck together for a lifetime simply because society or religion looked down upon divorce.

I much prefer things to be the way they are now.

I also think that people in the past didn't have all the problems that people do now. Cohabitation was easier.

Women for the most part didn't have to go to work and took the house work seriously. A husband wouldn't come home to a rat's nest.

People were not as stressed as they are now either.

And there was more respect. Women were not self-entitled as they are now.

(I'm thinking of my grandparents as I write this)

So when people lived together things were more civil, easier, congenial.

I much prefer the way things were before the stupid women's liberation movement that destroyed society. Women are meant to be home with the children, and men with a regular job should be able to support it all (not like now that if the woman doesn't work they wouldn't be able to afford a living for the most part).

The perfect marriage for me would be like in Leave it to Beaver, one of my favorite shows, it doesn't get any better than that.

January 27, 2008

Bravo Ariadne! I completely agree! I used to watch that show, it is the ideal marriage type and family type. Too bad we just don't have that anymore.

January 27, 2008

Hi,

I feel sorry for people in the past (say my parents/ grandparents) who were miserably stuck together for a lifetime simply because society or religion looked down upon divorce.

I much prefer things to be the way they are now.

I also think that people in the past didn't have all the problems that people do now. Cohabitation was easier.

Women for the most part didn't have to go to work and took the house work seriously. A husband wouldn't come home to a rat's nest.

People were not as stressed as they are now either.

And there was more respect. Women were not self-entitled as they are now.

(I'm thinking of my grandparents as I write this)

So when people lived together things were more civil, easier, congenial.

I much prefer the way things were before the stupid women's liberation movement that destroyed society. Women are meant to be home with the children, and men with a regular job should be able to support it all (not like now that if the woman doesn't work they wouldn't be able to afford a living for the most part).

The perfect marriage for me would be like in Leave it to Beaver, one of my favorite shows, it doesn't get any better than that.

I think you are over romanticizing the past a little. Having a mistress on the side was also common. Women who were "the marrying kind" were good girls treating sex as their duty. Boring! Boring for both parties! Women became equal to their children because that was all they had. No new knowledge made for stale adult interaction and everyone needs their brain stimulated too. Coming home to a clean house and hot food is nice. But so is conversation that isn't comprised of tales of diaper rash and the itsy bitsy spider. Men of that era had to step out to meet that need.

January 27, 2008

Marlena, I'm probably going to get blasted for this, but more and more I feel marriage benefits men more than women.
Generations ago, divorce was less common. I feel (and felt this before I knew of my grandfather's violence) that marriage worked because women then were more willing to just go along with whatever their husbands decided. They were the bread winners and there were mouths to feed, so women felt obligated. They were raised to keep their mouths shut and be glad some man chose them and gave them children.
Divorce became more common when women began to work outside of the home too. Now marriage has more pitfalls to hurdle because now it's two people with wants and needs and feeling equally entitled to have them met.
Men still remember when men had their way, but I don't think they think of it that way. I think most are just frustrated over how much harder it seems to have become for them. Wondering why it can't be as simple as it use to be.
Women still remember it too and worry about becoming invisible through marriage. We still feel the programming of the past trying to influence us into giving in to the "old" ways. Too many times, I think marriages fail because women are still afraid to speak up to their partner. The stay quiet and grow cold and resentful. Then the husband gets resentful for the coldness till all thats left is two resentful people unwilling to compromise.
I think the only chance for a successful partnership to last is if both people realize it isn't just their duty to stay, but to also voice what they need to want to stay and see the benefit in helping each other attain these things.

I agree with you, Sally. You sure won't get blasted from me.

Your last sentence says it all. And the key word is "both". The problem occurs when one of the partners voices and voices and voices what they need, in order to remain in the marriage, and the other partner either doesn't hear, doesn't understand it, or refuses to acknowledge it, merely repeating "Everything is fine".

My marriage is a prime example. I tried every which way to tell my husband I wasn't happy and that when I spoke my vows, I THOUGHT they included sex with some kind of frequency, not once a year. Eventually, I sounded like a broken record, and then he didn't want to have sex simply because I had become a harpy to him.

As you said <<all thats left is two resentful people unwilling to compromise>> Yep.

January 27, 2008

I am a man and I don't want a 1950s marriage. I don't think most men want that but many men especially from the baby boomer and 70s generations tried to make things work with a modern feminist woman and it blew up in their face. I know that my father supported my mother through every endeavor in life, shared household and childcare responsibilities and never betrayed her or abused her yet she still turned on him and blamed him for all her unhapiness. I used to see the anger and resentment she had towards him and I and to this day I still don't understand it. He did nothing to deserve it. I repeated the same cycle and married a woman just like her but I got out before any lasting damage was done. My mother might be an extreme case but there are many men who ended up in his situation and when men today rail against modern feminist women they are not trying to put women back in the kitchen but they rail against women like my mother.

January 27, 2008

Men of that era had to step out to meet that need.

Exactly. And if women "stepped out" like that, they were socially ostracized and drawn and quartered.

Even today women are STILL viewed, by some people, as loose, slutty, etc if they sleep around, either before marriage, or during. It is STILL more expected and accepted that "boys will be boys", and girls should stay home and be good girls.

January 27, 2008

We shouldn't have! The reasons ran the gammut from children (5) to religion (Catholic) to need (she had no employable skills) to habit (what was familiar) to stubborness (never cry "uncle").

Those reasons were valid then and they would be valid now if we'd remained tgether. We'd also both have continued to be miserable.

I'm married now and have been for a bit over 11 years. The lesson I learned from the former marriage and divorce is this. If it starts going south for any reason but infidelity, an instant deal-breaker, then leave no stone unturned to make it work. If you do that, and if it still fails, you can forever after look yourself in the facve in the mirror without flinching and can honestly say, "No regrets!"

Marriage is important, not to be taken lightly and worth saving as an institution because it's serious, not frivilous and because if you can't commit to even just one person, what can you commit to? There was a reason, back in the early- to mid-20th century, when such things were permitted, why corporate America favored married men over single men. Marriage was believed to equate to stability, seriousness of purpose and loyalty.

Ah, the good old days!

January 27, 2008

My mother might be an extreme case but there are many men who ended up in his situation and when men today rail against modern feminist women they are not trying to put women back in the kitchen but they rail against women like my mother.

You bring up a valid point. For every man who is/was a chauvinist, there is/was a woman who will be not be satisfied with anything her husband does for her. The more he gives, the more she wants. He bends over backwards to make things equal for her, and then she labels him a wimp because he won't stand up to her. It's a vicious cycle.

January 27, 2008

We shouldn't have! The reasons ran the gammut from children (5) to religion (Catholic) to need (she had no employable skills) to habit (what was familiar) to stubborness (never cry "uncle").

This makes so much sense to me right here, and you just get to the point where, as you also stated, these things will always be present. I know that with me, and most likely with many people, the reasons, excuses really to keep a bad marriage going, would still be there. But along with that the misery.

Is the misery worth the excuses? I think not. It will run the both of the people in the marriage into the ground.

Sign In

Why are Americans so hell bent on saving their marriages?

Recommended Posts

marlena

Ariadne

nittygritty

Lovelybird

marlena

Ariadne

marlena

marlena

Trialbyfire

OWoman

marlena

marlena

sally4sara

marlena

HokeyReligions

sally4sara

Ariadne

ElvenPriestess

sally4sara

Zolie

Woggle

Zolie

Curmudgeon

Zolie

ElvenPriestess

What's New

My Activity Streams

More...