Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Breakdown in communication
Sexual dissatisfaction
Infidelity
No balance between relationship and life commitments
Selfishness
An unhappy marriage is rife with fights, uncertainty about the future, unequal workloads, and a basic lack of compatibility.
So taking in the amount of divorce rates every year, is a lifelong contract or commitment within marriage realistic for modern society? Should there be some type of “20 year increments” instead? Interesting enough, celebrity Will Smith and his wife refer to each other “life partners” instead of husband and wife as apparently they no longer use the “married label.”
Is this going to be a new trend for folks who just can’t stick it out?
Quote:
Will Smith and Jada Pinkett may not have the most conventional marriage by society’s ideals of traditional.
But the couple aren’t really ‘married’ after all, according to Jada, 47, who explains why she and Will, 50, refer to each other as ‘life partners’ rather than husband and wife.
Jada told People of their choice to banish the ‘married’ label: ‘I needed a different form to dissolve all the expectations that I had of a marriage. I needed to do that to see Will outside of husband and see him as a human being.
We have all these expectations. Oh, this is what a husband is. This is what a wife is. I started dissolving all the ideas and expectations and labels.’
No; it’s not realistic to expect marriage to last a lifetime; given that our marriage “customs” (which are relatively brand new in the context of human history) are so ... unrealistic.
Marriage, up until maybe the last 150 years; was done in a manner that benefited your family & community.
Marriage now; is seen as something that’s all about you: Who you want, based on what you want in a spouse, when you want & how you want.
That IS somewhat unrealistic; in that nobody is the same person at age 50, as they were at age 25. Your values & the traits you value in others change. You will likely look at a spouse chosen for certain attributes (looks, lifestyle, money, etc) years down the road & think “Who ARE you?”
Previously, it would be seen as selfish & even narcissistic to wait until you were “ready” because bonds needed strengthened, lands needed to be merged, heirs needed to be born & communities needed to become viable. The “it’s MY big day” theme of the wedding day would be seen as horribly irresponsible.
Marriage as a “due” meant a person understood at some level; that you didn’t just hurt your spouse, yourself or your children should that marriage dissolve; it meant weakening your community & that would likely not be seen as very honorable, no matter which country or ethnicity you belonged to.
Now; it’s all about you. Make yourself happy by marrying ... make yourself happy by walking away.
Things change, including pair-bonding. Long, long ago it was unlikely a male and female bonded for lifetime but with no evidence in pre-history we can only guess. Marriage has been a fairly constant institution in historical (civilized) times.
Child-bearing women always needed a mate to provide for themselves and offspring during those critical years.
There is still a reason for that and does not seem likely to change.
But for childless and older women (kids grown) marriage is much more of a choice rather than a necessity.
Men have long had the choice not to marry because all their needs can be outsourced, if they have the money.
As women have become more equal in finances they also think about what exactly they "get" out of marriage.
I like marriage and being married. No kids, none for him either. 41 years together most of it married.
Someday marriage will be a quaint old-fashioned custom.
Not everyone is lucky enough to find the right person or BE the right person. Some members of my family have tried multiple times.
Who among is will vow that there is nothing - no act at all - that could compel them to want to end a marriage?
[not very many - and most of them would either be lying or fooling themselves]
And anyone who allows that there are some things that would be beyond the marital pale for them are in no position to judge whatever boundaries another chooses.
If someone feels it's realistic for them, then it's realistic for them. I can't say that it would be realistic for me. I'm already in my late 30s, which means even if I marry a few years from now, it won't be for "a lifetime". I've already had plenty of partners in the past. Most people have more than one partner throughout their lifetime.
I'd only marry if the person I loved really had their heart set on it. I don't see the point. Be together as long as you make each other happy, but be open to that happiness ending eventually, too. All good things come to an end.
At least with divorces, a mother-in-law isn't as much of an issue anymore until you re-marry.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
