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.
Ohh for god's sake! Want me to explain how he arrived at these false conclusions?
A. married men live longer than nonmarried: He's factoring in everybody who died before they got married! Kids don't marry! Teens who die before marriage! Young adults who die in Combat or accidents or complications.
B. He's pushing a religious book!
C. They're richer! true! He's factoring in every priest, and person who doesn't bother to amass large wealth because they are ...F R E E to not do so!
I'm sorry you didn't read all of it or the whole thread and missed the point entirely. And it's HER book and she is comparing married men to married women and how each fair in a marriage and they are opposites in a marriage due to grand misguided expectations which are mostly conditioned to women. It's how to look at some more practical matters other than 'romance' when selecting a partner for marriage for life.
Well, it's just that at the time everybody wants things to be somewhat fair and nobody wants to be taken advantage of; however, in the long run the work load increases... Even the laziest man contributes to SOMETHING, be it income, car repairs, heavy lifting, house repairs & remodeling, yard work, etc., and those chores have to be taken care of one way or another - either by exhausting yourself or paying people. Usually it's a combination of both.
I totally understand all that and agree. Personally I always wanted to do the house stuff myself. I'm particluar enough to want it 'my way' so I took charge of the house. And you're right...if they contribute the things that I either can't do, or don't want to do, it's a good thing to me.
I did some searching and found this guys "research" is really being called in to question! Like it being found out he factored in GAY MALES! He factored in all males under 18! 90 PERCENT OF WHICH DON'T HAVE JOBS AND AREN'T MARRIED!
Another guy did the exact same thing, except with males who were at least 30, and straight!
OFF THE CHARTS POSITIVE! Wealthier, happier, living longer!
This is the problem when some guy with an agenda writes one of these, I can prove most women like sleeping with kangaroos, if i only factor in people from the amazonian kangaoo lovin league of Walla roo!
I did some searching and found this guys "research" is really being called in to question! Like it being found out he factored in GAY MALES! He factored in all males under 18! 90 PERCENT OF WHICH DON'T HAVE JOBS AND AREN'T MARRIED!
Another guy did the exact same thing, except with males who were at least 30, and straight!
OFF THE CHARTS POSITIVE! Wealthier, happier, living longer!
This is the problem when some guy with an agenda writes one of these, I can prove most women like sleeping with kangaroos, if i only factor in people from the amazonian kangaoo lovin league of Walla roo!
Too true. I use statistics all the time at work. Give me a data set, tell me the outcome you want, and I can produce it. Luckily in my job, there is no agenda to produce one outcome or another
Too true. I use statistics all the time at work. Give me a data set, tell me the outcome you want, and I can produce it. Luckily in my job, there is no agenda to produce one outcome or another
That's just the point if you read the thread or the whole transcript. She had no agenda when she started studying marriage. What she discovered was totally opposite of what she thought so there was no pre determined conclusion she began with. She faults herself with her first marriage over the issues brought to the surface in her studies and it suprised her. So there was no agenda.
That's just the point if you read the thread or the whole transcript. She had no agenda when she started studying marriage. What she discovered was totally opposite of what she thought so there was no pre determined conclusion she began with. She faults herself with her first marriage over the issues brought to the surface in her studies and it suprised her. So there was no agenda.
I think some of her points were interesting, but this book isn't exactly scientific research, more of a personal self-discovery thing, which is fine and can be interesting if you are into such things. My quibbles are with the research she based her findings about improved health and wealth. I know some of that research and some the statistical methodology is less than rigorous.
Location: Partisanship Is An Intellectual/Emotional Handicap
1,851 posts, read 2,154,109 times
Reputation: 1082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thursday007
Author of Eat, Pray Love discusses marriage vs. a wedding and types of marriages with CNN's Cambell Brown
(Excerpt)
CNN: Marriage has often been portrayed as something that protects women. But you found in your book that it benefits men the most. Were you surprised by that?
Gilbert: It's surprising, though it shouldn't be. Looking at study after study, it becomes quite chilling to see how very much benefited men are by marriage. Married men perform in life exceptionally better than single men, they live longer, they're richer, they're happier.
CNN: And yet men are often reluctant to enter into marriage.
Gilbert: Which is the big irony. They have to be dragged kicking and screaming into something that will benefit them enormously in life. And the cruel irony is that the people who drag them kicking and screaming into it -- the women -- are the ones who often find that they've gotten the short end of the stick.
Women give more and as a result they give up more.
I think the other problem is that women go into marriage with such high expectations, really inflated romantic ideas about what this relationship is going to be. Men go into marriage with virtually no expectations whatsoever. Ten years later, the men are delightfully surprised to find out that it's actually kind of nice, and the women have sort of had to take a nose dive from what they thought it was going to be.
Written by a woman. Hardly an objective perspective.
So how exactly did she come to these conclusions? On what basis?
What, she took a poll? How may couple were involved in it?
She travelled around the world and looked at all types of marriages and customs and cultures. The book details this process more and it was quite objective since she's already admitted she and her romantic ideals of marriage caused the breakup of her marriage and she discovered this while researching it - I'd say that's objective. This wasn't a simply process done overnight. Her story and her research is worthy of a look in a very practical sense. Again, this book is not about bashing of the sexes or coming to a predetermined conclusion.
Location: Partisanship Is An Intellectual/Emotional Handicap
1,851 posts, read 2,154,109 times
Reputation: 1082
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thursday007
She travelled around the world and looked at all types of marriages and customs and cultures. The book details this process more and it was quite objective since she's already admitted she and her romantic ideals of marriage caused the breakup of her marriage and she discovered this while researching it - I'd say that's objective. This wasn't a simply process done overnight. Her story and her research is worthy of a look in a very practical sense. Again, this book is not about bashing of the sexes or coming to a predetermined conclusion.
" It's surprising, though it shouldn't be. Looking at study after study, it becomes quite chilling to see how very much benefited men are by marriage. Married men perform in life exceptionally better than single men, they live longer, they're richer, they're happier."
That's not an objective opinion. That's a very broad, all encompassing generaliztion.
There's well 6 billion people on this planet. At least 1 to 2 billion are married (probably a very low, generous number). Billions upon billions have been married through out the last two centuries.
One woman making her rounds of a few countries, a few cultures and a few communities; is hardly the basis for her conclusions.
What it is, is a warm, fuzzy feel good story for her. Which she tries to apply to both genders. Both genders for all of time.
Sorry, but it's nonsense.
Every individual person....every individual marriage is is based on the personality and relationship dynamics of each individual marriage.
Some women, as she stated do make the lives of their husbands better.
Some men, make the lives of their wives better.
Some women make the lives of thier husbands a miserable mess. As do some men, to their wives lives.
A married woman is no more likely to make the male gender's lives richer, with exceptional performance in life and extend their life expectancy; than a anything else in life.
Some men will argue that some women will actually shorten their life expectancy. As well as intrude, distract and disrupt their focus on achieving excepetional life performance. As will some women argue, that some men do, to women.
There simply is no such thing as an all encompassing, generalizational concept that can be applied to either gender.
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.
Personally I always wanted to do the house stuff myself. I'm particluar enough to want it 'my way' so I took charge of the house. And you're right...if they contribute the things that I either can't do, or don't want to do, it's a good thing to me.
