A
female
age
36-40,
anonymous
writes:I sometimes worry when I see a young person "pushing" for marriage, and seeing marriage as the ultimate goal in a relationship, while worrying little about the "issues" that exist within the relationship and on building a healthy relationship and valuing every step of a developing relationship. For instance, I've seen people cheat in long-term relationships, and soon thereafter, get engaged, thinking that they will change after marriage and that is when the "real" committment begins. That seems flawed to me...Doesn't this demonstrate that there is not enough value and respect for the actual person, but more value on an "institution?" If every step of the relationship isn't valued, and the expectation is that the values within the relationship will change after marriage, isn't that a set up for disaster, and a clear message that one does not respect and value what they have? Isn't that placing too much of an expectation and having misconceptions of what a healthy marriage can be? Shouldn't a person's "word" count just as much, if not more, than the legalities and/or the sacrament of marriage? So many people say they rather not know about betrayals and hurts their partner has kept from them, b/c they are "getting married..." and since they've reached their "goal" it's better not to know...Does anyone else think this is worrisome and sad, and demonstrative of immaturity?
View related questions:
engaged Reply to this Question
Share |
Fancy yourself as an agony aunt? Add your answer to this question! A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (22 March 2011): The INSTITUTION of marriage is just as good as it is in the fairytales. The coming together of two people who want to spend the rest of their lives getting to to the good and the bad about that one person. But like every institutions terms and conditions apply.
The problem is marriage is an amplifier. What ever you have before you cross the marriage line whether that may be a great ceremony or a silent exchange of rings in a registery. What you have (in the other PERSON)before you go in will be magnified. If one is irresponisble before the married expect mariage to magnify that the same for some one with lack of integrity in being faithful.
So in terms of focusing on the individual rather than the institution, they are both very important, you can't have focus on one with out the other.
A
female
reader, Amdz +, writes (17 March 2011):
 I am the OP of this post and I LOVE the discussion my post has created! This is an awesome site! Thank you to all who have responded, as I have really enjoyed reading the thoughtful comments and additions/debates to the points I originally made...Clearly this is a a loaded topic!
...............................
A
male
reader, De LuV DOCTOR  +, writes (17 March 2011):
 focusing on the beautification of marriage is a reciept for disaster as others have said..and i think marriage is opte to be living joyeously with the one you love for the rest of your life..but we can't achieve this if we fail to put into consideration the personal trait of our partners before marriage..and whan i say trait,i mean both his/her possitive and negative personal trait..he/she will try to hide the negative trait and unhide his/her possitive trait, but greater focus should be on the negative trait..because the ability of finding out our partainers negative trait and learning how to deal with it befor marriage,,is the begaining of a happy marriage life...
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (17 March 2011): I've often been troubled about marriage in the same way, though probably not as articulately.
I don't think it's so much the "institution" of marriage itself that some people value, but the social position and dynamics that comes along with it being married.
In some places, being married is the norm at a certain age and if you don't get married, people question what's wrong with you. In some enviroments, marriage makes the difference between acheiving normalcy and falling off the social ladder. It's no wonder then that alot of people make it "a goal."
It's also why closetted or unfaithful politicians get married. They probably couldn't keep have their jobs if they weren't...marriage normalizes you in the eyes of the public.
I admit these are generalisms and I think the social perception of marriage depends alot on class ...especially on your economic class. There are plenty of people who live a "married" life, but can't afford to get married....there are just as many properly married couples who are unfaithful or in otherwise dysfunctional marriages.
I think that marriage is becoming controversial amongst younger people today is because of our relationship between the individual today and the larger social circle around us. Americans tend to be very individualist people and...more so in the past 60 years, and so our responsiblities to the larger society are as obvious or clear as they were 60 years ago. We tend to vacillate between an idyllic and pessimisstic vision of marriage. In one vision, it's a goal as you described. It think for these sorts of people, they regard it as an apex of life, it's the height of maturation and a marker of adulthood. The other vision of marriage is a cynical one where we criticize the "institution" as being unredeemably flawed and irrevlant to two people's inner emotional life. I think both stances are a bit sentimentalist.
Like I was saying...Americans tend to be very indiviudalistic people and I think we sometimes to forget to admit that marriage is a public ceremony. Marriage is not so much a union between two people but a marriage between three parties: The bride, the groom (in whatever combination) and a witness. At the very minimum, legally, t's a public declaration of you intent to be tied and to be responsible to someone.
No one likes to talk about the witness, but they are always there...whoever it is you are socially beholden to: your family, your rabbi, the IRS, whatever. Everyone pretends that the success or failure of marriage only depends on two people's efforts in love or their lack of love. I argue that it has A LOT to do with the enivironment in which you get married: social circle and family.
Some sentimentalists will say that marriage spiritually consummates your love for another person.
Some sentimentalists who truly love each other will say, "I don't need a piece of paper to inform me that I love someones and will stay with them." In all the controversy about marriage, I think some forget to remember it's a public declaration of your feelings and commitement.
Why bother making an institution around a public declaration of personal love?
Because it tends to persuade people into fullfilling their commitments. And it keeps the social order.
For example, I know for a fact, both my parents are too narcissistic to divorce each other. It doesn't keep them from pondering it when they have their fights, but they both enjoy the status of being "married" and they couldn't deal with the shame of being "divorced".
I also know that divorce no longer carries such a great stigma for younger people. So why do some people put such an emphasis on getting married so much, still get it so wrong and end up in divorce? I think it's the first sentimentalist reason: the idyllic of marriage as a transformative process. The previous female anon poster pretty much covered all those illusions...so I won't get into it. But I think these illusions are why people get distracted with the instituion rather than their partner.
In response to Chigirl, I think Americans probably tend to more sentimental about marriage than most nationalities...and I think that has a lot to do with America being such a pluralistic nation and culture. Our responsiblities and social expectations...marriage is one thing that everyone can socially recognize. That's why it sometimes has impossibly high ideals attached to it. It's these ideals that I think attract younger people into the marriage; they literally don't know any better.
Sooooo..yes OP, I agree with you, people should probably pay more attention to the person they married to and not to their wedding dress and the cake they are going to order...but I think alot of it has to do with your family expecations passed on to you and increasinlgy.....whether or not you can afford it.
My personal prediction for marriage in the next 60 years: It will eventually become a marker between social classes. There will be people who can afford to get married and divorced(ad nauseum) and those who can't. It's not that I think people who are married are classier or matter more in society, it's just that I think they have more of an interest (financially and socially) in making their relationships official and publically spectated.
All this said. I'm not against marriage. I don't get to my friend's weddings and say, "Congratulations!...Enjoy the tax benefits!" though I sometimes feel like it. I'm probably a bit more cynical about it than I should be, but I do think it's possible for two people to love each other and take care of each other for a lifetime. I just don't think marriage necessarily excludes that possiblity. If you are lucky enough to have a relationship with someone worthy of the idyllic marriage and you feel like making your respective witnesses happy, then I am all for it. If you are just looking to reincarnate yourself as Mr. or Mrs. Such and Such, you may acheive a sense of normalcy, but I suspect you'll always feel emotionally unfillfilled by your spouse because you were never satisfied with who you were in the first place.
...............................
A
male
reader, shawncaff +, writes (17 March 2011):
 You and the other posters here have some good points, but I would like to add something that I think you (and some of the other posters) have overlooked:
You speak about the importance of emphasizing the relationship and the people involved as opposed to the institution of marriage.
I strongly believe that you can't separate the two out so easily. Marriage, if entered into with the right frame of mind, is a guide and framework for relationships. It concretizes the roles and goals of the couple. If people look forward to marriage, it is not because they are necessarily overlooking who each other is as a person, but because marriage will help them get to know their beloved partner better.
I know people will accuse me of looking at marriage with rose-colored glasses. But I am just saying that the philosophy of "let's get to know each other really well before marriage" has serious limitations. Most married people I have spoken with say they never really never knew their partner until they got married--even if they had been dating 3 or 4 years! And even if they been living with them before marriage!
"Dating" for a long period of time is a very recent concept. Until the 20th century, it was unheard of to date for years before marriage. The vast majority of people had a brief courtship of a few months and then got married. I think a large part of the reason long-term dating is so hard is because there are no rules. Rules have been developed over time for marriage (whether you agree with them is one thing, but they are there), but in long-term dating it is largely wild territory: Do we have sex? If so, when? How often should we see each other? What is considered cheating? How do I know you love me? Etc. Etc.
In traditional dating--which leads toward marriage--the goals are clearer: you are dating on order to see if you are compatible for a long-term commitment, clear and simple. In long-term dating, the goals are more fuzzy: why are you dating? For sex? For alleviation of loneliness? For a friend? I am not saying this is bad. I am just saying that a lot of people enter into long-term relationships not entirely sure of why they are there.
Also, a final note: all relationships are guided by institutions, whether we consciously know it or not. There are unwritten rules behind every dating scenario that are guided by cultural norms. Whether these norms are created by high school students, a workplace, the media, etc., they are still institutions. So to say "I want to get to know you" apart from an institution is impossible. The question is, which institution do you choose to guide your relationship?
Marriage just might be the best way to know a person after all.
...............................
A
female
reader, Jen1689 +, writes (16 March 2011):
 Agreed, agreed, AGREED! I am currently engaged to be married. We have been together for two years and three months, and have been engaged for approximately seven months. At this point, I could take or leave marriage. The only reason it's even on our radar is because of the tax breaks it comes with. And if we do get married, we've decided not to have a wedding. It seems rather pointless to spend money on something that will be over in a matter of an hour or so. Not to mention all of the stress it causes. Plus, we'd much rather spend that money on something worthwhile, like a down payment on a house, or a really nice vacation, etc.I agree with you that a lot of couples think that issues can be solved through marriage. Whether the issue is commitment, children, money, stability, arguing, etc., most people think that marriage will magically erase or solve all of those issues, but they're terribly wrong. If anything, the problems will only get worse. Marriage shouldn't be what you turn to to make your relationship better or stronger. Marriage should be something that behooves the two people as a couple.In all honesty, marriage should change nothing about a relationship other than, as put by Ross on friends, "instead of checking the box that says Ms., you check the box that says Mrs. It's right next to it". Marriage should bring tax breaks and joint insurance policies. If you're religious, it can symbolize pledging your love before God, but it should not be a happy ending to an otherwise unhappy couple.
...............................
A
female
reader, Justtryingtohelp  +, writes (16 March 2011):
 Your points are very valid, I'm actually quite put off of marriage due to the way it's now treated mostly.
I make it quite clear that I don't want marriage and if I ever do it will be after years in a committed trusting relationship.
If someone were to cheat on me, I wouldn't even consider carrying on the relationship, never mind getting married.
I don't believe in "once a cheater, always a cheater.", but I feel that if they cheated, I surely can't be the person they want to be with in the long run.
Too many people marry too young and fast a lot of the time. They don't know enough about their partner or they think that marriage will solve problems, or they're just really in the loved up moment.
...............................
A
male
reader, dirtball +, writes (16 March 2011):
 I agree with your points and with the suggestion to make this an article. I also encourage you to sign up for an account and post advice, because you seem to have a good head on your shoulders.
Many people think marriage is a magical thing. That's simply not the case. Even long term "happy" marriages take a lot of work from everyone involved. It definitely is something too many people get into without thinking things through. At the same time, some people will spend their whole life thinking things through, and miss out on great opportunities because of it.
I like you post, and I hope you stick around.
...............................
A
female
reader, chigirl  +, writes (16 March 2011):
 I have another question. Why do people in the USA marry so young? They are more or less married away as soon as college in ended, or even before finished with high school. Are there any statistics on this that could be ran for a comparison? It just seems more "normal" over there to be married at 18-25 years of age. Is it because of custom? If so, perhaps that is a reason why the marriage as an institution is valued over the person, as the custom demands it? Or is it for a religious purpose, such as you can not live in the same house as your partner unless married, or if you fall pregnant you must marry before the child is born to be proper.
I know in some countries where the woman's rights are not at the same level of a man's, if only on paper, but not in reality, marriage means much more than being with someone you love. The institution is valued over the person to a certain degree, in the way that you want to get married, and take the first and best you find and make it work. Marriage then can be about independence from your parents, having your own economy, your own place to live. Often is is expensive to live alone, or so unheard of, that living at home until you are marriage appears as "the only way" to get your independence. This can go for guys as well, but in particular women as women often get the less paid jobs and do not get the same level of education, again resulting in not being able to financially support their independence.
But, I am thinking you weren't thinking of what the institution of marriage means to people in those countries, no matter how well developed or westernized they might be. You are probably thinking of people in the USA, right? For comparison sake you then need to specify exactly what the norms and culture is, and if there is another country with similar norms and culture you can compare with that country to find out if this is a general development, or something specific to the USA.
I will place my money on this being a result of the culture in the USA and the norms there. Perhaps some other countries can be thrown into the comparison, but I doubt there are many who match the cultural norm.
...............................
A
male
reader, CaringGuy +, writes (16 March 2011):
I agree with GeeGee, this is worthy of an article, rather than a shorter post.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (16 March 2011): Marriage is a format of relationship, not a relationship goal. I believe people have attached false abstract concepts to the idea of getting married:
1. It will make for a stronger relationship
(FALSE - Marriage tests relationships, better enter them strong to begin with.)
2. It will solve existing problems
(FALSE - Marriage will worsen any existing issues.)
3. It will make other people happy to see us married, thus we will be happy.
(FALSE - Never enter into a commitment to please others; it's okay to be selfish and know what you want in life, and pressured marriage ensures unhappiness.)
4. Marriage means children, something I want more than he/she does. Also, babies will make us happy.
(FALSE - Marriage isn't a good excuse to convince a partner to have children they don't want. Babies increase stress levels in a marriage; they don't bring more love to the union or fill a love void.)
5. Everybody is getting married, and I don't want to be alone for the rest of my life either.
(FALSE - Not everybody is getting married, and marriage will not solve loneliness. There are many happy unwed unions out there, and good gravy, make some friends!)
6. Marriage means financial stability, after my super expensive wedding debts are paid off of course.
(FALSE - If you're getting married for the money and the party, well, that's all you're going to get out of your relationship. And chances are things are not going to go the way you expect. You are not a fairy princess. Marry not for the wallet.)
7. Marriage is just something that people are supposed to do.
(FALSE - Open your minds people. You have a choice. The world has changed)
8. Marriage is a surefire statement of the love I have for my partner, because, well, we've only know each other for 3 months, but wow, they're like, amazing OMG, and I JUST KNOW THIS IS IT!
(FALSE - OMG, you're an idiot. Date at least 2 or 3 years with regular face time. Slow down. Have a few fights. See each other in stressful situations. Fart around each other. Just because you have butterflies doesn't mean they're the one to MARRY.)
Anyway Poster, good topic to bring up. I'm currently in a committed relationship heading in the marriage direction. Do I want a life partner to love deeply and cherish? Yep. Am I going to be wise about maturing in the relationship before we take the big leap? You bet. Marriage is a relationship format, not my goal.
...............................
A
female
reader, GeeGee255 +, writes (16 March 2011):
 You have some very valid points. You should make this an article.
...............................
A
male
reader, Dreamland  +, writes (16 March 2011):
Excellent observation! I'm having an affair with a married woman who kind reached the same conclusion, since she married someone who she viewed as a good provider, intelligent, stable. etc. She, however, apparently decided to overlook many of the traits in her husband that have since escalated in a breakdown of intimacy and communication, with infidelity as the inevitable result.
Too many people put way too much stock into this concept of "not wanting to end up alone", thereby clamoring for a lifelong commitment with someone they're not really attracted to. I've heard it all....."but he's such a nice guy....he'll change in time....he has a great job...etc." If you're looking at mitigating factors in a person to overcome your lack of real attraction/connection, you will eventually grow apart.
...............................
|
