As much as it may be a mistake, I'm going to weigh in. I think that what's being glossed over, is that all good relationships are built (among many other things) on working towards the same goals, pursuing the same interests--the things that attract people to one another. Sometimes, that takes work and sacrifice. For example, my girlfriend loves dancing, but hasn't been able to dance competitively since she was in her late teens because of a spinal fusion. I could give two shits about dancing, and probably wouldn't dance if you set my feet on fire. Say in five years she comes to me and says, "I really want to get back into dance, I miss it, and I was wondering if you would be willing to do some lessons with me. It's something we can do together." Now, I could easily say that I hate dancing and have no interest. Besides, the lessons are on Monday nights and there's football to watch. Or, I could say screw football, this is something that you want to do and are willing to share with me, so let's do it. By my reasoning, I have chosen to put forth the effort to help her pursue her goals, thus strengthening our relationship. While at the same time, sacrificing time that I would've otherwise spent watching football--something I enjoy. What I think you're trying to say is that she just got lucky that I was willing to go dancing during Monday Night Football. Perhaps it's both work and luck--that she feels lucky because I'm willing to put forth the extra effort to grow our relationship. My argument is that a lack of effort to grow the relationship as each person grows, and to pursue new goals together, is a sign that the relationship wasn't strong to begin with (extreme examples aside). I suppose you can say that two people are lucky if they're both willing to work to make each other happy.
This debate is great. Except for one small detail: the fact that there's no such thing as luck, good or bad. Shit just happens and it may be just or unjust, but ya know what? Justice isn't a real thing either. Theyre made up concepts we created to try and give reason to the universe. Carry on.
What about those couples who suffered such losses as the death of a child, acquired a TBI, etc., but had the strength in their relationship to get through it? Was that strength borne out of luck, too? And what does Paul McCartney have to say about all this?
Y'all are some jaded motherfuckers. Why can't anyone realistically say it's a decent mixture of work, willingness to put in the effort, luck, and an acceptance that sometimes things won't be easy, but being with the person you're with makes the uneasy times worth it. Shit happens. Sometimes it's big shit - and you don't cope well as a team, you pull into yourselves individually and you forget to let the other person know you want them in your life. Intimicay - emotional or sexual - can be found elsewhere. Sometimes it's small. You just wake up and realize "Wow. I really...don't...LIKE YOU anymore. You've changed so much that I can't see myself staying with you. Ever." And it's the end. Either way, shit happened...and you either work through it all together, and you enjoy the history and memories you're creating, or you say fuck it, and you move on. Neither makes you better or worse than the next person, I don't think. I think life just throws curveballs, and sometimes you see it and sometimes you don't.
A relationship is when a girl you're hanging out with starts letting you put things in her butt. Or maybe it's when she stops letting you do that? Hmmm...I can never remember. Either way, I'm pretty sure it all depends on how lucky you are.
Green rep and erotic pms, with video. Honestly? Fucked if I know, I'm taking notes on this thread. I sometimes think that the biggest flaw with dysfunctional relationships is whether people actually consider their partner as an entity in their own right, or only how that entity makes them feel. Oh. Now that I think about it, the best relationships I know have shifting, but balanced, power dynamics. It's hard to explain, but with my friends who are happily married, I can somehow tell the balance of power in a given circumstance, and it swaps around near constantly. I don't know if I'm explaining this coherently, or how they have managed to negotiate it, but it works phenomenally well. The only time I ever actively desire a relationship is after spending some time with the couple that does this best.
Before I go on, lemme say: Villiage Idiot, who pissed in your cornflakes? You sound like me when the subject of alcoholism comes up. Here and in the "We're not getting any younger" thread your posts seethe with bitterness and rage. You don't come right out and talk about how happy you are in your particular marriage, but it shows. I'm curious about two things: First, didn't your wife support you while you were in school then looking for a job as a lawyer? And when you landed that job, worked at it for awhile and hated it, didn't she again support you when you quit everything to bartend? Aren't you reaping some of the supposed "lucky" benefits of marriage that you rail against? Second, and this is to the group...just because you didn't technically get married doesn't mean you don't have to divorce. At least in Canada, I was under the impression that if you shared a home and money that was defined as commonlaw, and if it ended one or both parties could seek legal action successfully for alimony or half the assets. The point I wanted to bring up is that I have seen two successful marriages that I envied in my life. The first was the couple I worked for in Calgary who owned a restaurant. The second are my aunt and uncle. Both couples seem to have clearly defined roles in their marriage; the wife handles it when the kids get hurt, the husband handles the money, the wife's career is paramount, the husband is responsible for maintenance at home, etc. In both cases there has obviously been clear communication as to who does what, and they don't waffle or shrink from whatever those responsibilities are. Or resent the other partner. Also, the children of these unions (four and three, respectively) are AMAZING. All of them pursuing education, highly pleasant and social, hard working, really nice kids. A sign of a good marriage also seems to be how well you are raising your children.
How about this? Mutual love, respect, and admiration. I know, I know I didn't mention changing social mores, your grandparent's farms, the history of marriage from cavemen until now, changing educational and career prospects for women, birth control, mobility, children, luck, or tragic illnesses and accidents, but will that work for all of you hopelessly fucked up and maladjusted assholes?
It seems to me that the implicit assumption is that if a relationship ends for any reason aside from the death of one of the partners, it's an unsuccessful relationship. Why is that? I think a lot of what VI says has merit, even if it comes across as very cynical. If I get married and after 30 years of a wonderful, happy, partnership my wife and I realize that three decades after we said "I do" we decide at that point we want separate things in our lives and go our separate ways does that somehow invalidate the 30 great years we had together? It seems really stupid that the only (if not only than the most important) factor for judging how successful a relationship is is how long it lasts.
The way I see it, if you make a life long commitment to someone, and then break that commitment for whatever reason, then it failed. I'm not saying it invalidates the good times or even that you could have been happier with someone else during those years, or being with that person for that amount of time was the wrong decision, but that the relationship itself ended in failure. Maybe because the word failure has bad implications people don't want to give it that label, much like many people don't like to consider their employment with a company 'terminated' if they left on their own accord on good terms, but they are still considered terminated employees.
I can't help but think of this Mitchell and Webb sketch. "Two people who are a a little bit deluded in each other's favor. That's what love is isn't it?" That's probably the best definition I've heard.
No one did. If you're referring to the fact that I get annoyed when people seem unable to quote me accurately, reframe my argument or hypothesis in the most juvenile and ham handed fashion in a misguided attempt to make a point, or otherwise use cheap shots (a la 'don't pretend like your family is the only one with problems nonsense'), then you'll have to forgive me. I assume if people can type then they can read. Maybe I should I do away with that particular assumption. Uh, ok. Bitterness and rage? Because I don't blow people with the 'oh yeah, I know the accepted societal answer is 'hard work' or 'marriage is good' or 'kids is good' nonsense without actually examining those concepts for myself based on what I've read and experienced in life? If that's 'bitterness and rage' then you would be correct. I do get quite angry when people parrot stuff they see on talk shows because that's what they've been fed all their lives. Kudos to you, you took a couple of paragraphs to get to one of the most overused, and pointless, argumentative devices. Namely, attack the person making the argument, not the argument itself. But my marriage, and the state thereof, besides not really being anyone's business, if anything, has colored my view of marriage and relationships in a much more positive light than when I was single. But like I said, when you attack the actual argument I have made, I'll respond to that. Only two? Uh, no. Unless she had a time machine, went back in time 8 years to before we first met, helped pay the bills and take care of my sick father, and managed to do it while I wasn't looking. Then maybe. Swing and a miss one. Again, no, I financially support my mother, and have since my father died in 2004. Swing and a miss two. Of course. There are also downsides to marriage, any marriage. But I do see what you're doing here, again, attempting to undercut my prior argument by undercutting me. How? The old 'well if you benefit from it, how can you criticize it' argument? That dog doesn't hunt well. There are many things I have benefitted from in my life that I would not recommend to others. For instance, law school. I love the education I received, and it taught me a lot (which I think was great - I did love law school) but would I recommend it for others? Nope. And there have been several folks I have talked out of it that thanked me years later. One might say that because I'm married, I'm in a better position to criticize it since I live it. I would not be one of those people. The arguments stand or fall on their own and attacking the person making the argument is weak, and frankly, beneath you (see what I did there...). Swing and a miss three. Uh, actually, in the U.S. the overwhelming majority of states outlawed 'common law' marriages years ago. If you're married, and you want out, you're seeing a judge at some point. Only two? I'm assuming that you've know more than two couples that are married. If you can only point to two that are enviable, then I'm not sure that's the argument for marriage that you may want to go with. And this sounds great. I know similar marriages to the ones you are describing. I, however, am not extrapolating the experiences of a small few to support the idea that it's good for everybody. Or that most marriages are a good idea. Whether or not mine is a good marriage, I still don't think in general that marriage is a good idea for most people. It just doesn't seem to turn out very well for a lot of people I know (and before some moron comes along and says 'but maybe they're not college graduates' - most of them are professionals with college degrees and post college degrees. Agreed, good kids may well denote a good marriage. But again, two examples does not a trend make when there are millions of marriages. Am I saying all the rest are bad? No. What I am saying is of all the people I have seen in my life that are married, most of them wouldn't do it again. A lot of them are not happy. Some of them are. So when people ask me what I think, I tell them 'I don't think it will probably turn out very well.' Why? Because that's what my experience, including what I've read on the subject, tells me. Maybe I'm in an isolated pocket of 'divorce happy' or 'unhappily married' people. It's possible. Maybe there's a town out there where most married people are happily married and would do it again in a heartbeat. I just haven't been to that town. When and if I do, I'll re-evaluate my opinion then.
From what I understand once your biological clock starts ticking making it work is a synonym for "I don't want to die alone." Honestly though, I have a question. How do you know if the effort put into "making it work" is worth putting in?
I might be missing the point and if I am I appologize but I thought that if you have to make it work it is because there are some issues present. Otherwise it just works and you don't need to make "it" do anything so to speak. If you look at the person you're with and you are content and happy what is there to make work? It just does.
Because sometimes, you're frustrated. Sometimes external stressors are attacking your mindset, and being able to draw strength from that person is great solace. Sometimes, it takes EFFORT to do things that make you both happy. I am not a performance/musclecar/sportbike girl. Don't like it, just don't care. Don't dislike it. But, Other Guy enjoys those things...so I do things with him that he enjoys. That's effort. Likewise, he's not a baseball fan...at ALL...but...he watches the sport with me, because doing it with me is better than doing something else without me. Those things are the effort I'm talking about.
Pro tip: no matter how sarcastic your intent, do not ever, under any circumstances, play this song for your wife. She will not find the humor in it. Just... trust me. On a more serious note, never go to sleep mad at your wife/girlfriend. Simple, and insanely effective. Sometimes it's really difficult not to go to sleep angry, but by doing so it makes the two of you reach some kind of agreement or compromise before the end of the day, and keeps arguments from extending over a lengthy period. That being said, "making it work" also implies some kind of will or desire to keep the relationship going, so I'm going to take that as a given. If you don't have the will or desire, or you don't know if you do, then the above advice is not applicable.