Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What makes for a stable marriage?

randalolson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 142 posts

Re: What makes for a stable marriage?

#71

Post by Xcelerate »

jjoonathan wrote: post #57
Xcelerate wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> series of suppositions ... First is that people are static. I don't know of anyone who believes people are static. You even say yourself in the next sentence "We all know that we all change". No one (at least that I'm aware of) goes into marriage expecting the person they marry to stay the same over time. Another HN poster (can't remember who) put it beautifully once: marriage is an agreement to learn to love the p…

> marriage is an agreement to learn to love the person that each of you become over time The supposition that it is always possible to learn to love the other person is as ridiculous as the supposition that people are static. > If both people are in agreement that they might change and get divorced later before the marriage begins, then fine with me. Everyone who gets married knows that the possibility of divorce exi…

> The supposition that it is always possible to learn to love the other person is as ridiculous as the supposition that people are static.

No it's not. What do you support that statement with?

> Everyone who gets married knows that the possibility of divorce exists and roughly what divorce proceedings entail.

> I would wager that very few people are as hot-to-trot as you are on the notion of honor in contract literalism

I've found that people's life experiences significantly shape their views on things. Friends of mine that come from family backgrounds with a lot of divorce have the same view that you do. I call it the "realist" view. The idea of a permanent happy relationship is viewed with pessimism, as an "unrealistic fairy tale", because they've either never seen such a thing or experienced it themselves.

On the other hand, I come from a family background with multiple, near-perfect half-century or longer marriages. Out of my entire extended family, only one person has been divorced. And I wonder -- the divorce rate is so much lower in my family (30 or so people) than the rest of society -- why is this? And I think it's the "hot-to-trot notion of contract literalism" that you so summarily dismiss.

There's something fascinating that I've begun to realize in the last few years, and it's that people assume everyone else is more similar to them (or people they grew up with) than is actually the case. Cheaters assume everyone else would secretly cheat, just like them, given a good enough opportunity or motive. Liars assume everyone else does the same. They find it hard to believe that people actually do exist that don't view the world through the same negative lens that they do, including people who will honor their word above all else. And there's more of them than you might think.

(Btw, I didn't downvote you. I wish people wouldn't use the downvote button to express differing opinions; that's what comments are for.)

Re: What makes for a stable marriage?

#72

Post by genwin »

disallusioned42 wrote: post #60

This is a fascinating topic to me. I read it with great interest, and I might even go and do a bunch of my own analysis of the data. But I can't help but think that in a way the whole thing deeply misses the point. My skepticism started when I got to the third point: "How often you go to church". The results seem obvious to me. In general, churches frown on divorce, so of course church goers are going to have lower d…

Focus on divorce rate rather than happy marriage rate (I like that term!) describes pretty much every article on what makes a successful marriage.

Re: What makes for a stable marriage?

#73

Post by genwin »

Wintamute wrote: post #68

Slightly off topic, but I'm genuinely curious why forward-thinking secular people in the west still want to get married. Historically, and still in many parts of the world, its arguably an incredibly sexist tradition that has its roots in religious and patriarchal control. In many ways it has been completely re-defined, at least in the west, and doesn't have any/many of those connotations any more - but it begs the q…

There are gov't benefits to being married. For example, when one spouse dies the joint assets don't need to go through probate.

Re: What makes for a stable marriage?

#74

Post by atomical »

jostylr wrote: post #48

I would suggest that if you want a good and wonderful marriage, then respect is key. Have someone observe the couple and watch the dynamic. I wonder how much of the various graphs could correlate with likelihood of respecting the other. I am surprised by the length to proposal. My opinion is that once you meet someone that really clicks, then it works out quickly and well. I wonder if there is another dynamic that co…

The "it just happened naturally" relationship is a bit of a myth. They do things their way; you do things your way. There's so much to be negotiated! But before that happens and a couple lives separately everything is fantastic 24/7!

Re: What makes for a stable marriage?

#76

Post by general_failure »

Wintamute wrote: post #68

Slightly off topic, but I'm genuinely curious why forward-thinking secular people in the west still want to get married. Historically, and still in many parts of the world, its arguably an incredibly sexist tradition that has its roots in religious and patriarchal control. In many ways it has been completely re-defined, at least in the west, and doesn't have any/many of those connotations any more - but it begs the q…

Many of my friends married because of visa restrictions. You cannot bring your girl friend unless married to the US for example.

Re: What makes for a stable marriage?

#77

Post by doorhammer »

disallusioned42 wrote: post #60

This is a fascinating topic to me. I read it with great interest, and I might even go and do a bunch of my own analysis of the data. But I can't help but think that in a way the whole thing deeply misses the point. My skepticism started when I got to the third point: "How often you go to church". The results seem obvious to me. In general, churches frown on divorce, so of course church goers are going to have lower d…

I think the data is a fascinating point for lively conversation and conjecture as long as you understand that you can only draw so much so much in the way of specific causation from it.

I didn't look at the raw data, but it also seems like some of the info might be inherently linked. Eloping might imply you don't regularly attend church, or if you do that you're marrying outside the church consent. Regularly attending church can bring with it a relatively stable set of defaults to invite to a wedding. A large attendee list also might imply affluence, or having taken longer to plan the wedding, implying a longer pre-marriage relationship. All just flippant conjecture, of course, but interesting.

I wonder if there's anything in the data you could use as a sort of halfway proxy for whatever you'd consider a 'happy' or contented relationship.

I grew up in a church environment as well, and I saw my share of marriages held together by social pressure, but I also wonder if some of the other marriages are better because a lot of people I knew very much had the idea that "this is forever, so I don't even have to think about it anymore." It wasn't even a point of consideration anymore. I wonder if that can relieve some level of psychological stress in a marriage that's not absolute Perfect, but pretty decent, instead of wondering if you missed some distorted version of "the one". (again more conjecture)

Re: What makes for a stable marriage?

#78

Post by phamilton »

chaostheory wrote: post #59

Here's the paper from Emory that the post was based on http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2501480&u... The only thing that was contradictory was the parts about the wedding. How can you not spend 20k or more when there are 200 or more guests?

I had almost 400 guests at my wedding and it cost Venue: grandparent's backyard. Had that not been available a local church's community center would have worked (usually free or "free" with a donation of like $500).

Food: simple catered food. The wedding had a picnic theme (summer wedding) so we went w/ sliders and other finger foods. $8/head

Chairs and tables: Rented, but set up ourselves.

Photographer: Flew in someone from out of state. Much cheaper than a local LA photographer.

Dance Floor: Rented ($800) DJ: iPod with a playlist

Decorations: made our own decorations, borrowed strands of lights, etc.

It was a great wedding, wasn't terribly expensive and had a lot of guests.

Re: What makes for a stable marriage?

#79

Post by Natsu »

Xcelerate wrote: post #71
jjoonathan wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> marriage is an agreement to learn to love the person that each of you become over time The supposition that it is always possible to learn to love the other person is as ridiculous as the supposition that people are static. > If both people are in agreement that they might change and get divorced later before the marriage begins, then fine with me. Everyone who gets married knows that the possibility of divorce exi…

> The supposition that it is always possible to learn to love the other person is as ridiculous as the supposition that people are static. No it's not. What do you support that statement with? > Everyone who gets married knows that the possibility of divorce exists and roughly what divorce proceedings entail. > I would wager that very few people are as hot-to-trot as you are on the notion of honor in contract literal…

That's called 'projection' and I know what you mean. If you're put into a Prisoner's Dilemma with someone who believes that people always cheat, it's not hard to understand what they will do.

Re: What makes for a stable marriage?

#80

Post by lotharbot »

chaostheory wrote: post #59

Here's the paper from Emory that the post was based on http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2501480&u... The only thing that was contradictory was the parts about the wedding. How can you not spend 20k or more when there are 200 or more guests?

> "How can you not spend 20k or more when there are 200 or more guests?"

The short answer is: don't do the expensive things people normally do at their weddings.

It's not required to have a meal at a wedding; some American subcultures expect cake and punch only. It's not required to spend thousands on a single-use dress; my grandma still brags about getting her dress on clearance and being able to wear it for multiple occasions. It's not required to have thousands of dollars of flowers; at my wedding, my mother-in-law and her friends grew flowers in their gardens for us, and my sister's wedding (one week from today) will use the church's silk flowers. You can actually have a wedding with 200+ guests and still come in under $1000 if that happens to align with your priorities.

Post reply on HN