Printable View
I'm soon to be divorced (not by my will), but I agree with you. I will remarry eventually. I will stay true to my vows. I will live according to my own word. Marriage is a commitment and should be respected as such. When people agree to just live together, they make no commitment.Quote:
Originally Posted by KCurtis
I think some people who aren't married make that commitment. It's just a different way of thinking. Many gay people I believe have that same commitment, and have for hundreds of years.Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
I guess I had a particular attitude in mind when I said "just live together". Often times we hear, "We if it doesn't work out, we'll just split." That is an attitude that I've never adopted. This isn't to assume that there aren't those who are living together don't make a commitment. It's just easier to break that commitment more and more these days.Quote:
Originally Posted by KCurtis
That is definitely true. I never had that attitude either. I'm sorry for your divorce.Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
I see where you're coming from. Its just that I look around me and see marriages failing like ripe falling fruit, and I feel apprehension towards the fate of my own future marriage. I take the "from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part" thing very seriously but it seems many do not.Quote:
Originally Posted by KCurtis
In my opinion, if you're going to get married, or choose that you want to live your life with someone, you should know that person's it for you.
If you let them go, then you should live with loyalty towards them even as you part, and live your life on your own. That is the most honourable thing to do, to me.
It's a very traditional viewpoint, but I think that our relationships with people are precious.
It seems to me that people have an increasingly flippant, flighty view of marriage and relationships, that you can just turn them on and off like a switch. ''Oh, if I don't like him/her, it's just a stepping stone towards my perfect partner, my Soul Mate! I can just go and be with someone else and see if they fit the bill.''
And that kind of attitude is not progressive for our society as a whole.
Honestly, if you can get along with the person you're with, there's no real reason to separate. Love changes, as all things in life do.
We should nurture and cultivate our relationships, and bring together a more eastern-view, that is, to embrace community and family more, instead of becoming disconnected and increasingly unhappy.
Are there no unhappy marriages in the East or are they less talked about?Quote:
Originally Posted by BookBeauty
In my opinion, it is rather simple (you are welcome! :D ) : Marriage works for those who want to make it work and does not for those who cannot be bothered to put the effort into it. It is like one's relationship with one's body. You might wish you were thinner, taller, fitter and work at it to keep it that way if you are really bothered; however, by simply wishing to have a fit body will not guarantee you those muscles you yearn for unless you are willing to hit the gym three times a week.
I'm glad you do! And you will make sure the person you marry has the same beliefs, and to hell with everyone else!Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy88
Very well stated, and I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by BookBeauty
Probably bucket loads! Enormous amounts! Same as any other place, or maybe more, I have no idea. That's a separate issue though, and wasn't the point I was trying to make. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
I simply meant it as an example. In many Western families, and mine is no different, there is more disconnection and there isn't as much importance placed upon community and family. Probably in Eastern families too, nowadays, actually, come to think of it... As technology and popular culture becomes more widespread.
But, there are good examples of community and family working together in the East. I believe I read a news story about the tragic happenings in Japan, and yet there was no looting.
There are advantages and disadvantages everywhere, but we can all benefit from seeing what works and trying to incorporate it into our lives. :)
I do like your example of working with a marriage, as you would with your health, and not simply sitting around wishing for it to happen. It's absolutely true, as far as I'm concerned.
And thanks, KCurtis. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BookBeauty
The East is following the trends of the West, but still the family and the community are important issues here--however, it is not goody goody all the time. Many times, marriages fail because of family and community.
We have a saying here 'joray aasmaanon pe bante hain' which can be translated as 'marriages are made in heaven' but I read this book where it said (it's not a personal favorite of mine, actually far from that, but this quote regarding marriages did quite catch my fancy):Despite of that, I don't think marriages are going to die anytime soon. I believe so because of religious and cultural reasons as well as the human need for bonding and attraction towards permanence of things. The need of belonging. And I also don't agree they were more blissful in the earlier times. Just because people were 'made' to tolerate each other better or divorce was not as acceptable as it is today does not actually make the marriages more blissful. Quite on the contrary, in my humble opinion.Quote:
Who says marriages are made in heaven? Marriages are made on earth, by earthlings for purely earthly reasons the top-most being money.
I think what Pensive says is true: in the past, people maybe stayed married because it was done, but were not the happier for it.
However, these days it seems that once there is a disagreement (or even worse, that one partner at least is no longer 'in love') that the marriage is over. Why? I think Victor Meldrew in One Foot in the Grave puts it nicely when he says that 'marriage is spraying each other with [a medical pain-killing spray] when you've hurt your back'. In the long term things become routine, but it does not mean that your partner is not worth it. My hubby and I have had our ups and downs and actually he is turning into a kind of Victor Meldrew (complaining all the time), and I once had a crush when things were not going well, but I decided he was worth more as a person and a best friend. I could have walked away, but I didn't feel that was right. We have worked on it. One has to be realistic about things: things will not be the same as in the beginning.
What is actually the difference between living together long term and marriage? On a purely earthly level that is, leaving religious or cultural obligations to one side. If you live together in the long term, you have also bought a house or are renting a place, you have children, you have acquired things together (sofas and that kind of thing), you maybe have joint savings (that is something you can rule out from the start but people do tend to get complaisant about these things) etc. So the money thing crops up anyway. Unless you both contribute as much in terms of money: you both contribute exactly half of the warranty for the house, exactly half of registration fees, cover exactly half of the mortgage on it, or cover exactly half of the rent, you each cover exactly half of operational costs (electricity, taxes, gas, water, insurance), exactly half of anything you buy, eat, holidays, etc. etc. marriage is no different from living together. And then still, it is not because you can contribute half of exactly everything that you can actually afford the full hog.
I suppose I don't have to say that mainly women decide to stay at home a little more for the children or take less well-paying jobs and then the 50%-thing goes out of the window altogether. And if your partner earns more than you, does he have more right to the house or not? Are you going to split every single thing you buy your little daughter/son?
I seem to remember that someone said something about weddings earlier. I will say this: I got married with a big party for 120 people, paid for by myself/us, but a cheap wedding dress which I regret. Actually I both regret it. The money could have been better spent than on a party you do not enjoy. Fewer people (you don't notice them anyway) would have been OK. It's actually the most useless day you can pay for: you spend the first part running around/getting nervous and the second part being spoken to by everyone. Before you know it it's evening and what have you had from it? I say, go for a nice dinner, invite only those people who care about you and whom you often hear or see, have a nice service and go on a nice holiday with the rest of your €15,000.
Kiki when you said leaving religious or cultural obligations to one side, did you also mean the formal ceremony where people take vows to honour each other? For some people, like me it's about values rather than religious or cultural reasons. I would never enter into a defacto relationship with a man since my personal experiences taught me that if I'm good enough to fill the role of a psuedo wife, then I'm obviously good enough to marry so why settle for less?
That doesn't mean I condemn others who choose to live together because that is entirely their business. It simply means defacto relationships are not right for me because if we can't make a binding lifetime comittment to each other, then I have no earthly reason living with a man pretending that we have.
..so you do think that not-being-married is 'less'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
I meant leaving the obligation to marry to be together or to be considered as a couple to one side. One can commit oneself without the whole public shabang or even without the private shabang, but if that is what you wish, then that is your choice. [edit] I forgot to mention that we committed ourselves publically too (in church).Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
My only point was that the assumption that 'one can get out more easily' in a non-commitment relationship (i.e. living together) is not really true.