That's not a concept I thought up. It comes from Neil Clark Warren, founder of E Harmony. I think there's a lot of wisdom in what he says. The trouble is few couples really get to know each other before marriage. The old saying: "There's plenty of fish in the sea," belies the basic drive of each person in the relationship, which is to hook and land the other, and often the quicker the better so as s/he never gets away. When that drive is too strong, then good preparation and reasoning get kicked to the curb.
I came across this on line and expected the usual touchy-feely answers to marital strife like finding a hobby or social activity to do together, etc.
Instead, what do I find? Suggestions that range from getting away from each other to having a cyber husband as well as your own.
Is this actually sending up the white flag of surrender regarding marriage?
I'm not sure whether to cheer or go Hmmmmmm.
i hope the article made you "hmmm". anything
worthwhile is worth fighting for. how would
a girl my age know this? i live with two
people who would take a bullet for each
other. and they fight for whats theirs
everyday. i am a firm believer in traditional
marriage. too many people get married on a
trial-and-error basis. how can a commitment
be consumated under those circumstances?
and I readily admit that I don't have the answers.
I am a firm believer in committment and striving for what is right. I'm just not sure that the traditional marriage model is right anymore; and this article seems to reinforce that.
You and your housemates are greatly admired.
that are taking a beating sir. A single article will never sway me from what i feel is right.
a mob rules mentality won't disuade me from
how i was brought up.
im afraid your last sentence has taken a beating of late. my friends aren't as enthusiastic as they were in the past. TY hon
I dated this woman back in the early 80's and would have married her under different circumstances. She made a practical choice given the situation and married a real good guy, and I moved across the country. But I don't think she ever had the deep emotional connection with him that we had, not when they were dating, certainly not when they were married- and it was always the missing part of her marriage.
Over the years, we kept in touch now and then with a letter or a call, but it was pretty minimal. Then, a year ago her last child left the house and went off to college. It didn't take long before we were exchanging almost daily emails and she was probably sharing more with me than with her husband. I'm single, so I enjoy having the contact with her, especially since we once had such a torrid relationship. But I often wonder if her husband has any idea that I'm still a part of her life after all these years, and in fact, I'm once again the guy providing the emotional support to his wife that he's never been able to do.
Neither of us want it to go beyond what it is, but it has occurred to me that I'm definitely helping her survive the empty nest syndrome and the husband that has alway provided for her physical needs, but never understood her emotional needs.
That's not a concept I thought up. It comes from Neil Clark Warren, founder of E Harmony. I think there's a lot of wisdom in what he says. The trouble is few couples really get to know each other before marriage. The old saying: "There's plenty of fish in the sea," belies the basic drive of each person in the relationship, which is to hook and land the other, and often the quicker the better so as s/he never gets away. When that drive is too strong, then good preparation and reasoning get kicked to the curb.
Marriage has been conceptualized in many different ways across time. My own impression is that 1880s-1950s, marriage was transformed from an economic & reproductive arrangement into an economic & reproductive arrangement that followed a rather idealized and romantic courtship period.
Basically, by coupling marriage and romantic love, the understood emotional contents understood as essential to healthy marriage were passion, lust, excitement, intense co-dependence...essentially the emotional contents of courtship and dating.
Coupled with this, individuals were dis-embedded from other intensive life-long relationships: relationships with siblings, childhood friends, religious communities, neighborhood networks.
Essentially, the happy-ending-ideal of marriage was unsustainable and stifling. & second wave feminist efforts ultimately eradicated the economic role of marriage.
Beginning in the 60s/70s, psychologists, feminists began to suggest alternatives to the 'happily-ever-after' ideal. (check out "The Open Marriage" - 1973). And a lot of people continue to support--if not sexually open--at least emotionally open marriages.
Courtship is the process in which they come together.
We expect to feel that pull continuously.
But...if the magnets are simply stuck together...the two partners never feel that emotional pull.
Pull them apart periodically...that draw remains.
Or...another analogy:
Modern expectations of marriage are like a softer version of the GFE.
You can't be passionate, lustful, emotionally present, & connected to your partner on a 24/7 basis for 20-60 years.
Live in separate houses, cities, sleep in different rooms...whatever...you recharge, you do your own thing, you recognize your partner's absence, you take care of basic stuff...you don't feel stifled, you have a limit amount of time you have together that you appreciate, it's sustainable.