Marriage

[Cackalacky]

It's usually the males of other species putting on all the makeup and pushup bras, so to speak.....and frankly, its because we (males) have very little to offer in terms of ensuring the next generation. In other species, 'attractiveness' is nothing more than an indicator of ability to produce and protect offspring with a better than average chance of survival.

The human condition is decidedly post-darwinian.

There are many forms courtship takes in the world as well as what form the eventual family structure takes. Humans are most certainly not an exception to the rule. As dshans said I am not trying to go down that route here but as far as humans being post Darwinian, I disagree (strongly).

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Cackalacky,

In response to your post above:

It appears two issues are being conflated here. Appreciation of beauty vs. misogyny. I expect men to seek beauty, to want beauty in their life but if beauty is sought at the expense of the more important traits that help stabilize a marriage then we often get what we signed up for.

There is nothing wrong with marrying an attractive wife who isn't obsessed with her own beauty, all the better if you find such a woman. To refer to a woman as a "trophy wife" is to reduce her to an object. It's no different than calling her your "booty call", "housekeeper", etc. I hope it's apparent that this is the epitome of objectifying a woman. She is a thing, from which you derive pleasure and nothing more or from which you receive house chores in exchange for living quarters, and nothing more.

There is a spiritual union of two people when marriage occurs - if both spirits are not fed, they atrophy to the point of seeking a dissolution of their union in civil courts (hint: it's a spiritual union which the courts do not preside over). As stated earlier, discuss everything you can think of when courting a woman, no topic should be taboo because it will come up in marriage and I promise you it's better to have discussed earlier than later. It's important that both people recognize that "falling in love" is a misnomer. There can be intense sexual attraction and heart-felt love and excitement when the initial courting takes place but love is a choice.

We must choose to love the other every day despite the subsiding of the initial pleasure surge. A repeated stimulus begins to lose it's effect in all sensory vehicles. The dynamics of a relationship are no different. You must find ways to stay interested, or to settle on a healthy disinterest if you are both exhausted from spending too much time together.

My point from the beginning is that how we enter a relationship often dictates how that relationship will unfold. Men must choose to be men, every day. That is something with which I still wrestle.

 

[irish1958]

Agree. I'm marrying a recent grad from medical school. It's a career field that is barbarically inflexible, especially as it relates to the residency, so we're struggling to make it work. Very hard for me to find a job near the ONE place she has to be. No regrets on the woman, just regrets that it isn't the 50s anymore. (Not really---looking forward to her making bank haha).

The fifties weren't a cake-walk. Thirty six hour days, seven day weeks, zero time off, no vacation, and they would give you free parking, an on-call bed, a pager and $100 a month. If you were lucky you might get Christmas off one of the years you were an intern-resident.

 

[Cackalacky]

Cackalacky,

In response to your post above:

It appears two issues are being conflated here. Appreciation of beauty vs. misogyny. I expect men to seek beauty, to want beauty in their life but if beauty is sought at the expense of the more important traits that help stabilize a marriage then we often get what we signed up for.

There is nothing wrong with marrying an attractive wife who isn't obsessed with her own beauty, all the better if you find such a woman. To refer to a woman as a "trophy wife" is to reduce her to an object. It's no different than calling her your "booty call", "housekeeper", etc. I hope it's apparent that this is the epitome of objectifying a woman. She is a thing, from which you derive pleasure and nothing more or from which you receive house chores in exchange for living quarters, and nothing more.

There is a spiritual union of two people when marriage occurs - if both spirits are not fed, they atrophy to the point of seeking a dissolution of their union in civil courts (hint: it's a spiritual union which the courts do not preside over). As stated earlier, discuss everything you can think of when courting a woman, no topic should be taboo because it will come up in marriage and I promise you it's better to have discussed earlier than later. It's important that both people recognize that "falling in love" is a misnomer. There can be intense sexual attraction and heart-felt love and excitement when the initial courting takes place but love is a choice.

We must choose to love the other every day despite the subsiding of the initial pleasure surge. A repeated stimulus begins to lose it's effect in all sensory vehicles. The dynamics of a relationship are no different. You must find ways to stay interested, or to settle on a healthy disinterest if you are both exhausted from spending too much time together.

My point from the beginning is that how we enter a relationship often dictates how that relationship will unfold. Men must choose to be men, every day. That is something with which I still wrestle.

I disagree with most of this as marriage is a cultural thing dictated by many factors not just spirituality. Also your statement is deeply associated with the western Christian version of marriage. All I am saying is that the mechanism for choosing a partner( s) is not globally homogenous today nor was it in the past. Humans have developed several ways to join partners together. Who is right and who is wrong? IDK. All I know is I love my wife and family and I have my own story in getting where I am today. Clearly it is defined by the current legal and societal standards in which I find myself. Would it be different if I lived in Mali, Afghanistan, Japan or Papau New Guinea? Most definitely.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

I disagree with most of this as marriage is a cultural thing dictated by many factors not just spirituality. Also your statement is deeply associated with the western Christian version of marriage. All I am saying is that the mechanism for choosing a partner( s) is not globally homogenous today nor was it in the past. Humans have developed several ways to join partners together. Who is right and who is wrong? IDK. All I know is I love my wife and family and I have my own story in getting where I am today. Clearly it is defined by the current legal and societal standards in which I find myself. Would it be different if I lived in Mali, Afghanistan, Japan or Papau New Guinea? Most definitely.

Do you disagree with the distinction between beauty and misogyny? If so, I'd love to hear your reasoning.

Marriage is deeply rooted in culture and I find myself in the west, living in a culture that has strong historical ties to Christianity. What mechanism for choosing a partner do you speak of? Which of my tenets for partner selection would you deny based on varying legal or societal standards?

What are these unique ways that humans have developed to join partners together? Forgiving me for feigning ignorance, as I sincerely enjoy this conversation.

Can anything be claimed to be sacramental when discussing with you or do you simply shrug it off as unscientific? I'm just curious because it's not as if I don't routinely here the things you posted but I want to better understand your position.

 

[Irish#1]

It's really pretty simple. Find someone you like and who also likes you. Say "I do".

41+ years

 

[Cackalacky]

Do you disagree with the distinction between beauty and misogyny? If so, I'd love to hear your reasoning.

Misogyny implies a dislike or hatred of women and is not specific to beauty. Misogynists justify their behavior in many ways. The concept of a trophy wife or husband is denigrating but is far more narcissistic. Further beauty is relative. What I find beautiful is not what others do. So my trophy wife my not be a trophy to you. In my opinion it is much more telling of narcissism than misogyny. Further, women are just as likely to base their decisions on beauty and are therefore guilty of the same narcissism and by definition not misogyny.

Marriage is deeply rooted in culture and I find myself in the west, living in a culture that has strong historical ties to Christianity. What mechanism for choosing a partner do you speak of? Which of my tenets for partner selection would you deny based on varying legal or societal standards?

Marriage as you define it is not universal. Polygamy, forced unions, doweries, arranged marriages, etc are all types of partner selection mechanisms that currently exist and have been around much longer than our western version. Describing each in terms of benefits to the society in which it is practiced is beyond my knowledge or desire to do so on an internet message board. Just know that there are stable societies that have adopted such mechanisms

What are these unique ways that humans have developed to join partners together? Forgiving me for feigning ignorance, as I sincerely enjoy this conversation.

For the sake of brevity:Marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Can anything be claimed to be sacramental when discussing with you or do you simply shrug it off as unscientific? I'm just curious because it's not as if I don't routinely here the things you posted but I want to better understand your position.

Sure you can claim it, but that does not imply it is not worthy of questioning ( or taboo) nor is it able to be applied to other human cultures and civilizations. Do not mistake my brevity with dismissal. Further you should acknowledge that there are other scenarios and that your specific brand of marriage that you adhere to is the result of your upbringing and cultural context and may not suffice or be accepted in other parts of the world.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Misogyny implies a dislike or hatred of women and is not specific to beauty. Misogynists justify their behavior in many ways. The concept of a trophy wife or husband is denigrating but is far more narcissistic. Further beauty is relative. What I find beautiful is not what others do. So my trophy wife my not be a trophy to you. In my opinion it is much more telling of narcissism than misogyny. Further, women are just as likely to base their decisions on beauty and are therefore guilty of the same narcissism and by definition not misogyny.

Viewing a woman as an object or terming it as such is dismissing the personhood of that woman and subjugating her. There really isn't an argument here. Basing a decision on beauty isn't misogyny! That hasn't been my argument in the slightest. If your sole criteria or it's heavily weighted average revolves around beauty, I view that as shortsighted but not misogynistic. Referring to a woman in an objective manner or frequenting places that objectify women is misogynistic, I don't care about the reasons. We are discussing two different things.


Marriage as you define it is not universal. Polygamy, forced unions, doweries, arranged marriages, etc are all types of partner selection mechanisms that current exist and have been around much long than our western version.Describing each in terms of benefits to the society in which it is practiced is beyond my knowledge or desire to do so on an internet message board. Just know that there are stable societies that have adopted such mechanisms

Forced unions, doweries and arranged marriages serve(d) a purpose in their time and place but I fail to see how any of that applies to the audience at hand. This discussion began with some guys discussing the pros and cons of marriage with some anecdotal evidence thrown in. In this western world, where the overwhelming majority of people will choose who they want to marry, I gave some suggestions for evaluation and I explained some of the cultural significance on a Catholic football team's message board, thus I think I was fair in assuming the majority of my audience. Since the price to read my thoughts is nominal, I'll also add: caveat emptor


For the sake of brevity:Marriage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thank you for the wikipedia article, I'm some what familiar that my Judeo-Christian notions aren't the only notions in the world. I also understand that there have been great successes and failures with the Western world experiment. Much of the Eastern world has beauty I admire and mindsets that would serve us well. I find wabi-sabi a very healthy mindset for our understanding of this world. It's a much healthier way to view things in comparison to the western cycle of consumption.


Sure you can claim it, but that does not imply it is not worthy of questioning ( or taboo) nor is it able to be applied to other human cultures and civilizations. Do not mistake my brevity with dismissal. Further you should acknowledge that there are other scenarios and that your specific brand of marriage that you adhere to is the result of your upbringing and cultural context and may not suffice or be accepted in other parts of the world.

It is certainly able to be applied to other cultures but it may take some thought. Many of the worlds patterns are shared but some offer greater fulfillment. I won't be so arrogant to claim that my way is the best way, I will claim that the stability of marriages often dictates the stability of societies. Where would my marriage not be accepted? Are you referencing religious conflict? Or the hypothetical attempt to gain access to a polygamist's commune? What purpose does it serve to bring this to light in our current discussion? The point of my replies has been centered on the presumed audience, if this were a different message board, I would've crafted my replies to conform.

 

[Cackalacky]

I guess where we are missing each other is that the crafting of my answer would be the same no matter where I post it. So .... I will end it here. Carry on

 

[MNIrishman]

The fifties weren't a cake-walk. Thirty six hour days, seven day weeks, zero time off, no vacation, and they would give you free parking, an on-call bed, a pager and $100 a month. If you were lucky you might get Christmas off one of the years you were an intern-resident.

Haha, I was flippantly referring to the 'good old days' when women stayed home so school and career coordination weren't an issue.

 

[wizards8507]

Haha, I was flippantly referring to the 'good old days' when women stayed home so school and career coordination weren't an issue.

Be careful with that attitude. My wife will be staying home when our daughter is born and likely won't work outside the home for many years, if ever. That's the correct decision for our family and she and I both agree. The attitude that a woman must pursue a career in order to be "equal" to her husband is just as ignorant as believing that she MUST stay home.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 4

 

[Emcee77]

Agree. I'm marrying a recent grad from medical school. It's a career field that is barbarically inflexible, especially as it relates to the residency, so we're struggling to make it work. Very hard for me to find a job near the ONE place she has to be. No regrets on the woman, just regrets that it isn't the 50s anymore. (Not really---looking forward to her making bank haha).

Hang in there. My wife is a doc. Residency was tough, and the match process was tough, as it basically dictated where I went to law school (I turned down scholarship offers from much better law schools to be in the same city as her -- although to be honest, in hindsight, I'm pleased with the way that worked out, so I shouldn't act like it was a big sacrifice). But we got through it with a deliriously happy marriage intact. It can be done.

 

[Emcee77]

Be careful with that attitude. My wife will be staying home when our daughter is born and likely won't work outside the home for many years, if ever. That's the correct decision for our family and she and I both agree. The attitude that a woman must pursue a career in order to be "equal" to her husband is just as ignorant as believing that she MUST stay home.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 4

He wasn't saying that. I thought it was very clear that he was just saying that in today's world it is difficult for two professionals to coordinate two demanding careers so that they take both husband and wife to the same city, for families that choose to do that. There was no reason for you to condescendingly explain to MN that wives don't have to work if they don't want to. If anyone believes that they do, I agree that that is ignorant, but MN didn't say or imply that.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

I guess where we are missing each other is that the crafting of my answer would be the same no matter where I post it. So .... I will end it here. Carry on

Ha ha, well done. I took the time to post a lengthy reply and ask questions and you simply shrug it off with a, "My answers are so relevant to everyone with my broad, open-minded approach that I never have to think about who I'm speaking to."

Also, there's a subtle jab that I'm being disingenuous by catering my answers to a demographic. i.e - using Catholic terminology to describe the catholicity of marriage.

It's hard to argue with that so I guess we can agree to disagree.

 

[Irish#1]

Be careful with that attitude. My wife will be staying home when our daughter is born and likely won't work outside the home for many years, if ever. That's the correct decision for our family and she and I both agree. The attitude that a woman must pursue a career in order to be "equal" to her husband is just as ignorant as believing that she MUST stay home.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S III using Tapatalk 4

Heard something on TV a while back that the number of stay at home wives is rising again.

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

Ha ha, well done. I took the time to post a lengthy reply and ask questions and you simply shrug it off with a, "My answers are so relevant to everyone with my broad, open-minded approach that I never have to think about who I'm speaking to."

Also, there's a subtle jab that I'm being disingenuous by catering my answers to a demographic. i.e - using Catholic terminology to describe the catholicity of marriage.

It's hard to argue with that so I guess we can agree to disagree.

Dudes marrying strippers/trophy wives probably aren't the best demographic for a discussion on spiritual unions lol

 

[MNIrishman]

Hang in there. My wife is a doc. Residency was tough, and the match process was tough, as it basically dictated where I went to law school (I turned down scholarship offers from much better law schools to be in the same city as her -- although to be honest, in hindsight, I'm pleased with the way that worked out, so I shouldn't act like it was a big sacrifice). But we got through it with a deliriously happy marriage intact. It can be done.

Thanks for the words of encouragement. We just moved to Lansing for the residency, which is problematic because the job market isn't so good and she can't exactly leave to accommodate me. I have potential opportunities in Ann Arbor, Detroit, and Midland, but those are all an hour away. It looks like I may have to man up and commute a bit for a while---since they joyfully surprise you with where the residency is at the last minute, I didn't have the time to get a job before we got there, so apartment is in Lansing. That probably means an hour commute each way for me if (when?) I get a job in the next year. This whole experience makes me think medical education could really use an overhaul. It's unnecessarily drawn out, expensive, and family-unfriendly.

 

[JTLA]

 

[Irish8248]

Hang in there. My wife is a doc. Residency was tough, and the match process was tough, as it basically dictated where I went to law school (I turned down scholarship offers from much better law schools to be in the same city as her -- although to be honest, in hindsight, I'm pleased with the way that worked out, so I shouldn't act like it was a big sacrifice). But we got through it with a deliriously happy marriage intact. It can be done.

Pretty impressive to survive law school... I've never seen so many relationships go up in flames than fall semester first year ... law school is where relationships go to die lol

 

[Irish#1]

Pretty impressive to survive law school... I've never seen so many relationships go up in flames than fall semester first year ... law school is where relationships go to die lol

Or be built!

 

[Irish#1]

LOL

 

[Who'saWildManNow]

Never settle.

Finding the right person is vital to your happiness. If you're compatible and respectful of each other the marriage part is easy.

It's when you have the first kid the wrecking ball comes swinging in! The sacrifices and priority changes are abundant and if your marriage isn't strong it will be tested early.

Most importantly, make sure it's what you really want before you jump in.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Heard something on TV a while back that the number of stay at home wives is rising again.

My wife is one.

She felt there was pressure on her to be the all everything woman. By that, she would be the perfect mother, the perfect worker, the perfect wife and the perfect friend. It wasn't long until she realized that trying to be everything to everyone was not allowing her to enjoy what all of those things could offer her. At that point, she concluded that the most important thing to her was being able to enjoy our young family, since the first few years go by quick and before you know it, they are in school. It's been a tough transition for her though, as she still admits to me that her entire life she was told she must work to be equal. The good news is that our neighborhood is full of young families with many stay at home mothers, which has helped.

 

[Emcee77]

Pretty impressive to survive law school... I've never seen so many relationships go up in flames than fall semester first year ... law school is where relationships go to die lol

Absolutely, law school is brutal on relationships. What helped us is that we were both equally busy. If she had been sitting at home while I was in the library all night, it might not have worked. But she was on call at the hospital anyway. We were just smart enough or lucky enough to get the timing right ...

Which goes back to MN's original point, which I think was an excellent one: one of the hardest things in turning a relationship into a marriage nowadays is getting that timing right with regard to careers, advanced schooling, etc.

 

[gkIrish]

Pretty impressive to survive law school... I've never seen so many relationships go up in flames than fall semester first year ... law school is where relationships go to die lol

Amen. I made it to fall semester of 2L year before my 4.5 year relationship ended.

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

My wife is one.

She felt there was pressure on her to be the all everything woman. By that, she would be the perfect mother, the perfect worker, the perfect wife and the perfect friend. It wasn't long until she realized that trying to be everything to everyone was not allowing her to enjoy what all of those things could offer her. At that point, she concluded that the most important thing to her was being able to enjoy our young family, since the first few years go by quick and before you know it, they are in school. It's been a tough transition for her though, as she still admits to me that her entire life she was told she must work to be equal. The good news is that our neighborhood is full of young families with many stay at home mothers, which has helped.

FWIW, we are experiencing that process right now. Our first son is due at the end of Sept (not on gameday, we've had this discussion already), but we've been going back and forth between her working part time and simply staying at home. She works at one of the hospitals here so we get our insurance through her employer but if she goes part time, their is a strong disincentive to not carry health insurance by large premiums. It's almost a toss up on the financial side so it'll ultimately come down to what she wants to do.

Everyone is different so we constantly hear varying thoughts. Some women love staying home, some love to get back to work. We are playing it safe by having her go back after maternity leave only part time. She can then assess if it's helpful to get out of the house a couple days a week or if she has remorse for leaving our son. I'm guessing by Feb-Mar of '15, we'll know how our family dynamics will play out.

At this point, she could stay at home since my job is able to cover our needs but should I lose my current contract or not find another one after this one expires (2019), we'll be having stressful talks that balance needs of the family vs. financial incentives. It's such a tightrope to walk because we ultimately believe it's in our children's best interest to have their parents present and active in their lives more than provide them with shiny things but we don't want to get to a point where we are pressed to make payments on anything (which has led to some unconventional decisions for us).

 

[Ndaccountant]

FWIW, we are experiencing that process right now. Our first son is due at the end of Sept (not on gameday, we've had this discussion already), but we've been going back and forth between her working part time and simply staying at home. She works at one of the hospitals here so we get our insurance through her employer but if she goes part time, their is a strong disincentive to not carry health insurance by large premiums. It's almost a toss up on the financial side so it'll ultimately come down to what she wants to do.

Everyone is different so we constantly hear varying thoughts. Some women love staying home, some love to get back to work. We are playing it safe by having her go back after maternity leave only part time. She can then assess if it's helpful to get out of the house a couple days a week or if she has remorse for leaving our son. I'm guessing by Feb-Mar of '15, we'll know how our family dynamics will play out.

At this point, she could stay at home since my job is able to cover our needs but should I lose my current contract or not find another one after this one expires (2019), we'll be having stressful talks that balance needs of the family vs. financial incentives. It's such a tightrope to walk because we ultimately believe it's in our children's best interest to have their parents present and active in their lives more than provide them with shiny things but we don't want to get to a point where we are pressed to make payments on anything (which has led to some unconventional decisions for us).

Best of luck.

My started part time, but that only for a short time. It's a very personal decision for the family and for her. I have a had probably half a dozen women I worked with come back from maternity only to leave the company to stay at home.

 

[Emcee77]

FWIW, we are experiencing that process right now. Our first son is due at the end of Sept (not on gameday, we've had this discussion already), but we've been going back and forth between her working part time and simply staying at home. She works at one of the hospitals here so we get our insurance through her employer but if she goes part time, their is a strong disincentive to not carry health insurance by large premiums. It's almost a toss up on the financial side so it'll ultimately come down to what she wants to do.

Everyone is different so we constantly hear varying thoughts. Some women love staying home, some love to get back to work. We are playing it safe by having her go back after maternity leave only part time. She can then assess if it's helpful to get out of the house a couple days a week or if she has remorse for leaving our son. I'm guessing by Feb-Mar of '15, we'll know how our family dynamics will play out.

FWIW, I think that's a good plan, going part time for a bit to see how it goes. In my experience, as you say, women react to motherhood in different ways. I have sometimes seen women have kids and decide that they really want to devote themselves fully to raising their family and children, even if they were previously gung ho about their careers (that's a dangerous stereotype, I know, but I have seen it happen, especially with teachers, who are already in the child development business anyway, so to speak). Other women feel such a strong sense of vocation in their chosen career that, despite the desire to be with their children all the time, which I think every mother has, they couldn't be happy not working. (My wife is one of these ... she is just incredibly passionate about her chosen field and believes she has almost a moral responsibility to provide good health care to her patients, who might not be able to get it otherwise.) If your wife isn't sure which one she is, it would be great to have the chance to try both, in a way. I agree with ndaccountant that it's a personal decision every woman and family has to make for her/itself. And then you'll get a chance to see how the economics are working out, too.

 

[NDohio]

FWIW, we are experiencing that process right now. Our first son is due at the end of Sept (not on gameday, we've had this discussion already), but we've been going back and forth between her working part time and simply staying at home. She works at one of the hospitals here so we get our insurance through her employer but if she goes part time, their is a strong disincentive to not carry health insurance by large premiums. It's almost a toss up on the financial side so it'll ultimately come down to what she wants to do.

Everyone is different so we constantly hear varying thoughts. Some women love staying home, some love to get back to work. We are playing it safe by having her go back after maternity leave only part time. She can then assess if it's helpful to get out of the house a couple days a week or if she has remorse for leaving our son. I'm guessing by Feb-Mar of '15, we'll know how our family dynamics will play out.

At this point, she could stay at home since my job is able to cover our needs but should I lose my current contract or not find another one after this one expires (2019), we'll be having stressful talks that balance needs of the family vs. financial incentives. It's such a tightrope to walk because we ultimately believe it's in our children's best interest to have their parents present and active in their lives more than provide them with shiny things but we don't want to get to a point where we are pressed to make payments on anything (which has led to some unconventional decisions for us).

Good luck with your decision. My wife put her career on hold for 11 years to stay at home. It definitely puts a financial strain on the household, but for us, we wouldn't trade the experiences our kids had for any of those shiny things. We always found a way to pay for dance lessons, sports seasons, music lessons, vacations, etc.

The number one piece of advice I would give to you and your wife is to make sure she finds a group of other stay-at-home moms. The lack of adult interaction that can come with being a stay-at-home mom was my wife's biggest struggle. Once she found a group of moms to hang out with, it made a world of difference.

 

[wizards8507]

Interesting points being made here. I've been married for three years with our first child on the way around Halloween. My wife worked full time when we lived in Florida but didn't make much money. As a zookeeper, she had her dream job but work was more about playing with rhinos all day than the impact $10 an hour had on our budget. She loves her animals, but doesn't have much of a desire to be successful in the traditional "career" sense of the word. It was very important to us to get out of Florida and back closer to family, so we came to a place where I found a great job and the location is right in between my family and hers, but there's not a zoo within 50 miles. She was probably going to quit had we stayed in Florida anyways, since the lack of free weekends was a challenge even without a baby, but there was still a lot of stress making sure this was a decision we were making, not one that she was going along with because she thought it was what I wanted. Ultimately, I think we benefit from the fact that we're more than fine financially without her working outside the home so she'll be able to do volunteer work or a part-time job with very specific hours if she needs to "scratch the itch" of getting back out there.