You're just a kid, how would you know what you want for the rest of your life?

You're viewing a single thread.

226 comments

As people wait longer to marry over the generations, the divorce rate has increased and level of "happiness" has declined.
Causation yadda yadda yadda. You still can't actually disprove its why.
- I could see that. As somebody who met my wife in my teens, I never lived on my own except in a dorm room. If I had a decade of the bachelor life first, I think I would have a very different perspective. I would have a different living arrangement to compare with.
  As it is, my married life seems like the default. There’s no “it’s better/worse for this reason.” And obviously things are going well. It’s not like you should stick with a shit relationship just because it’s all you know. Unfortunately I think that happens way too often.
- The divorce rate among millennials is decreasing in the US compared to earlier generations. That said, reducing it to how long people are waiting to marry ignores a lot of other factors. For instance, low income couples are more likely to never marry, their relationships are less stable, and if they do get married they are more likely to get divorced.
  
  Another thing that's clearly unaccounted for is that people who divorce in their 20's can remarry... and do things differently when they're a little older. Meaning that their lived experience from their first divorce can lead to a healthier marriage later on in life in their 30's. It's entirely possible that WITHOUT that lived experience... they would have had a divorce in their 30's instead.
- What’s wrong with the divorce rate increasing? Like, no joke, is that not a good thing? More people getting out of bad relationships seems like a better outcome.
  
  If you look at the study the number one reason for divorce is "lack of commitment". That doesn't necessarily mean it was a "bad" relationship...
  
  That’s just a nice way of saying infidelity.
  
  That is its own selection... and was #3. There's a 20% difference between the numbers. If it was "just" a nice way to say infidelity then those numbers would be functionally equivalent. But they're not.
  
  Then what does “lack of commitment” mean?
  
  No idea... I'm not representative to the 630,505 [supposed] divorces that the study covers...
  Why People are Divorcing in the United States
  42. Lack of commitment is the most common reason given by divorcing couples according to a recent national survey. Here are the reasons given and their percentages:
  undefined
  
  Lack of commitment 73% Argue too much 56% Infidelity 55% Married too young 46% Unrealistic expectations 45% Lack of equality in the relationship 44% Lack of preparation for marriage 41% Domestic Violence or Abuse 25%
  If it was "bad" relationship... which I take to mean that the person was being physically/verbally abusive. Then I would suspect that the 25% number would be much higher. It doesn't make sense that "Lack of commitment" as a distinct option would be so high when the others are so low comparatively.
  What people view as difference between them is in their own head and based on their own experience. My first marriage, my ex-wife brought drugs into my house. I would absolutely consider that "lack of commitment" based on these options if I was filling out a survey or something (no idea how these values were collected... possibly from the court proceedings themselves? In which case I could look at my own and validate... but I don't care enough.) I was in the military at the time, and drugs is automatic issues. She also wouldn't get and hold a job... so lack of equality could also count, though I probably wouldn't have checked that box. Neither of us were abusive to each other.
  
  That’s not what I meant by “bad relationship”. That would be “abusive relationship”, which is a much worse thing, but included under the umbrella term. I would call your relationship that you just described as a bad relationship. Aren’t you happy that you’re no longer married to her?
  
  I would call your relationship that you just described as a bad relationship.
  Just the 2 issues alone I presented in my previous marriage qualify your "bad" relationship requirement? Far from. All the other context that you're missing is what made it a bad relationship, not those 2 issues at face value. I was simply showing 2 examples of my previous marriage that would make me check those 2 particular boxes (if this were a survey).
  Aren’t you happy that you’re no longer married to her?
  Happiness isn't a qualifier of good or bad. I'm not always "happy" in my current marriage. But marriage is often a compromise and that's okay. I recently had about 10 months of "unhappiness" in my current marriage. Does that make this marriage "bad" after almost 10 years? No.
  If this is your metric, then you've got a massive self-entitlement problem.
  
  You should take more of the things that I say as the worst and least charitable interpretations, and assign more motives to me that make me seem irrational and illogical. I don’t think you’ve done those enough yet.
  Anyway, I hope you find whatever you’re looking for. This conversation is very unproductive, and I’d like to stop here.
  
  You should take more of the things that I say as the worst and least charitable interpretations
  You mean I shouldn't just blindly accept your interpretation when it doesn't make sense? I'm sorry that I don't just accept what I read on the internet as gospel. Especially when evidence leads me to believe otherwise. The categories outlined are not necessarily markers of "bad" relationships. You assumed that it does. I do not share that same assumption.
  and assign more motives to me that make me seem irrational and illogical. I don’t think you’ve done those enough yet.
  I've not attributed anything to you at all. You're doing that all on your own with this response.
  This conversation is very unproductive
  You made it that way. Congrats!
  But to actually further my point. You can be 100% happy in a relationship and still have a valid reason to divorce. How does that jive with your interpretation? That's right. It doesn't. Which is part of my point, but you wouldn't know that would you, you know... since you don't want to actually participate but just hear people regurgitate your assumptions.

226 comments