Marriage (GOING OR GONE)

TURRICAN

Hello everyone

many times ive wanted to start this post.
Basically from being on boards.ie and other social sites one thing keeps
cropping up and this seems to be relationships going wrong.

i know some go right aswell,but in this day and age love dosent seem to last forever.
it seems to me that people leave relationships because the grass is always
greener bla bla.
or its for money and gold digging,property or any other material things.
also i see trust is another factor that ruins relationships.people out drinking to exceess then being taken advantage of ,then before you know it you have being cheated on.

i could ramble on here all day but is marriage worth the effort anymore or have people lost track of themselves and lost all morals.
thanks.

TURRICAN

TURRICAN wrote: »

Hello everyone

many times ive wanted to start this post.
Basically from being on boards.ie and other social sites one thing keeps
cropping up and this seems to be relationships going wrong.

i know some go right aswell,but in this day and age love dosent seem to last forever.
it seems to me that people leave relationships because the grass is always
greener bla bla.
or its for money and gold digging,property or any other material things.
also i see trust is another factor that ruins relationships.people out drinking to exceess then being taken advantage of ,then before you know it you have being cheated on.

i could ramble on here all day but is marriage worth the effort anymore or have people lost track of themselves and lost all morals.
thanks.

What does marriage have to do with morals? :rolleyes:

Beruthiel

Not a PI.
Moved to Humanities.

TURRICAN

bluewolf wrote: »

What does marriage have to do with morals? :rolleyes:

like the way you live your life trying to do what we think is right,thus helping keeping the marriage together.
if you can see what i mean

Wagon

It isn't needed. Simply because it costs too much, only ties you to a person "legally" and if there is divorce on the cards, the bloke will always come out worse especially if there's kids involved. It's like signing a contract and you're ****ed if you break it. It's not a sacred vow anymore. If you love someone that much you'll spend the rest of your life with them regardless if you get married or not. People don't go to mass anymore either so the actual spiritual bond is no longer present for many people. I'd be included in this too.

Maybe I'm just a very bitter person, maybe all 22 year old males are but i really can't see the appeal to getting married to anyone ever. Not because I intend to cheat but because i don't want to be cheated.

Wagon

Wagon wrote: »

It isn't needed. Simply because it costs too much, only ties you to a person "legally" and if there is divorce on the cards, the bloke will always come out worse especially if there's kids involved. It's like signing a contract and you're ****ed if you break it. It's not a sacred vow anymore. If you love someone that much you'll spend the rest of your life with them regardless if you get married or not. People don't go to mass anymore either so the actual spiritual bond is no longer present for many people. I'd be included in this too.

Maybe I'm just a very bitter person, maybe all 22 year old males are but i really can't see the appeal to getting married to anyone ever. Not because I intend to cheat but because i don't want to be cheated.

When I was 22 and single I felt something similar. I never thought I'd bother with marriage, and just continue being a bachelor. Even if i did meet someone special I would just continue in a normal relationship, and if that didn't work out i could always find someone new.

However, I'm now 32 and things have changed a lot. I've been in numerous relationships over the years, most of which were quite good. I'm still friends with nearly all my ex's despite these breakups. I've had two open relationships, and I've been cheated on once previously in a normal relationship. I've never cheated on anyone before, and have never felt any desire to.

But, after a while, I felt I wanted something different. A relationship is fine in itself, but it doesn't have any real meaning attached to it. Marriage on the other hand speaks of a commitment which both parties would be inclined to follow. I've heard all the arguments against marriage, since there was a thread quite recently about it. But I'll still be getting married.

Last year, I met someone completely awesome, and her culture still places a large emphasis on marriage. She's half Chinese & half Japanese and was brought up in a very traditional household. My own parents have had problems in their marriage, but they're still together after 40 years. For both of us, marriage has a meaning beyond a legal sticking point. Its a bond between two people who wish to spend the rest of their lives together.

Wait until you find someone that special, and then decide about whether marriage is not for you. Or her. Will you really lose someone simply because you're not willing to marry, or will you take a calculated risk (based on your knowledge of her and yourself) and actually commit to something?

I think its very easy to say that marriage is stupid when you're completely removed from the whole thing.

TURRICAN

TURRICAN wrote: »

i could ramble on here all day but is marriage worth the effort anymore

Yes. I believe its totally worth it.

Just don't go into it without examining all the aspects of the marriage. Too many people get married for the wrong reasons. I also believe too many people look for partners from a dream setup and when their partner doesn't stick to that image, all hell breaks loose. We're all told that we're entitled to everything and to have a wonderful life. Unfortunately we're not. Marriage just like anything meaningful requires work, commitment, understanding of your spouse and the desire/ability to be flexible. I figure many people just want a marriage that is easy, and doesn't require them to change their habits of a lifetime.

or have people lost track of themselves and lost all morals.

Nope. I don't think so. I have my own morals. You have your own morals. I doubt we agree on everything, but I'm sure some of our morals match. The same with most people. Their morals fit the type of lives they've chosen for themselves.

bubski

Totally agree with Klaz, when I was younger, I used to think marraige was just a piece of paper but then after a long term relationship I changed my views on it.

However I do feel that some marraiges are rushed into.... For me I always said that I would like to be with someone for more than 5 yrs before I even thought about getting married. But then again I did have my youth on my side as I know that for older women dont have that luxury of waiting 5 yrs or more as the clock is ticking for them.

And of course people dont marry for love, there are women & men who marry for the wrong reasons, but if they can live with it well then thats their life, it would not be for me.

CathyMoran

I admit that I was a commitment phobe for years, even though I had met and was dating the man that would eventually be my husband. Life got in the way though and my priorities changed - marriage means making my other half my chosen family and it is far different from co-habitation, it is a lifetime commitment for better for worse, in sickness and in health. I love my husband and I am very proud and feel very honoured to be his wife. Marriage does take work, but you get far more out of it than you put in.

TURRICAN

CathyMoran wrote: »

I admit that I was a commitment phobe for years, even though I had met and was dating the man that would eventually be my husband. Life got in the way though and my priorities changed - marriage means making my other half my chosen family and it is far different from co-habitation, it is a lifetime commitment for better for worse, in sickness and in health. I love my husband and I am very proud and feel very honoured to be his wife. Marriage does take work, but you get far more out of it than you put in.

better or worse sickness and in health.

i know people who are married but 1 of the couple is out of work 2 years and is suffering with depression.he wont go get help and now she is going to leave him.
i have mentioned this to my fiancee and she said well if hes not willing to go get help why should she stay with him.

that put me off getting married in case anything went wrong.

what do you think

TURRICAN

bubski wrote: »

Totally agree with Klaz, when I was younger, I used to think marraige was just a piece of paper but then after a long term relationship I changed my views on it.

However I do feel that some marraiges are rushed into.... For me I always said that I would like to be with someone for more than 5 yrs before I even thought about getting married. But then again I did have my youth on my side as I know that for older women dont have that luxury of waiting 5 yrs or more as the clock is ticking for them.

And of course people dont marry for love, there are women & men who marry for the wrong reasons, but if they can live with it well then thats their life, it would not be for me.

what reasons have yo u seen for getting married?

CathyMoran

TURRICAN wrote: »

better or worse sickness and in health.

i know people who are married but 1 of the couple is out of work 2 years and is suffering with depression.he wont go get help and now she is going to leave him.
i have mentioned this to my fiancee and she said well if hes not willing to go get help why should she stay with him.

that put me off getting married in case anything went wrong.

what do you think

I have personal experience of illness during a marriage, we actually got back together when I found out that I was seriously ill (physical illness)and my husband nursed me through everything, I owe my life to him. Both of us also have long term illnesses that can be very debilitating at times, we look out for one another.

I have heard anecdotally that men tend to stay if a partner has a brain injury such as a brain haemorrage but that women are more likely to leave...my father did not leave with my mum and I know that I would never leave my husband, he is my everything.

It really depends on the person unfortunatly but I do not believe that physical or other illnesses are a reason to leave.

philologos

TURRICAN wrote: »

i know some go right aswell,but in this day and age love dosent seem to last forever.
it seems to me that people leave relationships because the grass is always
greener bla bla.

Just curious, why do you think it was easier in previous generations?

TURRICAN wrote: »

or its for money and gold digging,property or any other material things.
also i see trust is another factor that ruins relationships.people out drinking to exceess then being taken advantage of ,then before you know it you have being cheated on.

Sometimes money does have to come into it unfortunately, there are bills to pay, but sometimes you have to know where to put your spouse in terms of priorities. As for trust, people have to have trust that their spouse won't cheat on them, and there has to be some form of understanding of what marriage means and what value it has surely?

TURRICAN wrote: »

i could ramble on here all day but is marriage worth the effort anymore or have people lost track of themselves and lost all morals.
thanks.

I'd hope so.

TURRICAN

CathyMoran wrote: »

I have personal experience of illness during a marriage, we actually got back together when I found out that I was seriously ill (physical illness)and my husband nursed me through everything, I owe my life to him. Both of us also have long term illnesses that can be very debilitating at times, we look out for one another.

I have heard anecdotally that men tend to stay if a partner has a brain injury such as a brain haemorrage but that women are more likely to leave...my father did not leave with my mum and I know that I would never leave my husband, he is my everything.

It really depends on the person unfortunatly but I do not believe that physical or other illnesses are a reason to leave.

i am glad for you that u have both got each other.welldone.

as for the woman supposedly to leave the man on brain or mental issues is from the fact that isnt the man meant to be the protector,and if he is incapable of this he is then not fit for the female.
Back to in sickness and health again.

TURRICAN

Jakkass wrote: »

Just curious, why do you think it was easier in previous generations?



Sometimes money does have to come into it unfortunately, there are bills to pay, but sometimes you have to know where to put your spouse in terms of priorities. As for trust, people have to have trust that their spouse won't cheat on them, and there has to be some form of understanding of what marriage means and what value it has surely?



I'd hope so.

basically i think people have lost the run of themselves during the good economic situation we have seen.back in the good old days everyone seemed to be happy with what little they had.
now i think people have to much and lost the meaning of life without materialism and what not!

CathyMoran

TURRICAN wrote: »

i am glad for you that u have both got each other.welldone.

as for the woman supposedly to leave the man on brain or mental issues is from the fact that isnt the man meant to be the protector,and if he is incapable of this he is then not fit for the female.
Back to in sickness and health again.

I look as us both protecting one another equally, but if one of us is down the other one picks the person up...hopefully that past of the male protector role is gone with equal rights. I do not believe in staying in an abusive relationship but then again I know my husband well enough to know that he would never hurt me. I have been with my husband long enough and through enough to know that I genuinely love him and that he is my soul mate. I imagine that most women want a life partner for good and for bad, true there are a few exceptions that I have met but they are so obvious.

TURRICAN

lets hope the obvious stays that way.

994

CathyMoran wrote: »

I have heard anecdotally that men tend to stay if a partner has a brain injury such as a brain haemorrage but that women are more likely to leave...my father did not leave with my mum and I know that I would never leave my husband, he is my everything.

That's weird, I heard women are more likely to stay if their husband has MS

CathyMoran wrote: »

hopefully that past of the male protector role is gone with equal rights.

About as likely as men stopping being attracted to young blondes with big boobs

CathyMoran

994 wrote: »

That's weird, I heard women are more likely to stay if their husband has MS

My dad was told that a lot of women leave their husbands when they suffer a brain haemorrage like my mum who has a severe brain injury, maybe some women find it easier to cope with physical rather than a brain injury? I know that I had no problem with my husband having crohns (he told me immediatly, funnily I had just studied it in college).

994 wrote: »

About as likely as men stopping being attracted to young blondes with big boobs

Hmm, so that is why my husband married me, though I am less of the young now

CathyMoran

CathyMoran wrote: »

Hmm, so that is why my husband married me, though I am less of the young now

I've never really gotten the whole male stereotype of men liking blond women with big boobs. Personally, I've always liked women with dark hair and small (ish)boobs. Case in point being my gf, having black hair and rather small breasts. She is Asian, so i suppose i do fall into one western male stereotype though. In fact, out of all my close male friends (7) all their girlfriends or wives, only one has blond hair and has smallish boobs.

There's too much stereotyping as to what men apparently like these days. And its funny in a way that it hasn't changed since the 70's. That all men want blondies with big boobs.

As for the main discussion, it might be worth noting that my future spouse is way richer than me. She's not worried that I'll divorce her for her money... Neither is her father, who owns a number of companies in Japan & Thailand. I guess many Asian people aren't quite so cynical when it comes to love & marriage. Practical yes, but not quite so cynical like so many posters here.

CathyMoran

My husband must be unusual then, though he did always have a thing for German girls (am part German)...we both value intelligence above almost everything else. What some people do not accept is that people change during a relationship and that major life events can and do happen, these events can either bring you closer together or break you apart. During my relationship with my husband we have faced leaving college, him looking for his birth mother (he is adopted), my mother having a brain haemorrage, both of us being seriously ill (a lot!) including cancer with a very low survival rate and a miscarriage but we have worked through these things and they have made us stronger as a couple. We talk all the time, and I mean really talk where the other half listens and we try and improve things for the other person if we can. It sounds like a lot of work but it is a small price to pay for being so clued in to your other half and for being so in love.

allabouteve

Deleted User wrote: »

I've never really gotten the whole male stereotype of men liking blond women with big boobs. Personally, I've always liked women with dark hair and small (ish)boobs. Case in point being my gf, having black hair and rather small breasts. She is Asian, so i suppose i do fall into one western male stereotype though. In fact, out of all my close male friends (7) all their girlfriends or wives, only one has blond hair and has smallish boobs.

There's too much stereotyping as to what men apparently like these days. And its funny in a way that it hasn't changed since the 70's. That all men want blondies with big boobs.

As for the main discussion, it might be worth noting that my future spouse is way richer than me. She's not worried that I'll divorce her for her money... Neither is her father, who owns a number of companies in Japan & Thailand. I guess many Asian people aren't quite so cynical when it comes to love & marriage. Practical yes, but not quite so cynical like so many posters here.

I've worked hard and also been fortunate, in the monetary sense, in my life. Its unlikely any husband would be better off than I am.

I still believe in throwing in my lot, lock, stock, and barrel. A total commitment is a total commitment. If I've decided to marry my hypothetical husband, I'd expect to trust him with everything. Our lives, our future, our money.

On the other point, I'm tall and blonde, but when I'm out with my black-haired friend, she gets far more attention.

The Corinthian

Wagon wrote: »

It's like signing a contract and you're ****ed if you break it.

Actually you don't even need to break it. That's the point of no fault divorce.

It is possible for either party to terminate the marriage contract (although retaining many of the financial aspects) without any breach. Moreover it is actually possible to breach it, terminate it and actually not suffer financially; for example a dependant spouse can leave his/her marriage for another relationship and successfully sue for maintenance.

Deleted User wrote: »

However, I'm now 32 and things have changed a lot.

And I am 38 and I disagree with you. Never been married, but I've seen too many marriages fail and seen how happily ever after becomes him vs her overnight, to ignore the very real downside and compare it against an upside which really does not compensate for the risk.

I think its very easy to say that marriage is stupid when you're completely removed from the whole thing.

One can easily also argue that it is easy to say that marriage is fantastic when you're in one that is presently successful.

It is pretty condensing to suggest that unless you're part of the club, you can't really make an informed decision. Of course you can on marriage in general. With a specific spouse, one may change their opinion, naturally, but that should not invalidate that as an institution it has become in serious need of reform.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it's stupid in all cases and it can make sense if you meet a genuine miss/mr right, but in general it does not.

Jakkass wrote: »

Just curious, why do you think it was easier in previous generations?

Not easier, which is kind of the point. Marriage in the past was either insoluble or required a breach of contract for divorce to take place. Additionally there was social pressure not to separate and cohabitation was not a socially acceptable alternative.

If you wanted to have a family, marriage was your only option. Once in, it was close to impossible to extricate yourself. It was for life. Better or worse.

Now it is no longer difficult. You only need the ambiguous cause that there are "irreconcilable differences" and if there is no challenge on assets and maintenance, the rest is a question of waiting the required period of time where you are officially separated (you don't even need to be living apart) and a rubber stamp at the end.

The Corinthian

The Corinthian wrote: »

And I am 38 and I disagree with you. Never been married, but I've seen too many marriages fail and seen how happily ever after becomes him vs her overnight, to ignore the very real downside and compare it against an upside which really does not compensate for the risk.

I've also seen plenty of marriages fail, both from my own extended family, and from friends. But I can't imagine that marriage is too risky, when I consider the far more numerous marriages that have succeeded. I don't tend to judge marriage from statistics, but rather from seeing firsthand. I'm not saying the statistics don't matter. They do. But marriage comes down to the two individuals involved, and every marriage is different.

I really don't know if marriage is too risky or not. I'm currently engaged, and hope to be married in roughly a years time. I don't know if my future marriage will fail. But I can't imagine not going through with it, and not sharing my life with her. Her family & culture would never allow a non-marriage long term relationship, and so marriage is the only real answer if I wish to stay with her, and perhaps have children.

One can easily also argue that it is easy to say that marriage is fantastic when you're in one that is presently successful.

True. But then if you enter into any activity expecting it to fail, then in all probability it will.

It is pretty condensing to suggest that unless you're part of the club, you can't really make an informed decision. Of course you can on marriage in general. With a specific spouse, one may change their opinion, naturally, but that should not invalidate that as an institution it has become in serious need of reform.

Sorry I didn't quite mean it that way. I'm not discounting other peoples opinions on marriage. Their opinions are very valid. I just figure that people who aren't in a serious relationship (and have considered seriously marriage with their partner), are lacking a certain perception of the feelings involved.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it's stupid in all cases and it can make sense if you meet a genuine miss/mr right, but in general it does not.

In general? I don't quite get what you mean. You say it can make sense if you meet a genuine miss/mr right, but then say its doesn't make sense...

The Corinthian

Deleted User wrote: »

But I can't imagine that marriage is too risky, when I consider the far more numerous marriages that have succeeded.

Judging whether something is too risky is not simply based upon the chance of failure, but also upon the consequences of that failure or rewards of success. A single round of Russian roulette has only a one in six chance of failure, but we do not judge it on the basis of this chance alone, but on the consequences of failure, that are obviously catastrophic. Additionally, were a successful hand of Russian roulette to gain us €100 or €100,000,000, our assessment of the risk - whether we should take it in the first place - is affected and it would be hardly be a surprise a that few would consider it an acceptable risk with the former reward and quite a few would be more than tempted with the latter.

This is how risk is assessed, and the problem, with marriage is that the price of failure (if you are the party with the money and assets) is very high, the chances low, but still significant and the rewards (when compared to the alternitive), from what I can make out, insufficient.

I really don't know if marriage is too risky or not. I'm currently engaged, and hope to be married in roughly a years time. I don't know if my future marriage will fail. But I can't imagine not going through with it, and not sharing my life with her. Her family & culture would never allow a non-marriage long term relationship, and so marriage is the only real answer if I wish to stay with her, and perhaps have children.

In your case you don't really have an alternative to marriage, so I can understand your logic. However, unless you're with someone who demands marriage, you don't actually need to get married any more to have a long term relationship or even children in Ireland.

True. But then if you enter into any activity expecting it to fail, then in all probability it will.

Sorry, but that is a cliché. Ironically, the most successful marriage, amongst my peers, was expected to fail within a few years - by the couple. The bride even joked about it in her wedding speech. They're still happily together.

Sorry I didn't quite mean it that way. I'm not discounting other peoples opinions on marriage. Their opinions are very valid. I just figure that people who aren't in a serious relationship (and have considered seriously marriage with their partner), are lacking a certain perception of the feelings involved.

You don't have to be married to be in a serious, and long term, relationship.

In general? I don't quite get what you mean. You say it can make sense if you meet a genuine miss/mr right, but then say its doesn't make sense...

When successfully married people discuss marriage, they tend to do so in the context of their own marriage and apply it to the institution. All marriages are worth it because your marriage is worth it - unfortunately it does not work that way.

Unmarried people, cannot focus on a single case, although on the flip side we also can have difficulty understanding the perceived rewards and thus will focus on the negative.

Both have potentially flawed perspectives, which is why I rather like these debates. There's been a few of them recently and I have consistently tried to challenge those who believe in the marriage to explain those rewards, because I want to understand.

Honestly, if those rewards (in light of the cohabitation alternative) are worth it, then it's a game of Russian roulette worth playing. Unfortunately, I'm just not convinced.

Ickle Magoo

TURRICAN wrote: »

basically i think people have lost the run of themselves during the good economic situation we have seen.back in the good old days everyone seemed to be happy with what little they had.
now i think people have to much and lost the meaning of life without materialism and what not!

It's an interesting question.

I'm not sure it's all about other generations doing it better tbh - maybe people are just not prepared to put up with things to the same extent as previous generations? People want more from life & have all the opportunities that third level education and making a great living has afforded them that other generations didn't, or at least not to the same extent - along with a gradual de-stigmatising of divorce/separation.

Suddenly there are more choices available to those unhappy in marriage & putting up with a less than satisfactory relationship out of lack of alternative or shame is no longer an issue = higher divorce rate.

Tim Robbins

TURRICAN wrote: »

i could ramble on here all day but is marriage worth the effort anymore or have people lost track of themselves and lost all morals.
thanks.

Sorry for resurrecting an old thread. I know there have many on this subject and many boards not seeing any logical reason for marriage.

Here's an unusual one that many may not have thought about.

I just finished reading this book: "Irrationality" by Stuart Sutherland.

There is clinical evidence which suggests that people are less likely to change their mind if they declare something in public. So a Priest for example is less likely to become an atheist or Muslim than a normal RC. A FF person is less likely to become a FG person than a normal person.

This explains why sometimes people don't like giving their opinions on senstives issues as they may change their mind and pyschologically this is easier to do if no-one knows their original opinion.

So, by declaring you are going to stay with someone for life through thick and thin in public, via marriage you are more likely to do so. Both of you.

You could argue it's always more rational to be able to change your mind and never declare anything in public. I would say society is more stable if more people can stick together for life, hence marriage is a good idea for society. (my own parents divorced, so I appreciate it's not always possible for people to stay together and in their case it's better they parted.)

tolteq

I think people dont choose the right person for them at all. i honestly think people dont know whats good for them.

McGinty

basically i think people have lost the run of themselves during the good economic situation we have seen.back in the good old days everyone seemed to be happy with what little they had.
now i think people have to much and lost the meaning of life without materialism and what not!

I think you are romanticising the past, there were a huge number of unhappily married people but they were unable to get divorced, now I am focusing on Irish marriages, divorce was banned in Ireland (post independence) until 1995 so people were forced to remain together. In the past marriages, in particular those with land or wealth, were made on a practical and economic basis rather than for love. Marriage was a practical business.

I see nothing wrong with marriage as an institution, it is the people who get married that causes the breakdown. There are several factors that contribute to a marriage breakdown and there are several factors that create a successful marriage. The difficulty is then is how do you judge a successful marriage in light of being able to divorce, do you base its success of length or the quality of it or what? How do you quantify a bad marriage, is divorce the only signifier for a bad marraige?

See you could have one couple who are together for 40 years, who appear to be happy but hate each other secretly and never talk.
You could have another couple who valued each other, were open in their communication, treated one another with respect but have decided that the love is gone and decide to part.
I personally see marraige as a success by the amount of work each couple puts into it, but I do not expect it always to be right, perfect, loved up, etc. I accept that there are hard aspects to marriage, I believe that we often have idealised notions of marriage and fail to see the work of marriage or any live in relationship (I see that as a form of marriage too). I believe if two people are honest, accept and work through their flaws, avoid blaming or any form of abuse (verbal, etc) then it has a chance of success, oh and of course personal responsibility. If you think that problems will magic away, or you can't talk about anything (including thorny issues such as sex, etc) then it's pretty much doomed for failure to a greater or lesser degree.
I know someone who was married for 20 years, on the outside it looked good, they never argued, they were friendly with each other, there was no abuse they had a good lifestyle but it may as well have been dead, they did not talk, have intimacy for many, many years of the marriage and they were like two strangers living in the same house. There are many marriages like this one and they continue to stay together living out dead marriages but because they stay together it is considered a success when in actuality it is not because there is no communication, no love or actual care for the other.

McGinty

McGinty wrote: »

I think you are romanticising the past, there were a huge number of unhappily married people but they were unable to get divorced, now I am focusing on Irish marriages, divorce was banned in Ireland (post independence) until 1995 so people were forced to remain together. In the past marriages, in particular those with land or wealth, were made on a practical and economic basis rather than for love. Marriage was a practical business.

And it still is in many cases. Its unrealistic to believe that everyone marries just for love. For many partners, they look at the practical reasons for getting married, and believe that love or at least respect will occur during the process of being together.

I'm due to get married, and while I love my future wife, I'm fully aware of how time changes things. We age both with our bodies getting older, and also with our priorities in life changing. When I met Lin, there was the attraction, and the dating process, but there was also the practical discussion as to why and if we should get married. To do otherwise is ridiculous. We love each other now, but there are no guarantees when it comes to an emotion. We recognised the need to understand how we might feel in ten or twenty years time.

My grandfather had an arranged marriage when he was 42 and my grandmother was 20. They had four children, and grew to love each other. It was a practical relationship to begin with, and I'm sure there were issues to overcome, but they did so extremely well.

It is the media that proclaims that marriage should only be about love. As if other reasons are wrong. Which they are not. If people are capable of looking beyond love, and still feel that they wish to spend their lives together, then its more likely that their marriage will work. Better that than the numbers of people who marry for love, and then "fall out of love" three years later, and get divorced. :rolleyes:

McGinty

It is the media that proclaims that marriage should only be about love. As if other reasons are wrong. Which they are not. If people are capable of looking beyond love, and still feel that they wish to spend their lives together, then its more likely that their marriage will work. Better that than the numbers of people who marry for love, and then "fall out of love" three years later, and get divorced.

Excellent point klaz, I'm only annoyed I didn't think of it first:) but I agree with you in that it is the looking beyond love and seeing how two people fit together that can create a marriage of integrity, rather than delusion. I have had friends (Indian mainly) who like your grandfather had arranged marriages and they also grew to love each other mainly because they came from similar backgrounds and had a lot in common, there were not as many issues to overcome.