Did our grandparents get it right re marriage and dating?

8kczg9v0swrydm

Just thinking about this recently, but did our grandparents have something great that the younger generations are missing?

The 'older folks' were married fairly young to a person who ticked a few basic boxes - had to be kind and hard working; health wise, without any major malfunctions. When they married, they married for life.

Dating was more along the lines of courting: basically, the two people discerned if marriage with the other person was feasible and would last.

Their expectations of each other were not sky high. A quiet, happy life with plenty of children was just about right.

When I look at a lot of people my age (late 20s), it seems like they are going through an endless cycle of dates. Tinder, online dating etc. 99% of these dates do not seem to go anywhere. Many of these folks are quite inward looking - they will go on these dates to satisfy some shallow craving, for example to get a confidence boost or a free meal (yes, I have personally heard that one!) Meanwhile, life goes on, said people become more disillusioned and unhappy. I think it gets especially tough for women, because of the biological clock and because they will have to compete with younger women for the better men. I have a female friend (late 30s) who will regularly burst into tears over not having a family, kids etc. It's heart-breaking.

The bottom line: has the sexual revolution of the 1960s been a good thing? It seems like a lot of people have basically been left without the love, security and comfort that comes with having a spouse (not to mention the joy of having children).

Now I know that there are some generalisations going on here, but nevertheless I think I have decent argument.

wench

I think you have a very rose tinted view of the past.

Not all husbands were kind and hard working. Many were abusive arseholes.
Divorce was not an option and marital rape wasn't a crime.

skooterblue2

wench wrote: »

I think you have a very rose tinted view of the past.

Not all husbands were kind and hard working. Many were abusive arseholes.
Divorce was not an option and marital rape wasn't a crime.

Yes but people put more mature thoughts into who they were marrying.
this lead to more stable marriages and less social problems in later life.
Most of them inmates in the 'Joy are from broken homes and have histories of alcohol and drug abuse.

Edgware

wench wrote: »

I think you have a very rose tinted view of the past.

Not all husbands were kind and hard working. Many were abusive arseholes.
Divorce was not an option and marital rape wasn't a crime.

Of course they are all perfect now.
There will always be bastards

chrissb8

Can't speak for generations gone by but I get what the OP is saying. Just looking at my parent's marriage they don't or never have asked a lot of each other. Both aren't ones for big gestures or overtly big displays of affections but the love is there through thick and thin. Built-up over many years of being together and it takes work, they even said it, but they would have never given each other up.

I think that's what people of my age are missing (late 20's also) That it doesn't have to be perfect or even instant but there has to be something there to build on. I think many people don't even want a relationship but they don't know it yet. They get in relationships but refuse to give up aspects of their lives or fully commit to making these relationships work.

That's more in line with how young people are these days though, many have their own single lives they built up including friends, a great career, opportunities to travel, disposable income. There is nothing wrong with liking those things either but if you really want to build a long-standing relationship, one or two of those things have to go, from both sides of the relationship. I think many just don't like the idea of that and in reality, don't want to give them up any time soon making relationships that end up being things that get in the way.

I also think there's a distinct lack of patience from my generation and any preceding it. We're a generation used to instant results, gratification, food, drink, drugs etc. We want it now and we want it with minimal fuss. Relationships are sticky, stressful things particularly at the beginning in tandem with all the wonderful stuff obviously. But I don't think many are willing to commit and work through problems with their OH and don't mind breaking up with someone at the first real test of a relationship. Because why not, there are literally thousands of other people you can engage with at the click of an app.

The above is good because many feel when they get to a certain age they have to find "someone". Which sounds a bit of a "that will do" approach to something that important. People can now find a person of their temperament and who shares similar expectations of what a relationship should be. But it also impedes making connections with others as you can connect with many people at any given time where it used to be a rare occurrence and meant that much more, making people put more effort into pursuing that connection, as it's not something that happened at the drop of a hat.

In general, I think marriage is an antiquated concept and many I know have no plans or can never see themselves settling down with one partner for life. Which really, is how it should be. Why marry for even 10 unhappy years and divorce, just be honest and be happy on your own.

Church on Tuesday

I think it is obvious that a lot of the old values are basically gone now; namely loyalty and basic decency and respect.

Of course, a lot of marriages in our grandparents time were far far from perfect for reasons I think we all know and are not going to labour over here. Divorce being illegal meant there where many unhappy people stuck in marriages.

But we simply live in a throw away society now and image, indeed status, is everything; it's a completely disjointed way of thinking and completely unhealthy and ultimately, unrealistic and unattainable.

wakka12

People are still free to enter a loveless marriage to please their parents and pump out a load of children if they so wish

It's hard to find a spouse you love and want to spend your life with. People still find it hard to find that person today. I dont think spending a long time looking for that person is such a bad thing despite the loneliness in the mean time

Lots of older people are lonelier than any single person, my grandparents have absoltuely no love for one another because they just married to tick a box as you described. They stay together because they dont know any better and dont know what else they might even want. Strangers under one roof now. They dont even fight , they are just completely indifferent to one another. What could be more lonely than that

Vic_08

It is only a few generations ago that most people in Ireland lived extremely hard lives, they didn't have the time, money or comfort to be destructively self involved that is the normal state of so many now. People got on with the basics of living because the alternative was having no home or food for them and their families.

I think it is pretty clear that modern life is toxic for a lot of people. The lack of actual adversity doesn't make people happy and content, it leaves a gaping hole they fill with petty trivialities they elevate into massive problems.

It is no surprise at all that self-obsessed people that are hard wired to make themselves miserable over the slightest problem can't sustain long term relationships with other similarly selfish individuals.

Listening to people whining about their mental health because they are forced to stay in their comfortable homes while being paid during lockdown I wonder what our ancestors would have thought about it. My grandfather had to leave the county for months at a time in order to pay he bills because he was blackballed in Ireland, with his wife confined in a TB hospital and his children in an orphanage. Countless others were forced to move across the world and never see or speak to their loved ones again.

eviltwin

Settling for someone just because they can give you a family, stability etc isn't a good idea either. A lifetime is a long time to be with someone you aren't fully happy with. Selfish to bring children into it too. People are more aware of what they are getting into now thanks to dating, they entered marriages blind before and were stuck. I grew up with parents who didn't love each other, it's not worth it, I'd rather be alone than be living with someone who feels nothing for me. There was always those people who remained single all their life, that hasn't changed. Plenty of people are settling down and having children, society will be fine.

dubstarr

Don't forget a lot of th had to get married as there was a baby on the way.
Different times,I don't think you can use the same values as years gone by.
People know are more educated,have a higher standard of living.
It's like comparing apples and oranges.

Wanderer78

skooterblue2 wrote:

Yes but people put more mature thoughts into who they were marrying. this lead to more stable marriages and less social problems in later life. Most of them inmates in the 'Joy are from broken homes and have histories of alcohol and drug abuse.

Criminality is far more complex than just this, there's been plenty of research done on this now, and it's still ongoing.

We live in a far more complex world, there's far more options in life now, the lives of different generations cannot be simply compared, as they are incomparable. Life in many ways was far more simplistic in the past, we had different values and beliefs, but as others have said, it wasn't all great, it created monsters to, as does the modern world, just different types of monsters. We are being encouraged to be more individual in the modern world, which is good, particularly for females, it must feel liberating for them, but we re pushing boundaries here to, and we ve opened the doors of narcissism, selfishness and instant gratification for both males and females, which is wrecking havoc in society, everything is disposable, in particular in relation to relationships and friendships, atomisation of society has its downsides to. We should be careful what we wish for.....

The Mighty Quinn

Most people today are "growing up", or maturing a hell of a lot slower.

My grand father was in a full time job on a farm at 12... Obviously there's all sorts wrong with that, but on the flip side, I now work with people who are mid 20s and this is their first job, no post time work before now etc, and some of them really are like they've left their mother's arms for the first time, need a hand held on everything. A bit self absorbed and ignorant of their own failings ("I have a masters degree" they proudly proclaim, yet don't know their arse from their elbow).

This has had an effect on dating. Immature later in life, hitting 30 before any cop on has bedded in. Vacuous narcissistic Instagram and Snapchat and tinder culture plays its part too.

Obviously that's a caricature, but you know what I mean. There are the odd level headed mature teens still but disposable skin deep life seems here to stay. To the detriment of all. Anxiety and stress levels are through the roof over problems that aren't particularly big, just that coping mechanisms and resilience isn't present.

morebabies

I agree with the OP, of course not every marriage back then was perfect, but these days lasting marriages seem to be a rarity.
Dating in your early twenties now would normally mean not looking for a future husband or wife which is kind of sad, since on a practical level, marrying later brings with it various health risks and fertility issues for women if couples decide they want children.
It may sound anti feminist, but speaking as a woman, I think there's a huge hole in modern health education systems, in that women are not being told that having babies after age 35 brings with it several increased risks to both mothers and babies.
I'm not suggesting marrying young for "practical" reasons, but are younger women today aware of the risks of our current dating models? I certainly wasn't, and when I realised the biological reality I faced, I wished I had known sooner. I'm very lucky to have healthy children, but friends of mine have faced expensive IVF journeys while others are now in their forties, wanted to wait to have children, but are now childless and heartbroken that they will never have families.

Salvation Tambourine

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

I think it is obvious that a lot of the old values are basically gone now; namely loyalty and basic decency and respect.

That is a sweeping and bold statement. How is this obvious?

eviltwin

morebabies wrote: »

I agree with the OP, of course not every marriage back then was perfect, but these days lasting marriages seem to be a rarity.
Dating in your early twenties now would normally mean not looking for a future husband or wife which is kind of sad, since on a practical level, marrying later brings with it various health risks and fertility issues for women if couples decide they want children.
It may sound anti feminist, but speaking as a woman, I think there's a huge hole in modern health education systems, in that women are not being told that having babies after age 35 brings with it several increased risks to both mothers and babies.
I'm not suggesting marrying young for "practical" reasons, but are younger women today aware of the risks of our current dating models? I certainly wasn't, and when I realised the biological reality I faced, I wished I had known sooner. I'm very lucky to have healthy children, but friends of mine have faced expensive IVF journeys while others are now in their forties, wanted to wait to have children, but are now childless and heartbroken that they will never have families.

I think women are well aware of how their fertility changes as they get older. I think the issue of older parents is more to do with the reality of modern life. There aren't many 20 something lads desperately looking to settle down and have kids either, women can't do it alone!

Even if you do meet someone early it's going to take time to get your ducks in a row so that you can have children.

I had my kids young and no one told us well done, fair play settling down and having a family. We were told we were foolish so people can't win. Everyone loves to judge.

morebabies

eviltwin wrote: »

I think women are well aware of how their fertility changes as they get older. I think the issue of older parents is more to do with the reality of modern life. There aren't many 20 something lads desperately looking to settle down and have kids either, women can't do it alone!

Even if you do meet someone early it's going to take time to get your ducks in a row so that you can have children.

I had my kids young and no one told us well done, fair play settling down and having a family. We were told we were foolish so people can't win. Everyone loves to judge.

That's true, you are in a minority, and yes, few younger 20-somethings are looking for marriage, but considering the real health implications, I think female fertility should form a huge part of the RSE curriculum.

In the nineties, our teachers handed out contraception and gave us advice on consent. What that told me was that I could engage in casual sex now and marriage was for some far distant point in the future.

There was zero advice about having babies or looking for a life partner, or even succeeding in a career and having a family. They were like 2 polar opposites.

Jim Root

I think its harder on ugly men compared with ugly women.

Leg End Reject

Seriously, who doesn't know that a woman's fertility decreases at about 35 and the risk of foetal abnormalities increases? That's been well known for years.

Not everyone wants a family, most of those that do want financial stability and a secure home before having them.

Being a young parent really only suits those with no real career aspirations, or those content to live on welfare.

Wanderer78

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Seriously, who doesn't know that a woman's fertility decreases at about 35 and the risk of foetal abnormalities increases? That's been well known for years.

Not everyone wants a family, most of those that do want financial stability and a secure home before having them.

Being a young parent really only suits those with no real career aspirations, or those content to live on welfare.

really!

seamus

Lol, stink of Joe Duffy off this thread.

Leg End Reject

Wanderer78 wrote: »

really!

It's not a dig, but it's very difficult for a young working couple to afford housing, childcare, utilities, groceries etc. early in their working lives when they're on the lower end of their potential salary starting out.

There's a reason many leave having children to later in life.

Brian?

My grandmother legged it to London with another man, leaving 2 kids behind for my grandda to raise in1959.

So I’d say no.

Leg End Reject

Brian? wrote: »

My grandmother legged it to London with another man, leaving 2 kids behind for my grandda to raise in1959.

So I’d say no.

That's awful, and fair play to your grandda.

It does highlight why we need divorce and contraception too though. Not all women are suited to being wives and mothers.

Wanderer78

Leg End Reject wrote: »

It's not a dig, but it's very difficult for a young working couple to afford housing, childcare, utilities, groceries etc. early in their working lives when they're on the lower end of their potential salary starting out.

There's a reason many leave having children to later in life.

theres many reasons why the cost of living has sky rocketed, causing the issues you have mentioned, and i agree with you, but life isnt as cosy as some think for the lower classes, those stuck on welfare etc

pgj2015

I'm not sure if it was the same in the past but the majority of people who were dating away with different people in their 20's then suddenly settle down and get married around the 30 mark is huge. it is hard to know who will be happier in the end, these people or the ones who use tinder for years and never settle down because they have an impossible list of traits they want in a partner. maybe the tinder crowd who never settle down, deep down are happier single and that is why they want the perfect partner who doesn't exist.

A lot of the people who settle down around 30 are obviously doing it because they see their friends doing it and they think that's the done thing, these same people are the type that think every milestone must be done by certain ages.

I think there is going to be divorce rates in Ireland in 10 years that is similar to the United States.

Leg End Reject

Wanderer78 wrote: »

theres many reasons why the cost of living has sky rocketed, causing the issues you have mentioned, and i agree with you, but life isnt as cosy as some think for the lower classes, those stuck on welfare etc

I never said it was cosy, I simply said the a young working couple starting out would find it impossible to secure private housing, pay childcare and all other living expenses early in their working lives.

morebabies

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Seriously, who doesn't know that a woman's fertility decreases at about 35 and the risk of foetal abnormalities increases? That's been well known for years.

Not everyone wants a family, most of those that do want financial stability and a secure home before having them.

Being a young parent really only suits those with no real career aspirations, or those content to live on welfare.

It's well known when you hit your thirties and start trying for a baby and maybe experience difficulties. Before that I was never taught it. Not once was it even alluded to.

Society is pushing women towards the "you can have it all" mentality, but hit your late thirties with a successful career and decide to have a family then... Biology will often tell you otherwise.

s7ryf3925pivug

Today we generally have unrealistic expectations of our partners. As you said in the OP, expectations used to be pretty simple/fundamental. Be a faithful provider if you're a guy. Be a faithful housewife/mother if you're a woman. We knew what was expected of us too.

Now we have smaller support networks, rent and property is proportionally more expensive, and we work too much - two working partners/parents is now the norm, but the number of hours worked hasn't been proportionally reduced.

We also are consumerists who are constantly told we should be doing better, our partners should be doing better, that we need to buy this and that product and service to make ourselves ok. So we're generally not quite satisfied with ourselves or each other.

Wanderer78

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Being a young parent really only suits those with no real career aspirations, or those content to live on welfare.

Leg End Reject wrote: »

I never said it was cosy, I simply said the a young working couple starting out would find it impossible to secure private housing, pay childcare and all other living expenses early in their working lives.

but there is a reason why you mentioned the statement above! there was in fact no need for it, it somewhat implies that you have some sort of grievances for the welfare class, and the rapid rise in the cost of living has little or nothing to do with them anyway

Leg End Reject

Wanderer78 wrote: »

but there is a reason why you mentioned the statement above! there was in fact no need for it, it somewhat implies that you have some sort of grievances for the welfare class, and the rapid rise in the cost of living has little or nothing to do with them anyway

You're the one who referred to them as "the lower classes" in a previous post. I never linked welfare recipients to the cost of living either.

I stated the reality of young working couples being unable to afford to start a family. Look at the rates of PAYE, PRSI and all the USC bands. Even if a young couple are starting out on €50k between them, they will struggle to save a deposit to buy a home or rent privately. Add up all the other costs and affording children isn't a possibility.

There's a reason working couples have fewer children and have them later. I don't know why you seem to be taking this so personally.

Leg End Reject

Wanderer78 wrote: »

theres many reasons why the cost of living has sky rocketed, causing the issues you have mentioned, and i agree with you, but life isnt as cosy as some think for the lower classes, those stuck on welfare etc

You mentioned lower classes, not me.

Leg End Reject

morebabies wrote: »

It's well known when you hit your thirties and start trying for a baby and maybe experience difficulties. Before that I was never taught it. Not once was it even alluded to.

Society is pushing women towards the "you can have it all" mentality, but hit your late thirties with a successful career and decide to have a family then... Biology will often tell you otherwise.

The decline in fertility and the risks associated with pregnancy after mid 30s has been well known for decades.

I don't understand how you couldn't have known.

Wanderer78

Leg End Reject wrote: »

Being a young parent really only suits those with no real career aspirations, or those content to live on welfare.

Leg End Reject wrote: »

You're the one who referred to them as "the lower classes" in a previous post. I never linked welfare recipients to the cost of living either.

I stated the reality of young working couples being unable to afford to start a family. Look at the rates of PAYE, PRSI and all the USC bands. Even if a young couple are starting out on €50k between them, they will struggle to save a deposit to buy a home or rent privately. Add up all the other costs and affording children isn't a possibility.

There's a reason working couples have fewer children and have them later. I don't know why you seem to be taking this so personally.

the above is a loaded statement, the root causes of long term unemployment are extremely complex, and we ve have decided its best to largely ignore these complexities.

the main causes of the rapid rise in the cost of living, and the issues you have outlined, has to do with policies that have been implemented over the last few decades, particularly the encouragement of the rapid rise in asset prices, clearly obvious in the housing sector. there has been also complimenting policies such as the contraction of wage inflation, which is causing the squeezing affect of the squeezed middle.

Leg End Reject

Wanderer78 wrote: »

the above is a loaded statement, the root causes of long term unemployment are extremely complex, and we ve have decided its best to largely ignore these complexities.

the main causes of the rapid rise in the cost of living, and the issues you have outlined, has to do with policies that have been implemented over the last few decades, particularly the encouragement of the rapid rise in asset prices, clearly obvious in the housing sector. there has been also complimenting policies such as the contraction of wage inflation, which is causing the squeezing affect of the squeezed middle.

None of that changes the fact that young working couples can't afford to have children early in their working lives.

It's not a loaded statement, it's not a pot shot at those on welfare.

Stone Deaf 4evr

whatever about dating, one thing I think they got right was regards having kids.

I've only one regret about my kids, and that was that I didn't have them sooner (and even then, in my friends group, we were the first to have them, aged 30). One of my friends is having their first now, and the idea of getting up in the middle of the night aged 42 is off putting to say the leat.

This is probably going to offend people, but I do wonder if theres a correlation between the (seemingly) increased numbers of kids with Autisim or other conditions and the fact that people seem to be having their kids later in life or the number of couples who increasingly have to turn to fertility treatments to have kids.

Wanderer78

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

whatever about dating, one thing I think they got right was regards having kids.

I've only one regret about my kids, and that was that I didn't have them sooner (and even then, in my friends group, we were the first to have them, aged 30). One of my friends is having their first now, and the idea of getting up in the middle of the night aged 42 is off putting to say the leat.

This is probably going to offend people, but I do wonder if theres a correlation between the (seemingly) increased numbers of kids with Autisim or other conditions and the fact that people seem to be having their kids later in life or the number of couples who increasingly have to turn to fertility treatments to have kids.

would be an interesting study, unsure if it exists though, from my own experiences, autism is probably largely genetic

El_Duderino 09

Holly Square Sympathizer wrote: »

Just thinking about this recently, but did our grandparents have something great that the younger generations are missing?

The 'older folks' were married fairly young to a person who ticked a few basic boxes - had to be kind and hard working; health wise, without any major malfunctions. When they married, they married for life.

...

I mean, you're into nostalgia by the second sentence. Why do you think only kind, hard working and healthy people got married?

Why do you think people had much choice about who they married?

I think the ones who were cut out for marriage will find a decent partner. Those who aren't cut out for marriage will struggle as people have choice now and they may repeatedly choose not to marry them. it might have been better for those people back then as others didn't have much choice and, before long, someone would marry them.

Stone Deaf 4evr

Wanderer78 wrote: »

would be an interesting study, unsure if it exists though, from my own experiences, autism is probably largely genetic

yeah, that's why I was trying to couch my query somewhat - I think we all remember lads from school who were 'mad' or 'wild', but in reality, these kids likely had something that just wasn't diagnosed or acknowledged at the time, and never had the resources to help them in the way they needed.

Wanderer78

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

yeah, that's why I was trying to couch my query somewhat - I think we all remember lads from school who were 'mad' or 'wild', but in reality, these kids likely had something that just wasn't diagnosed or acknowledged at the time, and never had the resources to help them in the way they needed.

yea i believe this is the case, shur i was only diagnosed a couple of years ago, but your idea, in my mind, does have merit, god only knows what issues we re introducing by delaying child birth

El_Duderino 09

wench wrote: »

I think you have a very rose tinted view of the past.

Not all husbands were kind and hard working. Many were abusive arseholes.
Divorce was not an option and marital rape wasn't a crime.

Not to mention that lots of the women weren't kind, hard working or healthy. Plenty were arseholes and wenches (if you'll pardon the allusion to your username).

People didn't start being arseholes or wenches in modern times. There were always the same rate or arseholes and wenches. Now people have more choice and can choose not to marry those people. I'm sure there are some people who are kind, hard working, healthy and are also not good at dating. Those people will suffer in the modern system where people have more choice.

JohnnyFlash

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Not to mention that lots of the women weren't kind, hard working or healthy. Plenty were arseholes and wenches (if you'll pardon the allusion to your username).

People didn't start being arseholes or wenches in modern times. There were always the same rate or arseholes and wenches. Now people have more choice and can choose not to marry those people. I'm sure there are some people who are kind, hard working, healthy and are also not good at dating. Those people will suffer in the modern system where people have more choice.

It’s the illusion of choice.

El_Duderino 09

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

I think it is obvious that a lot of the old values are basically gone now; namely loyalty and basic decency and respect.
...

Speak for yourself. Those values are alive and well in my house.

I, for one, demand and expect those qualities in my wife, among other qualities. And I wouldn't have married anyone who doesn't also demand those qualities from me. For me its a matter of self respect to expect those qualities and expect to marry someone worth self respect enough to expect them in return.

Maybe you mean your own standards of the behaviour you expect from yourself and your partner, have gone down?

Ash.J.Williams

Holly Square Sympathizer wrote: »

Just thinking about this recently, but did our grandparents have something great that the younger generations are missing?

The 'older folks' were married fairly young to a person who ticked a few basic boxes - had to be kind and hard working; health wise, without any major malfunctions. When they married, they married for life.

Dating was more along the lines of courting: basically, the two people discerned if marriage with the other person was feasible and would last.

Their expectations of each other were not sky high. A quiet, happy life with plenty of children was just about right.

When I look at a lot of people my age (late 20s), it seems like they are going through an endless cycle of dates. Tinder, online dating etc. 99% of these dates do not seem to go anywhere. Many of these folks are quite inward looking - they will go on these dates to satisfy some shallow craving, for example to get a confidence boost or a free meal (yes, I have personally heard that one!) Meanwhile, life goes on, said people become more disillusioned and unhappy. I think it gets especially tough for women, because of the biological clock and because they will have to compete with younger women for the better men. I have a female friend (late 30s) who will regularly burst into tears over not having a family, kids etc. It's heart-breaking.

The bottom line: has the sexual revolution of the 1960s been a good thing? It seems like a lot of people have basically been left without the love, security and comfort that comes with having a spouse (not to mention the joy of having children).

Now I know that there are some generalisations going on here, but nevertheless I think I have decent argument.

i'd say there's as many indian style happy arranged marriages as there was happy irish marriages, ie it works for many but some end badly.

morebabies

Leg End Reject wrote: »

The decline in fertility and the risks associated with pregnancy after mid 30s has been well known for decades.

I don't understand how you couldn't have known.

Well known among a certain age group, the one it mainly affects. Is it taught in schools at an age where it potentially will affect people's life choices? Not that I know of. I was in a non religious secondary school, we were taught about sex, sexual health, unwanted pregnancies... Fertility was never mentioned.

pgj2015

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Speak for yourself. Those values are alive and well in my house.

I, for one, demand and expect those qualities in my wife, among other qualities. And I wouldn't have married anyone who doesn't also demand those qualities from me. For me its a matter of self respect to expect those qualities and expect to marry someone worth self respect enough to expect them in return.

Maybe you mean your own standards of the behaviour you expect from yourself and your partner, have gone down?

Cheating is rife, there are people cheating that you wouldn't believe. it is awful but a lot of people only think of themselves now and if they think they can get away with cheating, they will. it disgusts me to be honest.

Silentcorner

morebabies wrote: »

Well known among a certain age group, the one it mainly affects. Is it taught in schools at an age where it potentially will affect people's life choices? Not that I know of. I was in a non religious secondary school, we were taught about sex, sexual health, unwanted pregnancies... Fertility was never mentioned.

Isn't that curious....I wonder why not.

Church on Tuesday

Nokotan wrote: »

That is a sweeping and bold statement. How is this obvious?

Just take a look around you. We all know of broken marriages and homes and cases of cheating. Divorce is a good thing but really should only be used as a last resort if things simply can't work out, IMO it's too much of a quick fix these days with no real desire to work things out.

We live in a disposable, fairly shallow society as is, again plenty evidence of that, much of which has been already mentioned above.

There were no saints in our grandparents time certainly, but they were teak tough people, who respected their neighbor and looked out for one another, where is the sense of community these days?

eviltwin

morebabies wrote: »

It's well known when you hit your thirties and start trying for a baby and maybe experience difficulties. Before that I was never taught it. Not once was it even alluded to.

Society is pushing women towards the "you can have it all" mentality, but hit your late thirties with a successful career and decide to have a family then... Biology will often tell you otherwise.

All the education in the world isn't much use when people of both sexes aren't ready to settle down in their 20's. Judging people for wanting to establish a career, enjoy their freedom is unfair. When I left college it was the norm to go straight into a job, get a house etc. That has changed and for the better

eviltwin

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

yeah, that's why I was trying to couch my query somewhat - I think we all remember lads from school who were 'mad' or 'wild', but in reality, these kids likely had something that just wasn't diagnosed or acknowledged at the time, and never had the resources to help them in the way they needed.

I don't think age is a factor. I had my kids at 19 and 32, both are autistic. The parents at the support groups are a wide range of ages. It's probably genetic, there are a lot of older relatives in my family I suspect are on the spectrum.

wench

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Divorce is a good thing but really should only be used as a last resort if things simply can't work out, IMO it's too much of a quick fix these days with no real desire to work things out.

A five year wait is a quick fix?

El_Duderino 09

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

It’s the illusion of choice.

Well, the ability to choose is real. It just isn't always helpful for all people at all times. I prefer the choice though.

It particularly isn't helpful to the people who aren't chosen.