
How we end up marrying the wrong person - zw123456
http://www.philosophersmail.com/relationships/how-we-end-up-marrying-the-wrong-people/
======
anotherevan
I remember a colleague who’s relationship was starting to get serious had a
couple of reservations as, “She’s got some issues.”

My response was, “Everybody’s got baggage. You have to figure out if your
baggage and her baggage make a matching set.”

I’ve been married twenty-one years, and neither of us are the same two people
who got married all that time ago. There have been times when we’ve discussed
if the two people we’ve become should stay married. There’s been times when
love is strained, times when things are just comfortable, and times when my
heart still beats faster when she walks in the room.

The number one piece of advice that I received that has stood the test of time
is being able to communicate. If you are able to share with each other your
dreams, fantasies, desires, fears, faults and foibles, you have a relationship
that can be built on and can last.

~~~
lifeisstillgood
Wishing you another twenty one years

Thank you for some sensible words

------
Xcelerate
I would be highly interested in a study that analyzes people who have been
married for 50+ years and compares them to people who have been divorced. I
have some opinions on what leads people to ultimately get divorced; however,
without any evidence to back them up, those thoughts aren't even worth
mentioning.

My belief is that marriage (at least for me personally) is a lifelong
commitment, and divorce is only an option in the cases of abuse or cheating.
In that sense, my biggest fear toward getting married is that the person I
marry would at some point change who they are ("get bored" in modern parlance)
and divorce me.

At this stage in my life (24 years old), I'm slowly realizing that I probably
won't ever get married even though I would really like to... I just can't
imagine meeting a person I feel so certain and comfortable about. Heck, I can
barely even find someone I want to date.

I was speaking with my sister (engaged) the other day and asked her how she
knew she had met the right person, and she told me that her fiancé is the only
guy ever that she felt like she wasn't playing "mind games" with. That's
particularly interesting to me, because I've never been with someone who I
didn't feel like I was playing those games with.

~~~
DanHulton
Over fifty years? The person you marry is going to change.

YOU'RE going to change.

Marriage is agreeing to let another person have first dibs over wooing the new
person you change into, and vice versa.

~~~
ncarroll
> Marriage is agreeing to let another person have first dibs over wooing the
> new person you change into, and vice versa.

Well said. And then, divorce happens when one or the other lets their option
drop.

------
panarky
How to know when to stop dating and get married:

1) n = number of people you could date in your lifetime

2) Date n/e people without stopping.

3) After dating n/e people, marry the first person who is better than everyone
you've dated previously.

This method selects the best candidate about 37% of the time, which sounds bad
but is superior to other systematic methods.

Sources:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimal_stopping](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimal_stopping)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_problem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_problem)

~~~
michaelochurch
The 1/e concept doesn't quite apply. First of all, the "Secretary Problem"
assumes a binary payoff structure: +1.0 for getting the absolute best and 0.0
for getting anyone else (and maximizes the EV at 1/e). However, for most
people, getting the 2nd-best theoretical potential mate is quite a bit better
than ending up alone (especially because people and preferences change, making
the concept of "best potential mate" sketchy; the person you want most at 17
is probably a bad lifelong match.)

Let's look at it, though. For the first 15-20 years (subject to debate) you
don't know _anything_ about this problem. You don't know who you are,
everyone's changing fast, you're blinded by sexual desire, etc. For the last
30 years, your reproductive viability is reduced for men and zero for women.
This puts the "choosing window" at, say, 20 to 50. That would mean that one
doesn't settle down until 32 at the absolute earliest, and that most people
would do so in their 40s (and have only a few years to bear children). Most
people don't want to wait that long to settle down, and for good reasons.

One major one is that the pool of available singles declines in quality as you
get older. The Secretary Problem assumes a uniform distribution of quality
over time. It's not true (and, in fact, insulting) to say that "all the good
ones are taken", but I definitely noticed a change in the _average_ quality of
dates from 20 to 26 (when I met my wife and left the dating game). You still
can find great people at any age, but the distribution evolves. Because people
improve with age (fuck VCs and how they think about that) there's some push at
the high end, but that's not offset by the disproportionate rate at which
either (a) "the good ones" are taken, or (b) the messed-up people become
better at hiding themselves, which is my preferred theory.

(I have no idea whether that decline of available mate quality continues after
26, or if it levels off or even reverses. I know some high-quality people who
are single at 40, but have no concept of the aggregate dating scene at that
age.)

Empirically, people don't "hold out" during 1/e of their window because,
unlike with the Secretary Problem, the payoff in choosing the 2nd or 3rd-best
theoretical match is quite high (maybe 0.8 to 0.99) compared to the payoff
(0.0 by definition) of never meeting someone as good as the best during your
hold-out period.

~~~
aianus
> Empirically, people don't "hold out" during 1/e of their window because,
> unlike with the Secretary Problem, the payoff in choosing the 2nd or 3rd-
> best theoretical match is quite high (maybe 0.8 to 0.99) compared to the
> payoff (0.0 by definition) of never meeting someone as good as the best
> during your hold-out period.

The 2nd or 3rd-best theoretical match could also have a negative payoff
(divorces you, takes half your money + child support + alimony). You can lose
a lot more marrying the wrong person than never marrying at all.

~~~
landryraccoon
Wow if that's true then marriage is just a horrible bet. Let's say you would
date 10 potential marriage partners - you're saying that only one of them
would have an outcome better than divorcing you and taking half your money and
your kids? I wouldn't even consider marriage as a possibility if the odds were
that bad.

------
mortenjorck
"One of the greatest privileges of being on one’s own is the flattering
illusion that one is, in truth, really quite an easy person to live with."

Ouch.

~~~
Delmania
This speaks to the real issue here. There's no right or wrong person to marry,
it's a matter of compatability, and how willing two people are to resolve
issues. Also, the question of friendship as well.

~~~
alashley
Yes, I think two reasonable people will usually have a fighting chance of a
healthy marriage.

------
joeclark77
They partly diagnose some of the dysfunctions of marriage, but their
prescription that we should psychoanalyze the "candidates" (as if you can
treat a good person that casually) and try to match ourselves based on some
kind of psychological compatibility is nuts.

The reasons marriages are failing so much these days is that we live in a
culture that does not value, or even understand, what marriage is. Marriage
works when both partners treat it as a lifelong partnership and they _work_ to
overcome their problems. If you were to engineer a marriage between two people
with perfectly matched personality types, phobias, etc, they'd still end up
divorced in a few years if they've been taught to think of marriage as a
temporary exchange of romantic favors "until I get bored" or "until something
better comes along".

~~~
burntsushi
I too thought some of the prescriptions were a little strange, but I think the
author brought it down to earth with:

    
    
        We need a new set of criteria. We should wonder:
    
        - how are they mad
    
        - how can one raise children with them
    
        - how can one develop together
    
        - how can one remain friends

------
rokhayakebe
The keyword is "wrong" as in being married and happy for 10 years, then
divorcing means the marriage was unsuccessful.

Perhaps we should rethink it as "we'll remain married as long as we are both
happy in it."

Marriage may just not have to be forever.

~~~
Karellen
What is marriage? I thought that one of the primary concepts behind it is that
it's a "commitment". (If it's not that, what is it?)

However, if you change that to "we'll keep doing this until we don't feel like
doing it", that's not really much of a commitment anymore, is it? After all,
doing something you enjoy doing until you don't feel like doing it anymore, is
pretty much what you do anyway, by default.

What is marriage, really, except a promise to try and keep going and work
things through, even when you don't want to anymore?

~~~
bluehex
It seems almost pathological to commit to continuing to do something even when
you don't want to do it anymore. And there's no way to predict how you will
feel in that regard a couple years later. What is the point of making a
promise like that? I'm not arguing for the parent's more lax stance on the
commitment of marriage; I'm just saying I don't see why people choose to marry
to begin with.

------
ilaksh
I don't think that the reasons for marrying are as far removed from primate
(or mammal, or animal in general) mate selection as people think they are.

Or more likely, people don't realize at all the degree to which their
behaviors and decisions are instinctual, and are confusing the
rationalizations that are layered on top for the actual explanation.

Why do two dogs choose to mate?

~~~
Turing_Machine
Dogs mate and then go their separate ways.

People do that, too.

Neither is anything at all like the decades-long commitment of a good
marriage. While it may seem like sex is the main feature (and it _is_
important), as someone who maintained a relationship for twenty years (she
passed away five years ago) I can assure you that it's far from the only
factor involved.

~~~
NIL8
I'm sorry for your loss, but I am grateful for your comment. I'm coming up on
23 years of marriage and I don't know how I could handle such a loss.

------
mistermann
Ten: “Men marry women with the hope they will never change. Women marry men
with the hope they will change. Invariably they are both disappointed.”

------
funkyy
The best method to not merry wrong person - do not marry because its the best
option you have. Reasoning have no saying in love. Just follow your true gut -
thats good enough. Your subconscious already know if the person is good or not
for you. And subconscious never follows social demand, but truly best option
for you. If you gut says - dont, but your reasoning says yes - then you are up
for a really bad time if you follow second.

~~~
dominotw
This is a really bizarre romantic notion. So your brain is actually divided
into 2 brains that are thinking independently and one that you have identified
as 'gut' is superior in matters of choosing a partner?

~~~
funkyy
Let me say this. Go with this thought - after the wedding it will be just a
downhill and all the bad things in your partner will become worse. If you can
live with that - cool, go and marry your partner. But if you honestly will
think about it and think like "it will be better" or "he/she will change/stay
the same" or "after wedding it will be much better" \- you are screwed. You
cannot bet your life on "it will be only better". Those things dont work like
that, I see way to many people divorcing because they made this bet.

I hate the way to young people marrying out of "it makes sense" while guy goes
to strip clubs every weekend and girls dream about some sexy guy taking them
for a date. Its sick and sounds like pathology. Its really, really wrong.

Mortgage/Taxes is not the reason to get married. Love is. If you call me
romantic, I am sorry, but it seems you didnt really seen true love.

------
B-Con
> In a wiser society, prospective partners would put each other through
> detailed psychological questionnaires and send themselves off to be assessed
> at length by teams of psychologists.

My wife and I did premarital counseling. I _highly_ recommend it. We learned a
lot about ourselves, each other, and us as a couple.

(We did it with our pastor and a couple we respected. But I recommend it
regardless of religious ideology.)

------
swframe
I read a paper that studied why some marriages work. The author concluded that
in those marriages, the couple worked to calm each other. I've used that in my
relationships and it has worked well. I make an agreement with my partner
upfront that we must make sure that one of us stays calm when the other is
angry and the angry person can't harm/insult/embarrass/etc the calm person.
The angry person should explain how they feel without resorting to name
calling or abusing the other person. If both of us become angry then we must
separate until one of us can be calm. With that algorithm, no one gets hurt in
an argument and arguments don't escalate into destructive events.

My relationships are still limited by the fact that couples must "agree to
disagree". This piles up and eventually there are too many disagreements to
ignore.

------
h1karu
Unfortunately in the US we have a divorce industry that spends billions of
dollars on advertising targeting mostly women, but also men with attempts to
normalize divorce or even to make it seem fashionable.

Basically if you look at the hard data and examine the strong correlation
between the aggregate divorce related TV advertising spend over the last 50
hears and the number of divorces in the USA a clear picture begins to emerge.

This is just another marketing success story where PR firms spent billions to
educate a market.. to help the divorce industry reach "product / market fit"

~~~
kstenerud
Or: The divorce industry has been a significant help in reducing the stigma
associated with divorce, such that people can now make their own decisions
without the societal pressure to stay in an unhappy marriage.

~~~
h1karu
Through well measured advertising campaigns they changed the definition of
what a "happy marriage" means so that it's new meaning aligns more closely
with the idea of being in a satisfactory employment situation. Everyone knows
that it's not a good idea to jump from job to job too quickly, but if you've
been at the same company for a long time, and a much better seeming
opportunity presents itself.. then in today's world.. thanks to the PR spin
machine and the divorce industry.. jumping ship seems like the only sensible
thing to do, after all lets not forget that there's a huge cash reward
involved which will more than cover the cost the attorneys fees many times
over.

Marriage has been reduced to a transaction, a mere token in the consumer
economy. The big question in my mind is, was this multi-billion dollar, multi-
generational PR campaign coordinated out of greed by the divorce industry or
is it an attempt by sinister forces to gradually bend the zeitgeist of western
civilization in a certain ?dehumanizing? direction ? I suppose attempting to
trace causation is not the most efficient means by which to remedy the
situation, but yet these thoughts arise.

------
copperx
One of the best pieces that I have read regarding love and marriage. I loved
the part on savouring the fleeting moments of happiness in our life.

~~~
john2x
Yeah. Reading "We want to freeze happiness" struck a chord with me.

------
digita88
It is too much for me to marry for purely Romantic reason. I like the idea of
marriages in the past. I want to look at a prospective partner's land,
property, ownership, if we are on a similar cultural field, any potential
alliances, education and so on.

------
gilgoomesh
This is a good list of hypotheses... but shouldn't the article attempt to
support these claims with some numbers to back it up or evaluations from
experts? Feels a little hollow as it is.

~~~
alexqgb
What you just described would increase the amount of work involved by a factor
of 10 (in round numbers). So "should" it? Given that you paid nothing for it,
the better question is why should anyone give a fig about what you think if
all you have to day is "Interesting, but how about doing a lot more work...for
free."

If you're truly interested, why don't you get in touch with the writer, tell
him what you'd like to know, and ask how much he'll charge to supply it. He's
likely to be pleased, and you may get what you're after.

------
PhantomGremlin
I hate to be fatalistic about marriage, but this quip from somewhere on the
Internet sums it up:

    
    
       50% of marriages end in divorce,
       the other 50% end in death.
       Mazel tov.

------
marincounty
Bill Murry summed it up pretty well, 'Take her around the world--nice and, not
so nice places; then decide if you still want to get married.' (That is if you
have the funds?)

Personally, I was told this by an old Sailor. "If she is willing to live on a
boat in order to save up money; You better marry her. It takes a special type
of woman to live on a boat. If she is willing to put up with the cold, and
misery of daily boat life--she is an angel, or really loves your ass?"

~~~
colordrops
meh, I am married to a woman that slept in ditches with me, but the second we
got married and had kids, she became someone else. This advice is bullshit.

~~~
scott_karana
The quotes aren't about people "staying the same", just the quality of their
character.

After having children, of course she would have to change! It's irrational to
expect otherwise.

The important part is tolerating and accepting change.

------
cryptophile
I do not believe that marrying the "wrong person" is fundamentally that
common. The problem is rather that it could be simple and easy to divorce
someone for the inevitable quirks that you do not want to learn to put with.

That is why I have never considered and would never consider to marry a woman
from a mainstream western community. The fact that it is culturally an easy
option to move on, turns them into unsuitable marriage material. I would just
be getting into an accident waiting to happen.

Prince Charles and lady Diana only divorced because it was culturally
acceptable and rather easy to do. Otherwise, they would still be married
today. Especially Diana would have learned how to deal with the drawbacks of
that, and probably not be more unhappy for it.

~~~
halhen
As a newly divorced mainstream western person, I might have an anecdotal
perspective on this. You don't divorce because of how easy it is. You divorce
despite how hard it is. And while the cultural boundaries are reasonable (not
encouraging, mind you), it is the finances, the practical things, the
emotions, the social consequences that hurt. And, if you have kids, rip their
opportunity to live in the same house as both parents.

My divorce was a "good" one. We agreed, and make the best of it together, not
just for the kids' sake but for each other's as well. Still, I never wanna do
this again.

According to other people I've talked to, the books I've read, and the
therapists I've been to, the idea that couples divorce too easily is simply
false. I'm sure you can find examples to point to, but, at least around the
Nordics, it simply is not the case.

If you marry a woman who would divorce you in a wink, the reason is you not
getting to know her beforehand, not some divorce-culture.

~~~
sheepmullet
"According to other people I've talked to, the books I've read, and the
therapists I've been to, the idea that couples divorce too easily is simply
false."

I don't think it is about how "easy" it is. It's about when is divorce
considered the "right thing"? In the west we often consider divorce the right
option based on feelings and desires. Don't settle. You have the right to be
happy etc.

