
Why You Will Marry the Wrong Person - brebla
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/29/opinion/sunday/why-you-will-marry-the-wrong-person.html?action=click&contentCollection=N.Y.%20%2F%20Region&module=Trending&version=Full&region=Marginalia&pgtype=article
======
nostrebored
I think that there are two extremely harmful narratives that have reached wide
acceptance in the last few generations:

1) There's a soulmate out there for you

2) You shouldn't change who you are for your partner

Both of which combine to create the barrage of unhappy relationship stories
that you hear today. Really, I think that you can be happy with just about
anyone who is willing to listen to you and change their mind when they're
wrong.

Because you are wrong about something. Maybe it's major, maybe it's minor,
maybe it's a "facet of your personality" which is destructive, and you should
be willing to update the way that you interact with the world based on new
information. Going into relationships as an immutable person is a quick way to
dwindle your dating pool down to practically nothing or decrease the quality
of the relationship for your partner.

------
up_and_up
PROTIP:

1\. Have a longterm vision/goal for your life that is achievable regardless of
financial resources/location etc.

2\. Find a partner in crime who shares that vision and is willing to join you
on what will surely be a great adventure known as your life. Life will surely
be no bed of roses.

3\. Stress Test your relationship in some way to ensure the vision/goal is
aligned.

I decided I should marry my wife following 6 months of hard travel through
South America. I figured if we passed that test, we could handle pretty much
anything.

EDIT: Appreciate all the comments. I have actually been married now for 10
years and have 3 kids. So while its true that the "Test" I am describing
cannot mimic the tough slog of real-life, how exactly do you propose to mimic
the difficulty of raising kids? If I were to speak to my 20 something self I
would still recommend a difficult trip is an easy way to see how easily your
relationship will come apart under stress, mainly because you are coming up
against unknown/uncomfortable situations and factors.

~~~
sgdread
There're random factors you can't control. Good example is post-partum
depression. Every child birth is 20% chance; once happening, it can
significantly change both partners.

~~~
Aelinsaar
So don't have kids, we're not running out of people after all.

~~~
fizzbatter
Not sure why you're downvoted. I suppose you're not contributing too much to
the conversation, and it seems a little sarcastic (or something), but i often
feel not having kids is a forgotten option. My SO and I chose long ago not to
have kids (independently, fwiw), and people often look at us like we have two
heads (.. each, heh).

~~~
Aelinsaar
People don't like to question the basic assumptions they live with, such as,
"Having children is a necessary part of a good and fulfilled life."

~~~
Mz
I didn't downvote, but if I had, it wouldn't be for that reason. It would be
because having kids or not having kids is something many people speak of
cavalierly as if it is totally in our control and this is often not true. If
birth control fails, there are places where abortion is hard to come by
(including large parts of the U.S., from what I gather). These attitudes
disproportionately negatively impact women.

Much of human sexual morality is rooted in the thorny issue that mother nature
makes sex pleasurable in large part to get you to reproduce and efforts to
enjoy sex without it leading to babies are often unsuccessful. So, we have a
long human tradition of things like shotgun weddings.

~~~
Aelinsaar
If every comment you come across accounts for the full spectrum of human and
geopolitical variability, they would stop being comments and start being
novellas.

~~~
Mz
It is possible to leave comments that are not novellas and that also are not
sweepingly dismissive of underlying reality. All birth control methods have
failure rates. None of them promises 100% protection -- except celibacy
(assuming no one gets raped), which most married couples are not keen to
practice.

~~~
Aelinsaar
I'm curious, if we take the failure rate of responsible protected sex, post-
vasectomy sex, etc, for the planet...

... does that even start to contribute to replacing the existing population,
or is it a statistical blip? Is this just a dead end you're trying to lead me
down?

------
stcredzero
_What matters in the marriage of feeling is that two people are drawn to each
other by an overwhelming instinct and know in their hearts that it is right._

That is not enough. If you don't have the practical logistics down as well,
the odds will be very much against you. Trust is a big factor. Everything is
harder when resources are constrained, especially trust.

~~~
Jtsummers
Note: That point in the article isn't stating the author's views. It's stating
a somewhat modern trend in marriage. Marriage by feeling, not by reason (the
author's description of two modes of deciding whom to marry).

The author even goes on to say why there are problems with this mode and
suggests a different one, one based on pessimism.

------
matwood
A comedian once said "Find someone you can tolerate and marry them." The point
being that we as society have put marriage expectations so high that they are
impossible for most people to meet. True love, the one, etc... are all things
that sound great, but just rarely, if ever happen. It will not always be
rainbows and butterflies and there will be times where it is a lot of work.
Knowing that going in will lead to an attitude of working together.

~~~
Digit-Al
There's a line in a song: It's not alway's rainbows and butterflies; it's
compromising that moves us along.

~~~
matwood
Maroon5. I probably subconsciously used part of that line in my comment.

------
mdorazio
I was really hoping for at least some statistics or research to show what the
scale of the purported issue is, and the decision-making processes that lead
to it. This reads more as an opinion piece from a marriage counselor (author
seems to be a television personality in actuality) than an actual explanation
of why people choose the wrong marriage partner.

~~~
busterarm
But at the same time I feel like this is an accurate summation of the problem
and contains solid advice.

This was a good read.

I think getting good data on this would be impossible. Unfortunately it would
involve including peoples' opinions and perceptions on events and we're
amazing animals at misunderstandings and self-deceptions. Who knows if the
purported reason actually has anything to do with it and isn't just the answer
someone is comfortable with telling themselves or others?

~~~
o_____________o
Agree, this is the wisdom I wish someone drilled into me when I was young and
lusty. We got indoctrinated early into romanticism by every song and Disney
cartoon. It's myopic. Ain't no r&b ballads about marriage doldrums.

~~~
busterarm
I don't know. I pretty much agree with the author on all points after my bad
experiences (luckily without being in a marriage)... ...but I've hardly found
anyone who entertains a similar point of view. It gets lonely, but honestly
that's fine.

~~~
o_____________o
Entertains the point of view/s in the article?

------
kazinator
> _The good news is that it doesn’t matter if we find we have married the
> wrong person._

Yes, it does! OMG, this so laughably wrong. (The whole article.)

Who you marry is a big, big determiner of happiness.

It's better to be single than to marry the wrong person.

~~~
nostrademons
That line is speaking at a different level than your response.

The point - which the article goes on to elaborate on in the next few
paragraphs - is that happiness is a _choice_ , not a _consequence_. Every
person is going to have flaws, and they will have little quirks that drive you
nuts. Whether the relationship succeeds or not depends on how you react to
those flaws. Do disagreements spiral out of control, with each person getting
angrier and taking it out on their partner, making them angrier in turn? Or do
they melt away with a decision to compromise and accept reality?

The article's point is that you should own your emotions instead of letting
them own you. The example they start with is two people who do whatever their
emotions tell them to without thought of the consequences. The example they
end with is two people who _understand_ their emotions but also understand
that they don't have to react to their first impulse.

~~~
kazinator
Of course "right person" doesn't mean "flawless person"!

That is a complete strawman.

> _you should own your emotions instead of letting them own you._

Those who let their emotions own them are the ones who tend settle for the
wrong person. "Sure he drinks, spends money like crazy and flirts with every
beautiful woman he sees ... but I LOVE him".

~~~
nostrademons
I think, then, that you and the article are talking past each other. There's
nothing in the article that says one should settle for he who "drinks, spends
money like crazy, and flirts with every beautiful woman he sees". The examples
given are "The failure of one particular partner to save us from our grief and
melancholy is not an argument against that person" and "The person who is best
suited to us is not the person who shares our every taste (he or she doesn’t
exist), but the person who can negotiate differences in taste intelligently",
neither of which I see as particularly big sins.

Indeed, I'm a bit baffled by the commenters (in this subthread and elsewhere)
that are interpreting the article's main point as "have no standards". It is
not contradictory to have high standards and _also_ realize that no partner is
going to complete us or make us happy all the time. It just means realizing
that momentary unhappiness is a part of life, and that it's worth forgiving
the little things if the big things are in place.

------
ryancouto
reminds me of this article...

[http://markmanson.net/question](http://markmanson.net/question)

TL;DR: Don't set goals based on what makes you happy. Instead, decide what
you're willing to suffer for.

~~~
xirdstl
I didn't agree with his opening premise of what everybody wants, so I couldn't
finish reading.

~~~
yeahmaybe
Do you only read articles you agree with? That sounds like a strong case of
confirmation bias. Besides, the core of the article does not reflect an
elaboration of that paragraph, you should give it a try.

~~~
xirdstl
No, I read tons I disagree with. I didn't do well to elaborate on my objection
in my original comment. Beginning an article with strong sweeping
generalizations that are obviously not true is likely to turn me off, and it
did in this case.

~~~
milcron
For what it's worth, the rest of the article delves into the "but"s and why a
worldview corresponding to the initial paragraph isn't a realistic one.

------
zw123456
My grandparents lived long enough to celebrate a 75th anniversary. I remember
I was old enough at the time to be cognizant of these issues and I asked them
both what "the secret was to a long happy marriage". My grandma said: "well,
when I look out the window and see your grandpa drive up in his truck after
being away for awhile, I still get a little excited to see him". My grandpa
said: "we have sex every night, well, now days we just rub our asses together
a little". I think somewhere in there they had some pretty good old timers
wisdom.

------
swsieber
tl;dr

A happy marriage isn't a result of magically picking the right person.

My 2 cents: Of course it isn't. A happy marriage is the result of two
conscious decisions - one from each person involved.

To sum it up with a quote I heard growing up:

"'Soul mates' are fiction and an illusion[...] yet it is certain that almost
any good man and any good woman can have happiness and a successful marriage
if both are willing to pay the price."

------
friendly_chap
Of course, you should not marry or have kids - that way you will be better
separated, an easier to tame slave. Thanks for not having relationships,
thanks for not having people who stand up for you!

~~~
ambicapter
Then again, how are you going to quit your job, with its sweet golden
handcuffs of medical benefits, when you have kids to provide for?

------
11thEarlOfMar
[0]

There are so many reasons why the whole marriage thing is a boondoggle. The
most pithy is: 'Women marry men, expecting they will change. Men marry women,
expecting they won't.' More often than not, both wind up disappointed.

Erring a bit more scientifically, the male and female brains are genuinely
structured differently and process sensing input differently [1], [2]. It's no
wonder they respond to the same situations differently. An anecdote: I've
asked dozens of people: "What would you do if you were walking down the beach
and you heard the screams of a child drowning?" The men unanimously say they'd
dash to the water, tearing their clothes off as they run to the rescue. The
women, not unanimously but overwhelmingly, say they'd run to get the life
guard.

When the stakes are high in a marriage, agreeing on how to react can become
very difficult and disagreement can lead to schisms in the relationship. It
might be a disabled child, a layoff, a drunken one-night stand, serious
accident, or any number of misfortunes. These misfortunes will push people
into emotional territory they may have never been in before, and you can't
know in advance how they'll react.

In the end, if you decide to marry, you're taking it on faith that the two of
you will remain committed no matter what. You really have few indicators to go
by.

[0] Speaking strictly in terms of man/woman marriages, the only place I have
experience.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Female_Brain_(book)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Female_Brain_\(book\))

[2]
[http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/books/review/Bazelon-t.htm...](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/books/review/Bazelon-t.html)

~~~
nostrebored
[0][1][2] I still can't honestly believe that people actually believe in brain
sex. Swathes of neuroscience researchers have told you that it's disingenuous,
it's a classic tool of projecting inferiority onto women, and it ignores the
reality of neuroplasticity. The brains of taxi drivers are different than the
brains of the general population -- does this mean that we consider them to be
naturally born to be taxi drivers?

Your anecdote reeks of social conditioning. This is literally a social trope.

My partner and I make decisions together and rationally, figuring out the best
course of action for the two of us. Miraculously, even with her lady-brain,
we're able to come to a consensus and agree with each other before talking the
majority of the time.

[0] [http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/brains-men-and-
women-...](http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/brains-men-and-women-aren-t-
really-different-study-finds) [1]
[http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/talking-back/is-the-
brai...](http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/talking-back/is-the-brain-
gendereda-q-a-with-harvard-s-catherine-dulac/) [2]
[http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2011/is-female-brain-
innatel...](http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2011/is-female-brain-innately-
inferior)

~~~
antisthenes
I just want to point out that even though the brains are equivalent, the
sexual strategy for men and women is completely different and that's okay.

The differences in behavior can be explained by choosing the optimal strategy,
rather than some deterministic brain chemistry.

------
swagasaurus-rex
> For most of recorded history, people married for logical sorts of reasons:
> because her parcel of land adjoined yours, his family had a flourishing
> business, her father was the magistrate in town, there was a castle to keep
> up, or both sets of parents subscribed to the same interpretation of a holy
> text. And from such reasonable marriages, there flowed loneliness,
> infidelity, abuse, hardness of heart and screams heard through the nursery
> doors. The marriage of reason was not, in hindsight, reasonable at all; it
> was often expedient, narrow-minded, snobbish and exploitative.

I hear this opinion everywhere, and I'm curious to see if there's any bearing
to this idea. As far as I'm concerned, loneliness, infidelity, abuse, hardness
of heart all occur with some regularity despite marrying for romantic reasons.

------
carsongross
No mention of children, until we get this: "maddening children who kill the
passion from which they emerged".

This solipsistic, navel-gazing age can't die fast enough.

~~~
rudolf0
What point are you making? That children can't somehow add additional stress
to a relationship?

~~~
carsongross
That this is a solipsistic, melodramatic and, ultimately, immature analysis of
marriage.

~~~
rudolf0
Could you elaborate? What is solipsistic or even melodramatic about it?

------
norea-armozel
I guess I count myself lucky in that I never bothered to look for anyone, not
even in the context of casual sex. For me, people are such a complicated topic
that I'd rather share my time with a cat than another human being. It's not to
say that I don't enjoy the time I do share with my friend (yes, I literally
just have one friend) but I can't see myself having anything but a friend or
two in my life. I may be setting myself up for a lonely life in my later years
but I've lived this way since college (never had much in the way of friends
during my k-12 years). And honestly, I'd rather be lonely than miserable. I
can always make a friend, but I can't unmake bad memories of a failed
relationship/marriage.

~~~
nostrebored
The fact that nobody has responded to you concerns me. I'd much rather have a
failed relationship with fond memories (which all but the worst of
relationships will have) and personal growth (which every relationship will
encourage given that you have the right outlook going in).

You're setting up a huge false dichotomy here. The choices aren't lonely or
miserable, there's a huge spectrum, and you might feel those feelings at
discreet points, but overall just developing the level of closeness that you
do with another person in a prolonged relationship can help you see the beauty
of the world and the people in it again.

From one previously lonely guy to another, I really hope you give it a chance.

------
anotherevan
Authenticity and communication I personally think are the two most important
traits for a successful relationship.

If you don't feel like you can be your real self in front of that person,
unable to share with each other your dreams, fantasies, desires, fears, faults
and foibles, it is going to be difficult to build a relationship that can
last.

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.

------
bittercynic
Part of this was borrowed without credit.
[https://web.archive.org/web/20160422073110/http://thephiloso...](https://web.archive.org/web/20160422073110/http://thephilosophersmail.com/relationships/how-
we-end-up-marrying-the-wrong-people/)

~~~
TACIXAT
It looks like the author [1] is associated with The Book of Life [2] which is
referenced on the site you linked [3]. Likely all owned by the same person.

[1] [https://twitter.com/alaindebotton](https://twitter.com/alaindebotton)

[2] [http://www.thebookoflife.org/](http://www.thebookoflife.org/)

[3]
[https://web.archive.org/web/20160316112501/http://thephiloso...](https://web.archive.org/web/20160316112501/http://thephilosophersmail.com/category/what-
this-is-all-about/)

------
DanWaterworth
I've found this podcast [1] really insightful. The guy who presents it is
Christian, but it's interesting whether you buy the Jesus thing or not.

[1] [http://subversivekingdom.com/theres-no-such-thing-as-a-
soulm...](http://subversivekingdom.com/theres-no-such-thing-as-a-soulmate/)

------
sw00
It's the long form of this:
[https://youtu.be/zuKV2DI9-Jg](https://youtu.be/zuKV2DI9-Jg)

The author founded The School of Life - which I think is wonderful.

------
atomical
I thought I had read something like this before. The Philosophers' Mail had
some very thought provoking writing but it appears to have gone under.

~~~
makenova
Yeah, I think this exact article was there but it's down now. I immediately
checked my pocket archive and even though I pay for premium(meaning my library
should be permanent) it's gone. I liked it when I first read it and I like it
now.

------
multinglets
Oh cool, now NYT columnists are plagiarizing polyamorist marketing. That's so
cool how we can engineer better sexual relationships than >250K years of
biological and cultural evolution, and all it took was a little postmodern
thinking.

