> And it inadvertently prioritizes relationships over the people actually in them.
An oath is an oath. You are an individualist, but social stability often matters more than the whims of individuals.
> The idea that if people would just do everything right, no relationship would need to break up is an unhealthy, and completely unrealistic, judgement.
When people are focused on their 'perfect wedding', you already know priorities are already way off. Marriages need to built on decent foundations, not just feelings. So, I can agree with you that a feelings-focused marriage in an impulse-driven society is unrealistic.
> When people are focused on their 'perfect wedding'
Perfect wedding? Who said anything about that?
> Marriages need to built on decent foundations
Well, yes. Did someone argue against that?
> not just feelings
"Feelings"? Which parent commenter said anything about that?
> So, I can agree with you that a feelings-focused marriage in an impulse-driven society is unrealistic.
Who are you talking to?
You have no idea who I am. How seriously I take commitments. How constructive I have remained in trying times. The end of my previous relationships involved serious circumstances, real people experiencing trauma and tragedy, and a great deal of lasting pain and loss.
Another person's misfortunes, which you have no knowledge of, are not a blank canvas you should be painting your careless assumptions and selective "values" on.
Just to be clear, I am not talking about you directly. I had no intention of judging you personally or upsetting you; I'm sorry if you took it that way.
> The idea that if people would just do everything right, no relationship would need to break up is an unhealthy, and completely unrealistic, judgement.
Let me try again: I think that what you're saying is true because of the social context. Would you agree that current society is not as conducive to long-term relationships?
> Would you agree that current society is not as conducive to long-term relationships?
There can be great value in long term relationships, but equally, there is great value in people's freedom to associate (or not), including the freedom to move in and out of personal relationships.
Those ideals could be framed as appositional, but they are synergistic.
Emphasizing only long term commitments, and stigmatizing break ups, has a long history of trapping countless people in abusive, unhappy, practically harmful relationships. And covering up that harm. Anti-breakup effectively becomes anti-transparency and pro-abuse.
Promoting the freedom to break up (not promoting break ups), helps people get out of bad relationships, and gives them another chance to find one.
So win-win.
So yes, I would say that a more free society is tautologically less conducive to long term relationships than one where they are highly prescribed.
But more conducive to people taking the health of their existing relationships seriously, and for finding a healthy relationship, however long that takes. And more conducive to people who are simply happier without a relationship (after suffering a bad one, or not), to do so without stigma.
> Anti-breakup effectively becomes anti-transparency and pro-abuse.
If there is no communal support or watchfulness, then I guess those things are more likely, yes. Communities should help prevent abusive people from isolating their partners. I guess you would argue that the reality will always fall short of that and that communities can never be good enough.
> So win-win.
I'm not so sure it's necessarily a win for the kids.
I guess the main problem that you're not addressing is the possible lack of sustainability. Women do have a time limit if they want children, and of course there is personal freedom and all that, but if a culture that pushes personal freedom doesn't reproduce enough to replace itself then it may eventually be outbred by cultures that are less interested in personal freedom (e.g. their women might be forced to have more kids).
An oath is an oath. You are an individualist, but social stability often matters more than the whims of individuals.
> The idea that if people would just do everything right, no relationship would need to break up is an unhealthy, and completely unrealistic, judgement.
When people are focused on their 'perfect wedding', you already know priorities are already way off. Marriages need to built on decent foundations, not just feelings. So, I can agree with you that a feelings-focused marriage in an impulse-driven society is unrealistic.