People often say you need to have faith. The word faith, or faithful, is common in wedding vows.
I recently read a book called "End of Faith" by Sam Harris. The book is an argument against religion, and he makes a differentiation between religious faith and faith in something proven. Harris argues that religious faith is harmful and wrong, because religious faith is the belief in historical and metaphysical propositions without sufficient evidence. Faith in someone or oneself, however, is okay, if it is based on quantitative results.
For example, I have faith in my son's ability to do well on a spelling test, as he has done well in every spelling test he has taken this year at school. That would be a valid use of faith. In contrast, it would not be good to place faith in my ability to bench press 300 pounds, because I can have never done more than 250, no matter how much you believe in me or I pray to God to give me the strength. Any bets on that result would be lost money.
So, to have faith in a marriage succeeding is fine, but not if that faith is in the words of a vow, an overlord god, or in superstitions that even today still play a huge role in planning a wedding. The faith has to be in something that can be proven, in order to be a valid prediction of success.
But the problem here is that the most important attributes of a successful marriage are subjective concepts that cannot be quantitatively measured nor uniformly defined.
In other words, you cannot have faith in a marriage. It is an oxymoron.
How do you identify or measure the faith a couple has in themselves and each other? How do you identify or measure their love? What about trust? People can say they have faith, love, and trust in their spouse, but all couples said the same wedding vows, so obviously what someone says at a wedding cannot be taken as a true oath until death do them part, even if the bride and groom speaking at the time say it with honesty and sincerity.
To have faith in someone being married forever is no different than believing your next coin flip will be tails, that your dealt blackjack hand of 14 will bust with another card, or you will win a game of eeny meeny miny moe (all of which have odds around 50%).
People may want the marriage to last, but there is no evidence to think that the wedding you went to last week is any more likely to last than the next one Britney Spears is involved with.
In fact (and this will really anger you), there is no reason to believe YOUR marriage is more likely to last than a neighbor's, for the same reasons: You don't know what is in your spouse's heart any more than I do.
Do you think every divorce ended with one spouse saying, "Yeah, I knew he would cheat on me" or "I could see it coming that she would neglect the kids" or "I knew he couldn't hold a job and would lose everything we had in savings" or "I knew I would get bored with her sexually"? Of course, not. So what makes you immune to this possibility?
People change as they get older, and now, more than ever, the likelihood of not being aligned over time exists. It wasn't much of an issue when women couldn't hold property, vote, initiate a divorce, be a CEO, file charges against the husband for rape or abuse, and do everything a man can. It's easy to keep the divorce rate low when a women has no rights, but that is not the case now in America. Sure, Muslim arranged-marriages are still going strong, but I don't think that is reason to push women's rights in the Western world back to the 14th century.
The divorce rate increase in America is not a result of sex education, rap music, or the removal of "Merry Christmas" from public schools, as Christians would have you believe; it is directly aligned with the progression of women's rights. Over two-thirds of all divorces are initiated by women, with the rate increasing with the level of education of the woman involved.
In other words, the more women are given options in a society, the more likely they are to decide the option of staying with their husband sucks, because the fact is marriage has always been broken- women just weren't able to do anything about it in the past. In addition, the reality that people died in their 30s hid a lot of discontent that may have existed over decades of marriage, as exists today.
Again, my point is not to push women's rights back to what they are in Saudi Arabia but to point out that the issues with marriage have always existed but have been masked by flaws in society- marriage has always been flawed.
In Vegas, the odds always favor the house, yet people still give their money, risk their future, their children's future on the next bet, and wonder what happened when they lose everything or their lives don't turn out as they imagined. Marriages seem to be the same method of operation.
People think the weddings of their family and friends will work, because they think they know the bride and groom, the family, and other key players. They feel they have well-founded faith in the happy couple who are, by all accounts, good people. But no matter how hard you try to quantify it or create a test, the reality is you can’t predict the success of a marriage, because we can’t look into someone’s heart and know if the "feeling" is there.
So, can we do anything about it?
It is a fact many people get married who should not. We also know that the consequences of these decisions are significant and impact us all directly. Yet I don't know of a way to fix it, because only the bride and groom know if they really have faith in each other and if the love they feel is truly for better or worse, through changes unforeseen.
I do think that many engaged couples know deep down they aren't ready to marry at the time they plan to, but do so anyway. Society doesn't encourage or acknowledge doubt in weddings ("It is normal to have cold feet... You can't call it off now... You do love me, don't you?"), so they keep their doubt quiet, accept the gifts and attention, and hope in bad times or moments of temptation that somehow behaviors demonstrated in the past will suddenly change and pleasantly surprise them.
So, lacking a mind-reading lie detector and a time machine, we cannot prevent divorces in American marriages. But can we at least decrease the frequency?
I think so, but no one will support me on it. I believe that we need to create via mandatory pre-marriage counseling session to better educate people before they get married, using the third-party impartial interviewer solution that I previously described.
Similar to an inspection before you buy a house, adopt a child, or visit with your bank to get pre-approved for a house loan, this solution is not perfect, but it would identify the big showstoppers.
If you would gladly pay $200 on a $200K investment of replaceable wood, cement, and glass, how could you not pay $200 to better understand the investment that will be with you forever, in flesh and blood.
If this cost is too high for everyone, then maybe the government should subsidize it for the poor, because surely the cost saved in a significant decrease in divorces and all of its consequences would easily pay the cost of state-provided counseling.
I realize most people, if not all, will laugh at the idea of having state-mandated marriage counseling by a stranger not affiliated with any religious organization, and will say they don't need the government telling us what to do, but I have seen the results of the religious counselors, and I am not impressed.
And if we require government-mandated training to own a gun, drive a car, or flip burgers at a fast-food restaurant, why not for marriages?
The government already tells us how we can raise our kids (social workers remove kids from homes every day), our pets (animal control takes pets from people every day), and take care of our yard (homeowner association fines for weeds), so what is the big jump to marriages? A strange result of all this thought on marriage is that I started off thinking marriage should be completely redefined or dissolved as an option for relationships without children, but I found that marriage does work for some and that option should not be removed.
I still have faith in marriage, if not in the people who are getting married and their ability to handle it. After all, I estimate 20% of them are happy, and they should not be punished.
My wife's friend Jen certainly is not going to seek my approval on her decision to marry.
But, if she were to ask me: "Should I get married?"
I would respond: "I don't know. But if you choose to get married, I promise to be supportive, not be silent or turn a blind eye if I witness actions that are harmful to your marriage, and I do everything in my power to help your marriage last forever."
And maybe that is what we all need; a little more support from our friends and family beyond a new blender, a car with cans tied to it, and a Hallmark card.
Friday, February 08, 2008
Monday, February 04, 2008
Faith in Marriage, Part I
My wife has a friend (we'll call her Jen). I have known Jen for about 18 months.
Jen's boyfriend, who lived in another state, recently got a new job and is moving to the same city Jen lives. They have a serious relationship, and when you remove the barrier of distance, it is likely a marriage proposal will take place in the near future.
Coincidentally (or not), Jen and I have had some deep conversations on this topic. I have a negative opinion of marriage, even though the most honest and open relationship of anyone I know is between myself and my wife.
We have been married for 13 years this month. Neither of us has committed an act of infidelity, we have a happy and healthy son, we vacation together several times a year, we go out and do things together, and we have an open communication on the topics that tend to result in marriages falling apart (finances, sex, religion, in-laws, parenting, employment, etc.).
Despite this background, I think marriage is a broken concept that needs to be fixed.
(ground rules for this discussion: I am not saying that people who are unhappy should not get divorced, as it is unhealthy to be unhappy until you reach your breaking point and shoot your spuse, your co-workers, then put the gun on yourself. If a father is sexually molesting a child, then you obviously have to divorce the bastard. My comments are not for extreme corner cases that are not preventable but directed at the relationsips that most of us experience every day.)
It is pretty much accepted by all sides that about half of all marriages end in divorce (and the divorce rate is higher for second and third marriages). So, if we have 100 married couples, 50 are getting divorced.
Of the remaining 50, I think it is safe to say not all are happy. I estimate about 20 of these couples are on their way to getting divorced but taking a bit longer to get there. That leaves us with 30 couples.
Of that 30, it is likely not all of them are perfectly happy, so let's assume 10 of them are not really considering divorce as an option and will never be a statistic, but at the same time aren't happy with the relationship (in counseling, cheating on their spouse, avoiding each other, hiding financial issues, etc.). That leaves us with 20 couples.
I could probably argue that a significant amount of those 20 are on thin ice themselves, just an unexpected pregnancy, layoff, bad financial decision, in-law moving in, etc. away from becoming an unhappy marriage because the relationship is only as strong as their success, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt and state they are happily married.
That means I estimate about 20% of marriages are successful and happy. I could go into more detail with my thoughts on the reasons for believing this and the explanation of why marriage is falling apart, but that is another blog entry. For now, understand that I have explained these thoughts in detail to Jen.
I have asked her, if you had a 50% chance that the car you buy will blow up when you start to brake, would you buy that model? Of course not, she replied.
If you had a 50% chance of getting food poisoning at a restaurant, would you eat somewhere else? Yes.
If a toy had a 50% chance of breaking, would you buy it for a child? No.
Yet, even though everyone knows there is a 50% chance of a marriage ending in divorce, marriage is still valued by society and encouraged as the only option for at-risk individuals who clearly don't have the resources, capabilities, and maturity to handle the complexity of marriage.
I told Jen most people shouldn't get married. The risk is too great, and the impact financially, socially, and mentally on people is too devastating and long-lasting. And while some may say that it is a personal choice and not my concern, I disagree. It does impact me, because most people cannot contain the problems of their personal life to just their personal time.
I have to deal with your transference when you commit acts of aggression on the road, blow off your responsibilities at work, or act ignore the rules of civility in society, all because you are fighting constantly with your wife and you've had enough with everyone and everything.
And the impact is even greater when children are involved; the majority of prisons in the US are filled with males who did not have a father influence in their lives due to failed relationships/marriages, and the father was no longer a daily influence (research shows the greatest influence on a child's life is the same gender parent). This doesn't include the millions of kids who are not felons but are disruptive in classrooms, bullies outside of school, and destructive to themselves and society, who also grew up raised in the home of a failed marriage.
Why should our kids get beat up walking home because your son is acting out his aggressions from watching years of mom and dad yell at each other? Why should we have to pay for the vandalism your kid caused because he watched mom throw things at dad when he was six and thinks that is how you behave when you don't get your way? Not only should you not have had kids; you never should have been married to begin with.
After listening patiently to this rant and waiting for me to pause for air, Jen asked me (and I am paraphrasing here): "What am I supposed to do when there is only person who makes me feel that way? Am I supposed to avoid it? I want to experience that feeling."
That, of course, is the crux of the problem: Every engaged couple feels their love is eternally strong. Even if one concedes my argument on the number of failed marriages, no one thinks that they will be the ones getting divorced.
So how do we know a marriage will be one of the successful ones?
After all, in every wedding I have been to or heard about, everyone celebrated the bride and groom without reservation, hugged and cried, gave gifts, said congratulations, commented on how great they look together, and by doing this explicitly supported the union.
I have never heard of anyone ever actually speaking up when asked to by the preacher and saying: "Walk away! He's a bum! In seven years she will tire of your looks and start to fool around with your neighbor!"
Clearly you can't trust friends or family to tell you if this is the right person for you to marry, because they are either incapable of considering the possibility the marriage might fail, too emotionally attached to see things clearly, or maybe they have doubts but don't have the guts to tell the truth; either way, we celebrate and buy presents for thousands of couples each year who will hate each other before the warranty runs out on the applianace you gave them.
I told Jen that although it may be awkward and certainly unusual, the best thing one could do before marrying is to find someone who is neither a family member nor close personal friend of the bride or groom, someone who has no agenda, someone who is open-minded and an intuitive thinker who bases decisions on fact and not emotion, and ask that person if the marriage should take place, based on honest evidence and arguments presented by the person getting married, supporting the case for marriage.
While a religious person is often the most common third-party advisor in pre-marriage counseling (as was the case with mine), they are not a good resource for this task, as their religious agenda makes them no better than family and friends.
I know many people who have been "counseled" by a religious person from a church prior to marriage; I know of none whom have been told not to marry. The goal of the church is not to honestly counsel these people but to have them do some surveys, hear scripture about God, and get them into the Church machine.
Only a true impartial person would have the best opinion on the possible success of the marriage. It may not be perfect, but it certainly would result in a success rate above 50%. It may be a whole new profession- the Wedding Approver. Sure, it would raise the cost of a wedding, but it would be money well spent if it avoided years of screaming, crying, and heartbreak- "The best $200 I ever spent!" people would tell their friends years later, after emotion passed and they realized what a big mistake they almost made.
I joked with Jen that I am available for this consultation when she is ready.
(see part II for conclusion)
Jen's boyfriend, who lived in another state, recently got a new job and is moving to the same city Jen lives. They have a serious relationship, and when you remove the barrier of distance, it is likely a marriage proposal will take place in the near future.
Coincidentally (or not), Jen and I have had some deep conversations on this topic. I have a negative opinion of marriage, even though the most honest and open relationship of anyone I know is between myself and my wife.
We have been married for 13 years this month. Neither of us has committed an act of infidelity, we have a happy and healthy son, we vacation together several times a year, we go out and do things together, and we have an open communication on the topics that tend to result in marriages falling apart (finances, sex, religion, in-laws, parenting, employment, etc.).
Despite this background, I think marriage is a broken concept that needs to be fixed.
(ground rules for this discussion: I am not saying that people who are unhappy should not get divorced, as it is unhealthy to be unhappy until you reach your breaking point and shoot your spuse, your co-workers, then put the gun on yourself. If a father is sexually molesting a child, then you obviously have to divorce the bastard. My comments are not for extreme corner cases that are not preventable but directed at the relationsips that most of us experience every day.)
It is pretty much accepted by all sides that about half of all marriages end in divorce (and the divorce rate is higher for second and third marriages). So, if we have 100 married couples, 50 are getting divorced.
Of the remaining 50, I think it is safe to say not all are happy. I estimate about 20 of these couples are on their way to getting divorced but taking a bit longer to get there. That leaves us with 30 couples.
Of that 30, it is likely not all of them are perfectly happy, so let's assume 10 of them are not really considering divorce as an option and will never be a statistic, but at the same time aren't happy with the relationship (in counseling, cheating on their spouse, avoiding each other, hiding financial issues, etc.). That leaves us with 20 couples.
I could probably argue that a significant amount of those 20 are on thin ice themselves, just an unexpected pregnancy, layoff, bad financial decision, in-law moving in, etc. away from becoming an unhappy marriage because the relationship is only as strong as their success, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt and state they are happily married.
That means I estimate about 20% of marriages are successful and happy. I could go into more detail with my thoughts on the reasons for believing this and the explanation of why marriage is falling apart, but that is another blog entry. For now, understand that I have explained these thoughts in detail to Jen.
I have asked her, if you had a 50% chance that the car you buy will blow up when you start to brake, would you buy that model? Of course not, she replied.
If you had a 50% chance of getting food poisoning at a restaurant, would you eat somewhere else? Yes.
If a toy had a 50% chance of breaking, would you buy it for a child? No.
Yet, even though everyone knows there is a 50% chance of a marriage ending in divorce, marriage is still valued by society and encouraged as the only option for at-risk individuals who clearly don't have the resources, capabilities, and maturity to handle the complexity of marriage.
I told Jen most people shouldn't get married. The risk is too great, and the impact financially, socially, and mentally on people is too devastating and long-lasting. And while some may say that it is a personal choice and not my concern, I disagree. It does impact me, because most people cannot contain the problems of their personal life to just their personal time.
I have to deal with your transference when you commit acts of aggression on the road, blow off your responsibilities at work, or act ignore the rules of civility in society, all because you are fighting constantly with your wife and you've had enough with everyone and everything.
And the impact is even greater when children are involved; the majority of prisons in the US are filled with males who did not have a father influence in their lives due to failed relationships/marriages, and the father was no longer a daily influence (research shows the greatest influence on a child's life is the same gender parent). This doesn't include the millions of kids who are not felons but are disruptive in classrooms, bullies outside of school, and destructive to themselves and society, who also grew up raised in the home of a failed marriage.
Why should our kids get beat up walking home because your son is acting out his aggressions from watching years of mom and dad yell at each other? Why should we have to pay for the vandalism your kid caused because he watched mom throw things at dad when he was six and thinks that is how you behave when you don't get your way? Not only should you not have had kids; you never should have been married to begin with.
After listening patiently to this rant and waiting for me to pause for air, Jen asked me (and I am paraphrasing here): "What am I supposed to do when there is only person who makes me feel that way? Am I supposed to avoid it? I want to experience that feeling."
That, of course, is the crux of the problem: Every engaged couple feels their love is eternally strong. Even if one concedes my argument on the number of failed marriages, no one thinks that they will be the ones getting divorced.
So how do we know a marriage will be one of the successful ones?
After all, in every wedding I have been to or heard about, everyone celebrated the bride and groom without reservation, hugged and cried, gave gifts, said congratulations, commented on how great they look together, and by doing this explicitly supported the union.
I have never heard of anyone ever actually speaking up when asked to by the preacher and saying: "Walk away! He's a bum! In seven years she will tire of your looks and start to fool around with your neighbor!"
Clearly you can't trust friends or family to tell you if this is the right person for you to marry, because they are either incapable of considering the possibility the marriage might fail, too emotionally attached to see things clearly, or maybe they have doubts but don't have the guts to tell the truth; either way, we celebrate and buy presents for thousands of couples each year who will hate each other before the warranty runs out on the applianace you gave them.
I told Jen that although it may be awkward and certainly unusual, the best thing one could do before marrying is to find someone who is neither a family member nor close personal friend of the bride or groom, someone who has no agenda, someone who is open-minded and an intuitive thinker who bases decisions on fact and not emotion, and ask that person if the marriage should take place, based on honest evidence and arguments presented by the person getting married, supporting the case for marriage.
While a religious person is often the most common third-party advisor in pre-marriage counseling (as was the case with mine), they are not a good resource for this task, as their religious agenda makes them no better than family and friends.
I know many people who have been "counseled" by a religious person from a church prior to marriage; I know of none whom have been told not to marry. The goal of the church is not to honestly counsel these people but to have them do some surveys, hear scripture about God, and get them into the Church machine.
Only a true impartial person would have the best opinion on the possible success of the marriage. It may not be perfect, but it certainly would result in a success rate above 50%. It may be a whole new profession- the Wedding Approver. Sure, it would raise the cost of a wedding, but it would be money well spent if it avoided years of screaming, crying, and heartbreak- "The best $200 I ever spent!" people would tell their friends years later, after emotion passed and they realized what a big mistake they almost made.
I joked with Jen that I am available for this consultation when she is ready.
(see part II for conclusion)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)