If you’re interested in the philosophy and ethics of marriage and divorce, this post may be worth your time:
Early on in our relationship, we had a conversation – theoretical at the time – about divorce. While I’m not quite as absolutist as Christopher Lasch’s recommendation of a constitutional amendment banning divorce, as a child of multiple divorces on both sides, I don’t view marriage as something that should be “gotten out of” simply because one of the (or even both) partners believes the marriage to be a mistake. My takeaway from childhood was not the modern – “there are all kinds of families” or “children are better off with two happy parents living separately than two miserable married people;” my takeaway was that the option of an out leads to constant insecurity. That the replacement of a sort of quiet and mundane contentment with the never-satisfied need for fulfillment leads to unhappy people who never find what they’re seeking and too often hurt those around them while seeking it. That casual divorce turns marriage into some kind of balance sheet in which people expect to get an approximate return on what they put in and are always open to a better option if one should come along.
Everyone’s opinions are based on life experience, and for every person who has had my experience of the familial revolving door, there’s someone who has life experience that leads to the questions I often get on the subject: would you recommend an abused wife stay with her abuser? Well, obviously no. Should a married person who comes to acknowledge they’re homosexual be forced to stay with their spouse (of the opposite sex in this scenario)? Honestly, I do think it’s the honorable thing to do, although I would imagine in most cases the other partner would put an end to it anyway. Simply put, in very large part, marriage is marriage (as opposed to dating or cohabitation) because there is no going back. It’s permanent. The selection of a spouse is based on choice, but once the vows are taken, the spouse becomes family, and it should be as difficult and infrequent to divorce them as it is to divorce relationships of blood. Obviously, there are people who are estranged from parents and siblings, but the rates of that kind of estrangement are nowhere near the rates of marital separation and divorce.
The ensuing discussion in the comments may also be.
What if the other person’s just an asshole? I’ve seen a lot of people stuck with people who seem incredibly difficult to live with, but aren’t criminally abusive or adulterous.
The “stick-it-out” philosophy usually seems to assume the couple is made up of two considerate persons trying hard to make each other happy.
Comment by Sheila Tone — December 28, 2010 @ 7:53 pm
To blatantly oversimplify, part of the answer is “don’t marry an asshole.” Sometimes somebody has really done everything they can and they just can’t carry the marriages themselves. In which case… go, I guess. At best, though, it’s the case of two wrongs making a right (or the least bad situation where one concedes the first error).
Comment by trumwill — December 28, 2010 @ 10:42 pm
A constitutional amendment banning divorce never occurred to me. My first thought is that such an amendment would be a terrible government intrusion on personal freedom. I wish the government would just try to govern as the constitution states (with less government) instead of amending it. The government should stay out of marriage and the rest of our lives as much as possible. Such an amendment would be political suicide so I highly doubt it would ever pass or be seriously considered.
Comment by Marriageman — December 28, 2010 @ 10:51 pm
Well, given that marriage is a status conferred by the government, I don’t see it as a matter of government intrusion into personal freedom. But I nonetheless consider it a really, really bad idea. At this point, barring divorce would simply lead to nobody getting married.
Comment by trumwill — December 28, 2010 @ 10:58 pm
On a separate note, did anyone else notice that Phi suddenly seems to be in Kabul? Was this expected? I thought he was a math professor.
Comment by Sheila Tone — December 29, 2010 @ 12:50 am
I can tie that in with: What if your spouse suddenly decided to join the armed forces without consulting you and go to Kabul? Would that be a good reason for the heave-ho? I’d be pretty pissed, especially if we had kids.
Comment by Sheila Tone — December 29, 2010 @ 12:52 am
Your scenario is a pretty tough one. I would be pretty pissed, too. I might seek a divorce. I would probably also consider it my own failing towards the ideal as much as theirs, though.
Yeah, Phi made that announcement a couple of weeks ago. Apparently he had been leaving hints as to who his employer was. I never picked up on it, though I did make a connection through SiteMeter. I didn’t know his… position… would require relocation to a war zone, though. It did not seem entirely unexpected or remotely desired, though, so I have to assume he and his family knew that it was a possibility.
Comment by trumwill — December 29, 2010 @ 12:57 am