All too often the divorce reason stated as "we married too young" can
more accurately be stated by objective individuals close to the situation as
"we refused to accept change or reality and grow in maturity".Nothing wrong with what the lady said - she's wise beyond her 29 years,
albeit it a little politically incorrect.
Y_Is_For_Yale's plan, or anti-plan, sounds great, and for the right type of
person it will work out delightfully. The one guy in our family that eschewed
the "pattern" is the most successful and probably the happiest. But that
guy is wired a certain way, for lack of a more clinical term. My take is that
most kids don't have the drive or judgement to just "wing it" after
high school, assuming a stable adult life is the goal. Obviously the
"plan" isn't meant to be rigid, and those who insist on following
it step by step may well be headed for intense disappointment, but having a
skeletal plan for your major life decisions is not a negative.Better
to have a tentative idea of how life will play out, and then adjust to fit
preferences, opportunities, and happenstance than to just wander around, ending
up at age 40, going "How did I get here?" There is no perfect life or
perfect pattern, but just not having one at all isn't the answer.
@Y_is_for_Yale: Bravo, well said. And who could argue with that? I met my
wife while attending University, but I also graduated before I married her
(knowing she was on a path to graduate). But I wouldn't necessarily
recommend that path for everyone. My advice to my nieces and nephews is always
to finish college, go out an live a little before tying yourself down. All to
often we hear about young marriages ending in divorce, often cited reasons are
"we married to young" - thus I say shun the social pressures of
antiquated traditions; make your own decisions on the matter, don't let
anyone pressure you to get married, tell your ecclesiastical leaders and parents
to mind their own, be your own person. That's my advice.
Some may find what Susan Patton wrote philosophically offensive, or feel it
exposes some injustice to women, or at the very least is a broad generalization.
However from a purely pragmatic perspective it may be very wise advice unless
you want to play the long odds or tilt at windmills.
How about this format:1.) Go on a mission2.) do what the
spirit tells you to doWe are human beings, each with different
potential and ambitions. What's great for my neighbor isn't great for
Interesting advice, but controversial which, however, doesn't make it
false. My advice would be:1. Go on mission2. Get married3. Move to Florida5. Get college6. Get careerYep,
pretty much in that order! :)
Seems to me that one important fact has been left out of this discussion. There
are more women in the world than men, and today there are more women attending
college than men. So, the pool for women to find equally yoked partners is
harder. Having been in the LDS singles scene for a few years I saw a lot of
very well educated and successful LDS women who had put off marriage and now the
pickings are slim. I actually somewhat blame the men for not doing their part
to make themselves worthy of women who attain higher educations and careers.
I think we place far too much glory in following "The Path." President
Kimball was a great man. He brought a great direction to the Church. He also
made those comments almost 40 years ago. This was the same year that Hank Aaron
broke Babe Ruth's homerun record. (April 4th he hit his 714th, 4 days later
his 715th!). Times have changed a lot since then. I think that it is time that
members of the LDS Church begin to come to grips with this. President Hinkley
has emphasised education for women. He also taught about the importance of
family. As taught by President Kimball, the two can go together. But it may not,
nor should it, always go like that. College is an excellent time to find a
spouse. But it may not be the only time.
Whats wrong with looking for a husband or wife while at college and even getting
married? Being married doesn't interfere with getting an education in fact
I think being married while at university made it emotionally easier for me.It depends on the person, but it can be a very good choice.
As an Ivy League alum (and an obvious non-Mormon), I would refrain from
establishing a sequence at all, including attending university. Limiting an
individual to another's pre-established path denies that individual the
freedom to exercise his / her own abilities to pursue a course based on the
variables at that particular point in time. Imagine if some of our great
entrepreneurs had decided to pursue a "sequence" instead of pursuing a
unique idea or venture. By telling young women to get married as part of some
sequence, you deny them this opportunity (and many others). Let them craft
their own future, free of the bonds of pre-determined fates.
I'm guessing when President Kimball (born 1895) gave his sequence in 1974,
he wasn't putting too much emphasis on the woman also finishing her degree,
or even going on a mission.I personally wouldn't marry a woman
without a degree, or at least the intent to finish one, even if her goal was to
be a stay-at-home-mom. Studies have shown that a mother's education level
has a stronger impact on children's education attainment than a
father's education level. This is demonstrated by Susan Patton, who was a
Princeton graduate, but whose husband was not an Ivy League graduate, having two
Princeton sons.Plus, despite our best efforts, people die. Best to
have a backup plan if one parent dies, other than just re-marriage.
I followed the very Mormon "sequence" listed by "Third Try"
above, and I have to say I'm advising my kids to do otherwise. My advice
would be to follow this pattern:Mission (if you really want to
go)MarriageFinish SchoolEstablish Career (both spouses)ChildrenYep; that's not the Mormon way, I know. If
you're not crankin' out babies by your mid twenties, something's
wrong with you. Admittedly, my preferences stem from the fact that life has
thrown me some painful curveballs, but I think it's only common sense in
2013 for both spouses to make themselves marketable by putting in a few solid
years in a profession. Then, if things are proceeding to plan, if wifey (or
hubby, if we're being PC) wants to be a full-time homemaker, go for it.At least that way if one career implodes, the other party has a better
chance of helping out by jumping back into the workforce. My wife, out of
necessity, just got her first "real" job after 2 1/2 years of trying,
after years of being Just Mom.
I think it is funny that when somebody speaks an opinion that is out of the
normal frame people get frantic. Some of what this woman says is spot on. How
come she can't say that? We are too sensitive as a society.
Where are we regarding counsel given by President Kimball in 1974?I
believe the sequence was:MissionMarriageChildrenFinish
SchoolCareerI suppose there has been some counsel given to
stop hanging out and start committing. And they frown on the five year plan.
This article misrepresents her advice.Essentially she was saying if
you want an Ivy League husband you need to find him while both you and him are
there, otherwise you might get stuck with a husband from a public/state
university, like she was, and which she goes into great detail lamenting.I'm sure if you're a woman not attending an Ivy League school
her advice would be different.