I have a daughter who was born with a "YPO" mentality. She is very
driven, focused on herself--but in very organized and healthy ways. She takes
care of her health, nutrition, social life, school work, and has always been one
to get what she wants from the men in her life. She loves cooking and doing what
it takes to have a neat and orderly dwelling space. And she loves children. I used to think these were cultural things we taught children, but
she's changed my whole way of thinking about such things--because our home
is quite disorderly and not nearly as focused as she is. I
anticipate when the time comes she will find someone that will suit her needs
quite well, as she plans to care for her family. I used to worry about her,
because she tends to be the sort that uses people to get what she wants. Sure
they always volunteer, because she can turn on the charm, but still... It's
nice to hear that given the right direction she may have a happy life together
with her family.
Nothing beats entering life miles ahead of others in the race and scolding those
who have lagged behind. I was born into a stable family with a healthy mind and
body. How repulsive would I feel by scolding those born into different
circumstances for not adhering to my idealistic path for happiness. Shame is
apparently a luxury, unlike the decision to marry.
LGBT couples are trying to 'prioritize marriage' and you two, Richard
and Linda are opposing it.I see something wrong with that picture.
Yes, money smooths out a lot of rough edges doesn't it?Of
course relationships are more stressed when resources -- money, time, energy--
are strained. This column often contributes to the relentless focus
on materialistic measures of wealth, and foolishly follows the tendency to
credit "successful" people with greater moral strength.
I don't know, something about this article made me uncomfortable. It's
great that these wealthy people are prioritizing their relationships and their
families; it's great that they are choosing this over other, more selfish
ways they could be spending their time and money. But if this is true, that more
wealth and better education equals stronger marriages, then this to me is a
clarion call for the type of progressive policies consistently opposed by
'family values' voters: access to sex education and contraceptives, so
you don't become a parent before it's economically feasible; more
funding for every level of education, from universal preK access to affordable
university tuition; paid family leave; access to health insurance. These are the
things the people in this article have access to, which is unquestionably a huge
factor in what gives them the time to be good parents.
Right, but to what extent are these couples more successful in their marriages
simply because they have the time and resources to be better parents? I think
there is a very unfortunate insinuation in the conclusion - "the
better-educated, higher-income segment of society that sets patterns and starts
trends that are then followed by more and more of the population" - that
seems to suggest that the poor, the lower-educated, those who are more likely to
be single parents, are avoiding marriage and being bad parents because it
hasn't occurred to them yet that being a good parent can be
'trendy,' but now that rich people are doing it, maybe they will too.
Perhaps the marriages of these upwardly mobile couples will become a status
symbol that others will seek to achieve for themselves. Or maybe that's
already the case. The Eyres have previously noted that marriage is still
considered the ideal that most people want to achieve and that most people
eventually still end up marrying at some point. It's just that couples once
married at the outset of adulthood while couples now tend to marry to show that
they have arrived at some state of stable adulthood. I don't know if the
marriages of the high end couples will alter that trend.
@Opinionated 9:39 a.m. March 19, 2014RE: Furry1993Oh please.
Why do you post to a story about marriage? Legal recognition will be trumped by
God's law every time. Supporters of "Same-sex marriage" must deny
the existence of a God and any kind of plan for the perpetuation of the human
family. The human family exists because men and women get together. That's
the plan. End of story.----------------------I post to a
story about marriage because I'm talking about the very real marriages
same-sex couples have created for themseves, sometimes over decades together.
They finally are getting the legal recognition for the family (with their
children) they have de facto had for years. It's sad that people
can't see that fact.
Schnee,Marriage is, essentially, a recognized and sanctioned sexual
union.If, historically, large numbers of men and women had wanted to
live together in platonic relationships we would have developed another category
@Opinionated"Supporters of "Same-sex marriage" must deny the
existence of a God and any kind of plan for the perpetuation of the human
family."Is marriage all about sex to you people? That's all
you seem to think defines a marriage.
I began to feel uneasy when the authors suggested that these young couples
enjoyed successful marriages and children because they were smarter than
average, measured by economic success.It is more likely that they
achieved economic success because they had the foundation of a successful
marriage and family. In that case, it would be better to say that they were
wiser than average, not smarter.
“They are working at their relationships because they have concluded that
relationships are what matter and what will make them happy.”This and the sentence preceding it were my favorite in the article because,
and perhaps unintentionally, it points to a new (well, not so new actually)
foundation for ethics based on happiness and human flourishing.People in the developed world are giving up the old thyme religions in droves
and this trend is not likely to reverse anytime soon. And while there is much
that is positive about this trend (reason supplanting superstition, for one),
the success of the 3000 year marketing campaign to convince people that religion
is synonymous with morality has left many people in the modern world floundering
for objective morality when they can no longer believe the myths (a sad and
unnecessary situation when we consider that it is our own moral intuitions that
tell us, for example, what is good in the Bible vs. what is deplorable –
e.g., stoning your children for talking back).Thank you for helping
people to recognize the moral intuitions at the core of our deepest selves.
RE: Furry1993Oh please. Why do you post to a story about marriage? Legal
recognition will be trumped by God's law every time. Supporters of
"Same-sex marriage" must deny the existence of a God and any kind of
plan for the perpetuation of the human family. The human family exists because
men and women get together. That's the plan. End of story.
Love, commitment and devotion (and excellent parenting of their children) can
also be found in the many, many, many same-sex couples who have been togther for
decades. They are finally starting to be able to obtain legal recognition for
their families. It's good to see that starting to happen.
I guess the reason this article resonates with me is that I think
marriage--real, unconditional commitment marriage--gives so much
security.....its just the smartest thing to do and the smartest way to live. I
love that it is the smarter, more educated portions of the population that are
embracing marriage, and I too hope they will be trend setters and that the
marriage commitment idea will become a trend and an example that the rest of the
When it's more than a conclusion, it's a commitment. When you give
your word to love, honor, cherish watch out for each other. How big of a lie r
does divorce make us.