- Home
- Find a Therapist
- Topic Streams
- Get Help
Mental Health
Addiction
ADHD
Anxiety
Asperger's
Autism
Bipolar Disorder
Depression
Eating Disorders
Insomnia
OCDPersonality
Passive Aggression
Personality
ShynessPersonal Growth
Happiness
Goal Setting
Positive PsychologyRelationships
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
SexEmotion Management
Anger
Procrastination
StressFamily Life
Adolescents
Child Development
Elder Care
Parenting
SiblingsRecently Diagnosed?
Diagnosis Dictionary
- Magazine
- Tests
- Psych Basics
- Experts
Marriage and other forms of long-term commitment are widely criticized these days either as an obstacle to other life goals or as irrelevant because they all too often end. Are these reasons to discount the value of commitment? I don't think so. Read More
I like this article
Yes!
Mark D. White
Once again Mark, a fabulous post. I so enjoy reading what you write - you have such an emotive and illuminating way of putting it all together (no matter what "it" is)! I often print your blog posts and carry them with me to read again and again as needed. This one is going on my fridge so my children can read it too. Thank you!
Thanks so much!
That really means a lot, thank you!
Thank you from the bottom of
Thank you from the bottom of my heart. It seems like suddenly there has been a deluge of articles on this site extolling the virtues of polyamory, when what I personally needed to see was an affirmation of having intimate and long-term relationships. I am as in love today as I was 5 years ago with the same person, and I this fills me with great joy! Although 5 years is quite short in the complete span of life, it seems an eternity for some in this world of short attention spans.
Should be mandated reading
Should be mandated reading for parents going through custody issues.
Sounds Like Philosophy, not Psychology
Very optimistic, and I enjoy the positive outlook regarding the advantages of a long term relationship, but as I read it, a voice inside was whispering as to its oversimplicity. And these questions followed.
So, why is a Phil PhD writing for a psychology mag?
And Mark, did you overlook the reasons why people are afraid to start relationships? Like, mortgages, lawyers, children and child custody? Or, are you just speaking of dating?
-T
Well, of course...
...it's overly simplistic. It's just a short blog piece, expressing a thought I had regarding the dichotomy inherenet in current discussions about long-term relationships and marriage, not a thorough examination of every aspect of the relationship process.
I have discussed other aspects of relationships in previous posts, though; see the last category of this page for some: http://www.profmdwhite.com/maybe.html
Great post!
Hello Dr Mark Im delighted with your post and Im sure you are asking the right questions. Basically, I agree with all you said and certainly I often wonder about the same issue though never had the time/capability to put it in clear words as you just did.
I would add, the problem seems not to be so straightforward.
I certainly agree that life is much better with someone you love besides you so he/she is an integral part of your life and helps you instead of considering him/her an obstacle in the way of your life and goals.
However, I think people who had put marriage for later, do so not only as a result of their general misunderstanding you clearly explain.
I will enumerate a set of external factors that Im sure contribute for people putting marriage "for later". These factors are in comparison against previous generations though there is certainly never a hard line dividig one generation from another:
1)Nowadays young people are under stronger pressure to be succesful profesionally speaking. Which usually means: getting master degrees; doctoral degrees; lots of research publications; getting high income jobs; be an entrepreneur; climb the ladder; don't be a loser; be a go-getter; become a CEO; etc, etc. All of this social pressure means lots of time and energy wasted. Remember, any committed relationship is gonna need lots of time and energy. Values are now inverted so young people tend to waste their time and energy into their careers and not into their sentimental life.
You know that any succesful committed relationship takes lots of time and energy.
2)Nowadays young people are more materialist than before. The invitation to accumulate wealth and position is calling all the time. Selfishness is no longer wrong but promoted. This may lead people to say "im not going to jeopardize my career because of a marriage". This is also fueled as a result of values being inverted, where academic degrees, high income jobs and wealth are the supreme values of society.
You know that any succesful commited relationship requires people not to be selfish but generous and human-oriented instead of materialist-oriented.
3)Nowadays getting job and financial stability si more difficult than before. Previously it was a matter of time so you could just marry right away after you got your bachelor degree (or even before) and you could be reasonably sure that you will, slowly but safely, climb a ladder where, at the end of the road you will get a healthy pension. This is no longer feasible.
You know that any succesful committed relationship is easier when under a reasonably stable financial condition which is generally lacking today for most people.
4)Nowadays there is a relaxed point of view regarding to marriage. Consumerist approach has invaded our sentimental realm so we tend to think about partners just the way we think about merchandise. If it doesn't make me any happy, I will get rid of it and get another one.
You know that any succesful committed relationship can best be achieved by people who regard each other as human beings, not as disposable objects.
5)Nowadays, individualism seems to be the right way to conduct our life. It is not only that marriages are on the low. Family memebers don't get together as often and closer as previously used to be. Compassionate attitudes are also on the low. Fewer people help their neighbors or even relatives or they just don't care about their problems. Exacerbated individualism is usually mistaken as freedom and this is the way it is sold to young people. Be free, you need no one else, don't rely upon anyone just you! This is for young people to easily fit into the job market. Previously, workers were proud to belong to a Union and to belong to a company. Now Unionist are regarded as (God save us!) Socialists or even Communists!! So, in short, young people nowadays tend to be less compassionate and with a lower sense of solidarity.
You know that a succesful committed relationship takes lots of compassion and solidarity, instead of individualistic attitudes
6)Nowadays people are more distracted than before. You may think Im exaggerating a lot, but we are bombed with lots of distractions such as TV, expensive gadgets for which we must work long hours (hours not used to grow sentimentaly and or spiritually). Im not saying these things are evil but their excess is evil and we live the life of never satisfied beings.
At the end, what you say is true, but that does not explain the whole problem as it is a lot more complex...
Regards!
Yes, of course...
...it is much more complex, and much of what you say rings true. As I replied to the commenter before you, I was not trying to analyze the phenomenon comprehensively, but just highlight one aspect of it which I found particularly curious.
Thank you for both your kind words--and for devoting so much time to finishing the job I started!
Well, I can count myself
Well, I can count myself amongst this new autonomous generation that has opted to seek and find myself before seeking someone else. I don't think it is definitely avoiding long-term relationships - I have many of those with friends and family. I think the difference between now and previous generations is the co-dependency that society had dictated. I wasn't raised to think that I'll be a wife and mother first and foremost - and that my welfare was dependent on finding a caretaker. I was given the option to choose and go after what I wanted and how I wanted to contribute to the world - with the knowledge that I was more than capable of being self-sustaining. As it happens, I chose to be a scientist - and the early life of such is rather nomadic and all encompassing. It would be very difficult for me and my partner were I in a committed romantic relationship. I have watched many heart-wrenching and ugly breakups due to the stress of both was too much to bear. We do need to prioritize what is important to us - and I may come across someone that makes me change my mind and reorganize my life - but it will be a meeting of fate and not one that I plan to go out of my way to seek at the moment.
I hear you...
...in that some professions are simply too demanding and time-consuming to afford time for romantic exploration. Nonetheless, if you are bearing stress, sometimes a partner can help share that burden--and sometimes a partner adds to it, to be sure--provided you and your partner found each other before the time pressures increased!
There is another
There is another consideration that perhaps goes under the radar as to the new phenomenon of many career-oriented singletons (and I give this perspective as a female) - the fact that many of us have conditioned ourselves to be "un-vulnerable". Having read your posts previously, I know that this is not a problem you have as you express your feelings and vulnerabilities with enviable abandon. Speaking for myself, it is hard for me to let my guard down, and I know this wall that I have built to protect myself is also keeping me from true intimacy which is needed to both initiate and maintain relationships.
You're absolutely right...
...I understand that many people have issues with vulnerability, but I find it hard to grasp the nature of them because I don't experience them myself. This is something I've tried to learn about, believe me, because I've encountered it with so many people (including women with whom I've been involved).
But your comment raises several interesting questions with respect to the post itself. Is vulnerability a growing issue (which would help explain the new role of relationships in people's lives)? Does it fade with time (causing people to put off committed relationships until later in life)? Lots to explore here, thank you!
Thank you for the opportunity
Thank you for the opportunity to articulate these thoughts and offering a pause for self-reflection. I do think that these walls for strength that we put up - especially for those of us who were trained to think that independence and autonomy are traits to be admired - have put a wedge into our relationships. Personally, I don't let someone get close enough to me so that I may end up relying on them. There is more than a tinge of a fear to trust. Should you need to pick the mind of a woman who has issues with vulenrability and intimacy - you're welcome to my noggin.
but..
S, I understand what you say, but I want to share some of my points of view:
a)There is no one really autonomous. Autonomy is a myth. We all need to share and we all need help one way or another. We all need each other. Human race has evolved and survived thanks to colaboration, solidarity and compassion, not thanks to competitiveness and selfishness as we are expected to think.
Probably there is a confussion with the definition of "being autonomous".
b)Being in a long term relationships is by no means synonimous as being codependent. True, too many (most of?) long term relationships are bonded as a result of codependency. But that's a distorted outcome, not a natural result.
c)Being a career seeker does not mean seeking yourself. Sometimes it means distracting yourself from what you truly are. People tend to think of themselves regarding to their professional activities. But that's a horrible reductionist point of view. You are not an entrepreneur, you are not a scientist, you are not a musician, you are not your career. You are a human being and that means a multi-dimensional experience. It is a poor approach to think you will find yourself in one only activity however rewarding it is.
d)There is so much feminist discussion in the sense that women who put motherhood as a priority are women who are brainwashed by "patriarcal" values. Women who chose motherhood as their top priority should not be stigmatized that way. Certainly no woman should feel less just because she chose not to be a mother. But there is nothing wrong with chosing to be a mother above anything else. One grows up a lot as a human being when one helps others to grow up.
Joe, thank you for your
Joe, thank you for your perspective, and I will say that I concur with many - if not all of them. Of course no person is independent - in fact I was raised by a family that believed in the virtues of the extended family - grandparents, uncles and all provided a community for the kids, and I am staunch socialist (despite my self-autonomous leanings which does provide quite the stark contrast).
However, I have many friends who got married while in the midst of their PhDs, some fell pregnant during their post-doc career, at which time they realized it is impossible to continue the traditional academic route and they let their partner's career needs lead the way. This decision has ultimately led to a sense of dejection a few years down the line - where they look back with more than a tinge of regret, a relationship that has lost its shine and salt in the wounds by being underemployed and not having the opportunity to do something that inspires them. It doesn't have to be this way - but there is definitely a bit of momentary insanity at the first buzz of love and then the obsession when baby comes. Everything else just doesn't matter, but when the euphoria wears off, the reality isn't what you thought it was.
I think it wouldn't be fair to either myself or my partner to seriously get involved while I'm still in mid-flight and haven't landed. The flip side is that sometimes you get so used to flying alone that you don't know how to co-pilot very well.
I understand...
I see what you say and I know some cases like those. I know some PhD students who marry very late in their lives and some others who divorce while in the middle of their PhD and some others never marry at all, and so many never finish their PhD and still they get divorced or never marry. (But of course, there are many happy endings around).
All of your comments are very interesting. You mention that momentary insanity at the begining of every relationship. Well, that's not really love. That's just falling in love, a state which, in any case, should never be a reason to get married, regardless of you doing a PhD or not at the moment. So if your friends decided to get marry out of that burst of sweet powerful emotion, I would say they did big mistake... an understandable and pardonable mistake most people easily fall into (Hollywood movies, Disney stories and rose-tinted songs and literature are the ones to blame for this mishaps).
My personal point of view is that one is ready for marriage when one is willing to help and be truly generous and compassionate to a certain person. When you feel you want to give. When you realize you have become a giver and you feel happy to share and give. Not when you are expecting the other person to make your life make any sense because you are so empty.
When you realize you are ready as a result of you happy to help and be kind, there will be no exciting burst of feelings, no butterflies flying inside of you, no stars shining inside your bedroom, no anxiety, no rush, no playing games. There will be only a moment that feels just right without the need to be a jolt of crazyness.
Contemporary concept of happiness is a very misleading one. We like to think of happiness as a never-ending party, a continuous jolt of excitement, all smiles and laughs, feeling all right all the time. That's our poor idea of happiness and it leads us to make so many mistakes. Cause when anything (be it our new fancy car, our classy cell-phone, our academic or professional awards and medals or even our spouse) loses its shine then we start to think of getting a replacement. Because there is no jolt of happiness coming out of them anymore...
We are never satisfied...
So we seek outside of ourselves the confidence and strength we think we lack. Get a diploma, get a high income job, get an award, be someone and have the proof of it hanged on your wall or lying over your desk. Then you are ready to marriage.
Some people embellish themselves by grooming, attires, cosmetic products (or even surgery). And some others do it by ways of material possesions. Some more by means of recognition, awards, etc, etc.
As dolls or mannequins, we dress ourselves, we build ourselves, we embellish ourselves... from the outside, only.
Who is the one who attempts a serious inner embellishment without the need of seeking outside of him/herself?
Having said that, we live in a real, material world so money matters.
And a good job is better than a bad one if you wanna get married.
And enjoying your job (or whatever your professional activity) is preferable than having a job you hate. Because if you are not enjoying your job, you feel incomplete and... How can an incomplete person deliver himself/herself to another?
And diplomas help to get good gob (though certainly they are no warranty at all).
So we start to lose sense and confuse means with ends. Means become ends themselves.
At the end, there are many ways to enrich yourself. There is not only one. And if a way to feel yourself complete is taking a high cost, at the expense of your multidimensional human experience, I would say it is time for reflection.
Consider that if we look for beauty and richnes, the sky above us is a beautiful treasure. If we look for knowledge, libraries are plenty of knowledge and most of them are public.
If we look for feeling happy, consider happiness is not a never-ending party.
That's so Patriarchal of you!
I gave up considering possibly oppressing any woman with marriage (etc.) way back in the 70's. Possessiveness and being controlling are so gauche.
Now we have long-term commitment, marriage lite, common law marriage, and even "meretricious relationships" (just for those of you in the State of Washington) to weigh against Marriage/Divorce 2.0, though they're basically all just different flavors of the same stew, since they're based on the same central idea: Till Unhappiness Do We Stay Together.
Men aren't avoiding these because they end, they're avoiding them because of how they end, which all too often is badly, for the man at least. False accusations of domestic violence and child sexual molestation are routine ploys used by women to gain the upper hand in custody and child support payment battles.
Under Divorce 2.0 the man's obligations to cupcake don't actually end lots of the time. The book remains open. So all these arrangements you cherish are based on potential fraud and deception. Men should avoid them like the plague. It's not a "commitment", it's a possible set-up for entrapment.
Remind Me Again Why a Man Needs a Woman.
The whole sexual/feminist/divorce revolution was designed to liberate women from the oppression of long-term relationships with men. It's been a smashing success. Such relationships are way more difficult and risky to form in the first place (hence the ever-growing culture of singleness), and it's easy for women to get out of them on the most favorable terms when they inevitably change their minds and that becomes the goal instead.
Go with a winner and get with the program! Short-term only.
Post new comment