I havent finished this but its quite interesting in my opinion. I can see pros and cons but still it is well, not rather unique but more a viewpoint that goes against that which most women espouse, at least in public. Click the text for the full article.
When we’re holding out for deep romantic love, we have the fantasy that this level of passionate intensity will make us happier. But marrying Mr. Good Enough might be an equally viable option, especially if you’re looking for a stable, reliable life companion. Madame Bovary might not see it that way, but if she’d remained single, I’ll bet she would have been even more depressed than she was while living with her tedious but caring husband.
What I didn’t realize when I decided, in my 30s, to break up with boyfriends I might otherwise have ended up marrying, is that while settling seems like an enormous act of resignation when you’re looking at it from the vantage point of a single person, once you take the plunge and do it, you’ll probably be relatively content. It sounds obvious now, but I didn’t fully appreciate back then that what makes for a good marriage isn’t necessarily what makes for a good romantic relationship. Once you’re married, it’s not about whom you want to go on vacation with; it’s about whom you want to run a household with. Marriage isn’t a passion-fest; it’s more like a partnership formed to run a very small, mundane, and often boring nonprofit business. And I mean this in a good way.
15 comments:
i read that article
i wanted to smack her upside the head
I agreed with a few points but overall the whole thing made me sick.
Lord,
Why do people always think single people are waiting for a prince charming?
Lord...
Stchuuuuuuusp, if I had 'settled' and married any of the JERKS I knew, no amount of inner harmony and blah blah would've saved me.
I think passion comes from within but what's the point of wasting it all on somebody just 'good enough'?
most people, including straight women, settle. period. its how and what we settle for that matters. if some of us weren't so uptight and thinking so highly of ourselves, we'd also realize that our spouses settled for us too. and that's ok. good enough sounds pathetic only if you think you're entitled to the best, when there's really no such person anywhere.
Wow, very thoughtful article. I don't like her use of the term "settle", cause it's like she saying anything other than the dream guy is "settling". The dream is opposite of reality, and despite herself, she seems to want the dream...Still chewing on the article.
In reality nobody's going to find a point for point perfect mate. The guy/girl will have some kinda habit that will drive you nutts. It's best to find somebody who will "hold you down in trenches." I would "settle" for that, darn straight. And Hollywood distorts relationship expectations for women.It's not a realistic yardstick at all.
yeah, i caught this piece a while back and it's still settling in me. it's a justification for settling for something less than loin-burnin love, and it's a pretty powerful argument imho.
if you want offspring, you need a stable, reliable, good-fi-mi pickni partner. a guy with a built-in heart-go-pitty-pat inducer is not required (if that's pretty much all he brings).
GC, GG I dont see why its so bad. If you read the article she's not saying get with the next guy that says hello or a jerk or an idiot or anything like that. she's just saying that there is a degree of idealism that one cannot afford when choosing a mate.
you also have to take into consideration that her viewpoint may be based on her vantage point as single mom. and even she isnt willing to settle cause she is looking for someone who will be good with her kid.
maybe passion is over-rated. some of the super passionate relationships end up with people beating one other, ridiculous levels of jealously and fighting.
I think a bigger question in mate determination is can I live with this person, love and like them and raise a family with this person without being driven off the edge of a cliff
No wonder Halle Berry no longer wants to get married. I'm sorry, but I'll never settle.
You always settle in my humble opinion. Basically, you just decide what you can live with and take it from there.
It's not a good idea to just settle, one should search for the best or most compatible. However one has to keep a realistic view in mind.
quote from the article
"By the time 35th-birthday-brunch celebrations roll around for still-single women, serious, irreversible life issues masquerading as “jokes” creep into public conversation: Well, I don’t feel old, but my eggs sure do! or Maybe this year I’ll marry Todd. I’m not getting any younger! The birthday girl smiles a bit too widely as she delivers these lines, and everyone laughs a little too hard for a little too long, not because we find these sentiments funny, but because we’re awkwardly acknowledging how unfunny they are." first off - this IS me. i'm that 35yr old and totally get this. but...
she makes settling sound easy;
"I would say even if he’s not the love of your life, make sure he’s someone you respect intellectually, makes you laugh, appreciates you..."
it isn't that easy to find that person. and to find them AND have the passion, would be a bonus.
i could settle. i've tried settling - but it isn't as easy as she makes it sound.
i think i would be okay being along, if i otherwise had a rich social life/career, then settling - because i don't think i could truly 'settle', without always wondering, 'what if'.
What makes up a good marriage is up to whatever the individual has in their head that it should be.
Marriage cannot maintain the momentum of passion and romance that consistently changing partners does, but there is a level between two people that can be reached that means significantly more than fluttering hearts and lashes.
It's all what the individual is looking for and what she/he finds in the end for their personal life.
Factually, contrary to the claims of many people, most people don't want to go it alone forever, if they don't have to.
P.S.: What I said above doesn't mean "settle".
Life isn't short like people say...it's long.
Too long to live with someone you can't love or get along with.
I'm just saying that no matter how much passion and desire you may feel in the beginning can't sustain itself, or you in the long haul if there aren't fundamental things that you have in common.
I've been with my husband for 20 years come this September and over those years we've fallen in and out of love with each other many times. It's the reality of two different people choosing a life together.
Chemistry is something that you have to have, otherwise it can't go the distance.
If I see her in the street, I'm still going to smack her in her head.
The point she made about, "you aren't such a big catch yourself" was the one and only point I agreed with.
Obviously this is a touchy subject, but I thought it was an interesting read. I didn't get the impression the writer was saying settle for just anyone. Instead for me it seems like she's saying out loud what we all do in our heads when we meet a prospective partner. (Or at least we should be doing.) After the first flush of lust you should be making a list and ticking off what you need, what's nice to have and what you can put up with based on your end goal.
And if your end goal is being married with kids then a good provider who is family-oriented but homely is going to rank far higher than the cutie whose thinks "so long as I'm not married - I'm single. Ohhhh yeahhhh - giggity!."
With this goal in view you might want to rethink marrying Mr/Mrs Homely. After all the first word in homely is HOME - where you'll both need to be if you plan on making that family/relationship work.
Course if you don't want kids then you have way more lee-way in choosing a mate, because a good spouse may be different than a good parent. It's all about your perspective.
Post a Comment