Networking is an awesome thing, you meet the most awesome and interesting people with so many diverse opinions and perspectives. I met Call Me Mom (CMM) in a chatroom for the Mark Gungor radio show. She is a wife and a mom, and she manages her own blog and online radio show, www.iratetirelessminority.blogspot.com. One of the topics she recently covered was the issue of relationships. CMM's son was a guest on her show, and he was talking about how people should by upfront and honest with each other and end a relationship once it is clear that they're not attracted to each other.
Surprisingly, this concept rubbed some listeners the wrong way. Apparently, people would rather stick it out, presumably because they figure that if it doesn't work out, they can always get a divorce. I personally believe that there are two reasons for divorce: unfaithfulness and abuse (mostly physical, but emotional and verbal as well). I am not 100% sure what CMM's position on divorce is, but like me, she is of the opinion that marriage means "till death do we part". My point in all this is that, because anyone can get a divorce for almost no reason at all, and because there is this thought that you should be blissfully happy 24/7 in a marriage and if you hit a rough patch it's because you're not compatible and you should find someone you're always happy with, there is a temporal attitude towards marriage and relationships. I am very interested in what you, my readers, have to say about this. Here's what CMM had to say:
"There was a real dislike of the idea that anyone should be looking at a love relationship logically and with any "process" at all in mind. At one point, my son was referred to as calculating and another as being too hormonal, by the same person and, apparently for the same reason. Then it was remarked that he was too immature to be getting married. I tried to keep it light, but I was really kind of disturbed by the comments. After all, if you are not going to be discriminating during the dating process, then when are you? And as to the idea that it is calculating or shallow to dump someone because you don't think they will fulfill your needs, isn't it better to dump them in the dating process than to marry them and make them miserable for the rest of your lives because they aren't fulfilling your needs or you aren't able to fulfill theirs?
"My son, surprisingly, was not shocked. He said this stuff really goes against the current culture. We discussed it a bit more over a late lunch and I have to admit he's right. If you were dating someone you found compatible, but didn't find them physically attractive, the current culture would tell you that you are shallow and you should get over it. Realistically though, wouldn't it be better to "own" your shallowness, if you know that this will be a problem? If you marry that other individual, would you be able to rise above it, or would you make both of you miserable over something that the other person cannot change? You and I both know that people's appearances will change over time and due to health issues, but, if physical appearance is a big issue for you, shouldn't you at least start out with someone who fulfills that expectation for you?"The idea that all issues should be secondary to the first feelings of romantic love is common and, short sighted to say the least. Would people buy a car or a house because they just saw it and loved it? No. They may make such a purchase, but they have the car or house examined by others first and then they weigh their love of the car/house against any problems/necessary repairs and/or restrictions. They may love the house, but if the foundation of that house needs to be replaced or the ground underneath it is slipping or the neighbors are druggies, most people will pass. Why is it so outrageous that the same type of process should be used when deciding to marry. This decision is a lifetime decision. That's much longer than most people will own a house or a car and yet they take more care in the process of buying a house or car, in many instances, than they do in choosing a spouse.
"This attitude may be because people don't view marriage as permanent anymore, but I think it far more likely that a large part of it is that people are no longer being made aware of the real, lifelong consequences of having a broken marriage. It's so common, and our culture so anti-shame, that the logical consequences are being hidden under a load of feminist, PCMC crap. (Politically Correct Multi Culturalism) Feminism teaches that men are worthless and uneccesary and that children are a drag, so why should people take into account the damage they are doing to their children when they get divorced? Especially when so many studies, tailored to support the feminist ideals, have said the children will be fine? I think it's time we put on our big boy pants and start recognizing how damaging divorce and feminism are to our nation and ourselves. If we need to bring shame back to restore our nation, let's get'er done already."
So what do you think? What should you look for in a potential mate? For the purpose of discussion, assume you're looking for a life partner, someone you want to marry. And take a look at Call Me Mom's blog: http://iratetirelessminority.blogspot.com/
Surprisingly, this concept rubbed some listeners the wrong way. Apparently, people would rather stick it out, presumably because they figure that if it doesn't work out, they can always get a divorce. I personally believe that there are two reasons for divorce: unfaithfulness and abuse (mostly physical, but emotional and verbal as well). I am not 100% sure what CMM's position on divorce is, but like me, she is of the opinion that marriage means "till death do we part". My point in all this is that, because anyone can get a divorce for almost no reason at all, and because there is this thought that you should be blissfully happy 24/7 in a marriage and if you hit a rough patch it's because you're not compatible and you should find someone you're always happy with, there is a temporal attitude towards marriage and relationships. I am very interested in what you, my readers, have to say about this. Here's what CMM had to say:
"There was a real dislike of the idea that anyone should be looking at a love relationship logically and with any "process" at all in mind. At one point, my son was referred to as calculating and another as being too hormonal, by the same person and, apparently for the same reason. Then it was remarked that he was too immature to be getting married. I tried to keep it light, but I was really kind of disturbed by the comments. After all, if you are not going to be discriminating during the dating process, then when are you? And as to the idea that it is calculating or shallow to dump someone because you don't think they will fulfill your needs, isn't it better to dump them in the dating process than to marry them and make them miserable for the rest of your lives because they aren't fulfilling your needs or you aren't able to fulfill theirs?
"My son, surprisingly, was not shocked. He said this stuff really goes against the current culture. We discussed it a bit more over a late lunch and I have to admit he's right. If you were dating someone you found compatible, but didn't find them physically attractive, the current culture would tell you that you are shallow and you should get over it. Realistically though, wouldn't it be better to "own" your shallowness, if you know that this will be a problem? If you marry that other individual, would you be able to rise above it, or would you make both of you miserable over something that the other person cannot change? You and I both know that people's appearances will change over time and due to health issues, but, if physical appearance is a big issue for you, shouldn't you at least start out with someone who fulfills that expectation for you?"The idea that all issues should be secondary to the first feelings of romantic love is common and, short sighted to say the least. Would people buy a car or a house because they just saw it and loved it? No. They may make such a purchase, but they have the car or house examined by others first and then they weigh their love of the car/house against any problems/necessary repairs and/or restrictions. They may love the house, but if the foundation of that house needs to be replaced or the ground underneath it is slipping or the neighbors are druggies, most people will pass. Why is it so outrageous that the same type of process should be used when deciding to marry. This decision is a lifetime decision. That's much longer than most people will own a house or a car and yet they take more care in the process of buying a house or car, in many instances, than they do in choosing a spouse.
"This attitude may be because people don't view marriage as permanent anymore, but I think it far more likely that a large part of it is that people are no longer being made aware of the real, lifelong consequences of having a broken marriage. It's so common, and our culture so anti-shame, that the logical consequences are being hidden under a load of feminist, PCMC crap. (Politically Correct Multi Culturalism) Feminism teaches that men are worthless and uneccesary and that children are a drag, so why should people take into account the damage they are doing to their children when they get divorced? Especially when so many studies, tailored to support the feminist ideals, have said the children will be fine? I think it's time we put on our big boy pants and start recognizing how damaging divorce and feminism are to our nation and ourselves. If we need to bring shame back to restore our nation, let's get'er done already."
So what do you think? What should you look for in a potential mate? For the purpose of discussion, assume you're looking for a life partner, someone you want to marry. And take a look at Call Me Mom's blog: http://iratetirelessminority.blogspot.com/