[MD] until death do us part

[Ian Glendinning]

As a non-inspector of non-pinheads Marsha, I'll give you my
non-intellectual story.

My wife and I have been married a little under 30 years. For the years
between 10 and 25 we kinda developed an (mostly, but not entirely,
unspoken) understanding that once the kids flew the nest we would
probably split - like, what was the point staying together - christ,
you know it ain't easy - too many snags etc.

But to our mutual surprise, we discovered that we actually liked each
other's company, doing things we like doing together, even though
there are also things we each like doing that the other wouldn't be
seen dead - posting on MD for example. It's not that the formality of
marriage provides anything other than some nominal stability for the
kids involved - like, they need it even if they don't know it -
therefore a valuable social (even biological) convention,  but that a
life-long soul-mate has shared-values when all is said and done, and
it's values that matter.

Regards
Ian

On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 9:28 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> I like the story, but I like all your stories.
>
> At first I thought a discussion concerning Tipper and Al a bit stupid too.
> I agree; who cares?  But it seems that the statistics point, not to the men
> buying themselves a new trophy wife, but to the women wanting the
> divorce, 60 - 70 percent.   What's that about?  It is mostly the wives
> breaking up this social institution?  "We've grown apart.",  the mommies
> are saying as they toss the guys out.
>
> The question today seems not to be 'Should a couple stay together for the kids?'
> It's more like, 'Should a couple get married for any reason?'  Child support can
> be gotten with a dna test.  Do today's kids care if their parents are married?
> Is marriage 'just' a social habit that has outgrown it usefulness?
>
> I wouldn't get married today, not at 20, 40 or 60.  No way!
>
> I knew you would respond, John.  You actually seem to have some real social
> concern.  Where do the rest of you inspectors of pinheads stand?  Do you see
> any value in the social pattern of marriage?
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 7, 2010, at 3:07 PM, John Carl wrote:
>
>> Well I'll take a non-intellectual stab at your question, Marsha.  One of my
>> favorite old couples in literature was Albert Durham and Hallie Ryder from a
>> book I can't rememer the name of right now, about a coyote named Brand X.
>>
>> Anyway, they were childhood sweethearts who'd grown up next door to one
>> another in a small town in Kansas, got married and had an only son who got
>> killed in WWII.  So they pulled up stakes, Albert sold his painting
>> business, and they moved to an old mine in Arizona with a spring where every
>> evening, all the animals would come and gather, and that was pretty much
>> their social life.
>>
>> There was an old cabin on the claim, that appealed to Albert's spartan
>> tastes, whereas Hallie prefered the neat little travel trailer with
>> everything in its place, so they basically moved apart and avoided conflict
>> and thus in their old age, reverted back to their childhood pattern of being
>> next door neighbors.
>>
>> Their story always appealed to me, resonated with something that seems
>> right, that marriage doesn't have to follow any particular pattern to have
>> value.  So Al and Tipper grew apart?  So what?  I think that's perfectly
>> natural and right.  Nobody said we have to turn into carbon copies of each
>> other for the rest our lives, just because we partner up for raising kids
>> and supporting one another.  What I don't get is why they have to divorce.
>> I mean, what's that about?  The only reason they'd need to divorce is cuz
>> somebody wants to what?  Get remarried and have more kids?  Find true love?
>> Silly thing for an old fart to be chasing at this stage of his life.  Poor
>> Al.  Hollywood musta gone to his head.
>>
>>
>> John the anti-romantic
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:30 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> All the buzz on the radio, because of Tipper and Al Gore, is whether the
>>> institution of marriage
>>> is falling apart.   Because of the expanded longevity, can two people be
>>> expected to commit
>>> 'until death do us part'?  Fifty years with one man, or woman?  That is a
>>> long time?  With the
>>> divorce rate above 50%, should this social pattern survive, change,
>>> dissolve?
>>>
>>> What say you intellectuals about this social static pattern of value?
>>>
>>>
>>> Marsha
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>>
>>>
>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>> Archives:
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>>>
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>
>
>
> ___
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>