I co-run a society for abundance-minded women in New York City (alongside Hailey). Last week, we discussed dating and marriage; It was our rawest conversation yet. In fact, someone started crying during the introductions, after sharing that her long-term relationship had just ended.
I want to add a concern that may be niche to the rationalist community but speaks to the general fear of failed marriage and is looming large in my decision whether or not to marry my life partner: what the promise of marriage should be. I don’t think marriage is or should actually be a promise to be together forever, but I also think a lot of the value of marriage is lost if you say something implying “maybe we’ll break up tho” in your vows. I think the commitment to the aspiration of being together for life is a lot of the added value of marriage, but it seems dishonest if you’re crossing your fingers behind your back as you say “til death do us part”, fully aware that there are plenty of circumstances in which you’d divorce.
My concerns about this are very similar to my feelings about the GWWC pledge, which I have taken and intend to keep my entire life, but I think is okay for people to break if it’s bad for them or not the best way for them to do good anymore. Many rationalists think this is community norm-corrupting dishonesty and doublethink. I might not take the pledge again today due to my greater awareness of all the unanticipated changes and circumstances that make it unrealistic to promise anything forever (I’m now divorced!), and I would prefer to have a concise pledge I could take today without reservation, but I feel something really valuable is lost when we can’t use aspirational vows. The point is to commit ourselves to living up to the vow, not to make the most accurate prediction of what will happen or leave ourselves plenty of room to fail.
This sounds super niche as I read it over, but I’m in your demographic and this is honestly my #1 obstacle to getting married again. I need a way to get what I want out of marriage (recognition of the paramount role we play in each other’s lives, being recognized as family, commitment device) without starting a marriage by making a promise that’s false on its face (divorce *is* an option but we want a ceremony and commitment that affirms forsaking all others and settling down).
Thanks for writing this, Priya! I think it's a really interesting and important topic. Point no. 5 stood out to me: "They had trouble articulating to themselves and their partners why they valued getting legally married vs. staying in a long-term partnership without involving the state." I am in a committed LTR with a man and we have been engaged since early 2020. We both talk about getting married, but there is an anti-establishment part of me that wants to have kids without getting married at all. Somehow this feels more romantic?
I'm not opposed to getting married, but oftentimes it feels like this is something that I would do to check a box in order to avoid awkward conversations with more conservative family members on both sides of the aisle. And that just doesn't feel like a good enough reason! I want better, both practical & romantic reasons!
At the risk of oversimplifying, it kind of feels like all 5 of those bullets boil down to "I can't find the right guy." - seems like solving #4 solves all the other ones (except maybe #2 - which feels like a different problem).
Focusing on these 2 sentences from #4:
> In general there was a wariness of men in New York City, and a general perception that many men don't want to settle down or have kids, creating a fundamental misalignment in values.
> A few women from conservative families had allowed their families to set them up on arranged dates, but found that though those men wanted marriage and kids, they were incompatible on most other axes.
I'm curious what the other axes are - if there were any patterns.
If we go with my oversimplification, then the question is: is it a supply problem or a demand problem? Do the men all suck nowadays, or are women too picky?
Maybe it's both? Maybe
--> less good men (hence "they were incompatible on most other axes")
--> more competition for the good men
--> the good men get choosy / non-commital (hence "general perception that many men don't want to settle down")
I suppose a good way to measure how much of it is a supply issue is to find a sample of "eligible" single men and ask them what their funnel looks like (how many messages vs how many replies vs how many first dates vs how many second dates and so on). If it's sharp drops at each step then I guess women are too picky. If it's fairly narrow I suppose it's a supply problem?
The first one was doomed to fail and I knew it when I got into it. I got married anyway because I had never been alone, was afraid to be alone, and I knew that marriage was what was expected. That marriage reinforced my arrested development.
The second one... Well maybe I rushed into it. Maybe I was infatuated. I was in love and admired her endlessly and thought surely "how could we as a team not win". Four years later, our chosen life paths are irreconcilably diverging.
Please forgive if my sharing here is inappropriate.
I guess I'll wonder out loud and this could provide food for the conversation.
If/when someone else finds their way into my life, why not just be long term partners? I'm not likely to have kids, getting close to the edge biologically, and I've always been on the fence about them anyway, so biology is likely to just make that decision for me. The coward's mode of avoiding fatherhood.
But, children strike me as the number one reason to marry.
Here's a more pointed question, forgive the other musings, I needed then to find my way to this question.
Why would two older adults, who don't have children and won't be trying for children, get married. What is the function/benefit/purpose of marriage for people in their late thirties, forties, and beyond?
At the risk of oversimplifying, it kind of feels like all 5 of those bullets boil down to "I can't find the right guy." - seems like solving #4 solves all the other ones (except maybe #2 - which feels like a different problem).
Focusing on these 2 sentences from #4:
> In general there was a wariness of men in New York City, and a general perception that many men don't want to settle down or have kids, creating a fundamental misalignment in values.
> A few women from conservative families had allowed their families to set them up on arranged dates, but found that though those men wanted marriage and kids, they were incompatible on most other axes.
I'm curious what the other axes are - if there were any patterns.
If we go with my oversimplification, then the question is: is it a supply problem or a demand problem? Do the men all suck nowadays, or are women too picky?
Maybe it's both? Maybe
--> less good men (hence "they were incompatible on most other axes")
--> more competition for the good men
--> the good men get choosy / non-commital (hence "general perception that many men don't want to settle down")
I suppose a good way to measure how much of it is a supply issue is to find a sample of "eligible" single men and ask them what their funnel looks like (how many messages vs how many replies vs how many first dates vs how many second dates and so on). If it's sharp drops at each step then I guess women are too picky. If it's fairly narrow I suppose it's a supply problem?
I want to add a concern that may be niche to the rationalist community but speaks to the general fear of failed marriage and is looming large in my decision whether or not to marry my life partner: what the promise of marriage should be. I don’t think marriage is or should actually be a promise to be together forever, but I also think a lot of the value of marriage is lost if you say something implying “maybe we’ll break up tho” in your vows. I think the commitment to the aspiration of being together for life is a lot of the added value of marriage, but it seems dishonest if you’re crossing your fingers behind your back as you say “til death do us part”, fully aware that there are plenty of circumstances in which you’d divorce.
My concerns about this are very similar to my feelings about the GWWC pledge, which I have taken and intend to keep my entire life, but I think is okay for people to break if it’s bad for them or not the best way for them to do good anymore. Many rationalists think this is community norm-corrupting dishonesty and doublethink. I might not take the pledge again today due to my greater awareness of all the unanticipated changes and circumstances that make it unrealistic to promise anything forever (I’m now divorced!), and I would prefer to have a concise pledge I could take today without reservation, but I feel something really valuable is lost when we can’t use aspirational vows. The point is to commit ourselves to living up to the vow, not to make the most accurate prediction of what will happen or leave ourselves plenty of room to fail.
This sounds super niche as I read it over, but I’m in your demographic and this is honestly my #1 obstacle to getting married again. I need a way to get what I want out of marriage (recognition of the paramount role we play in each other’s lives, being recognized as family, commitment device) without starting a marriage by making a promise that’s false on its face (divorce *is* an option but we want a ceremony and commitment that affirms forsaking all others and settling down).
Thanks for writing this, Priya! I think it's a really interesting and important topic. Point no. 5 stood out to me: "They had trouble articulating to themselves and their partners why they valued getting legally married vs. staying in a long-term partnership without involving the state." I am in a committed LTR with a man and we have been engaged since early 2020. We both talk about getting married, but there is an anti-establishment part of me that wants to have kids without getting married at all. Somehow this feels more romantic?
I'm not opposed to getting married, but oftentimes it feels like this is something that I would do to check a box in order to avoid awkward conversations with more conservative family members on both sides of the aisle. And that just doesn't feel like a good enough reason! I want better, both practical & romantic reasons!
At the risk of oversimplifying, it kind of feels like all 5 of those bullets boil down to "I can't find the right guy." - seems like solving #4 solves all the other ones (except maybe #2 - which feels like a different problem).
Focusing on these 2 sentences from #4:
> In general there was a wariness of men in New York City, and a general perception that many men don't want to settle down or have kids, creating a fundamental misalignment in values.
> A few women from conservative families had allowed their families to set them up on arranged dates, but found that though those men wanted marriage and kids, they were incompatible on most other axes.
I'm curious what the other axes are - if there were any patterns.
If we go with my oversimplification, then the question is: is it a supply problem or a demand problem? Do the men all suck nowadays, or are women too picky?
Maybe it's both? Maybe
--> less good men (hence "they were incompatible on most other axes")
--> more competition for the good men
--> the good men get choosy / non-commital (hence "general perception that many men don't want to settle down")
I suppose a good way to measure how much of it is a supply issue is to find a sample of "eligible" single men and ask them what their funnel looks like (how many messages vs how many replies vs how many first dates vs how many second dates and so on). If it's sharp drops at each step then I guess women are too picky. If it's fairly narrow I suppose it's a supply problem?
I am working through my second divorce right now.
The first one was doomed to fail and I knew it when I got into it. I got married anyway because I had never been alone, was afraid to be alone, and I knew that marriage was what was expected. That marriage reinforced my arrested development.
The second one... Well maybe I rushed into it. Maybe I was infatuated. I was in love and admired her endlessly and thought surely "how could we as a team not win". Four years later, our chosen life paths are irreconcilably diverging.
Please forgive if my sharing here is inappropriate.
I guess I'll wonder out loud and this could provide food for the conversation.
If/when someone else finds their way into my life, why not just be long term partners? I'm not likely to have kids, getting close to the edge biologically, and I've always been on the fence about them anyway, so biology is likely to just make that decision for me. The coward's mode of avoiding fatherhood.
But, children strike me as the number one reason to marry.
Here's a more pointed question, forgive the other musings, I needed then to find my way to this question.
Why would two older adults, who don't have children and won't be trying for children, get married. What is the function/benefit/purpose of marriage for people in their late thirties, forties, and beyond?
Lovely, insightful essay, Priya. Thank you.
At the risk of oversimplifying, it kind of feels like all 5 of those bullets boil down to "I can't find the right guy." - seems like solving #4 solves all the other ones (except maybe #2 - which feels like a different problem).
Focusing on these 2 sentences from #4:
> In general there was a wariness of men in New York City, and a general perception that many men don't want to settle down or have kids, creating a fundamental misalignment in values.
> A few women from conservative families had allowed their families to set them up on arranged dates, but found that though those men wanted marriage and kids, they were incompatible on most other axes.
I'm curious what the other axes are - if there were any patterns.
If we go with my oversimplification, then the question is: is it a supply problem or a demand problem? Do the men all suck nowadays, or are women too picky?
Maybe it's both? Maybe
--> less good men (hence "they were incompatible on most other axes")
--> more competition for the good men
--> the good men get choosy / non-commital (hence "general perception that many men don't want to settle down")
I suppose a good way to measure how much of it is a supply issue is to find a sample of "eligible" single men and ask them what their funnel looks like (how many messages vs how many replies vs how many first dates vs how many second dates and so on). If it's sharp drops at each step then I guess women are too picky. If it's fairly narrow I suppose it's a supply problem?