Alt-text:
I think a lot about how we as a culture have turned “forever” into the only acceptable definition of success.
Like… if you open a coffee shop and run it for a while and it makes you happy but then stuff gets too expensive and stressful and you want to do something else so you close it, it’s a “failed” business. If you write a book or two, then decide that you don’t actually want to keep doing that, you’re a “failed” writer. If you marry someone, and that marriage is good for a while, and then stops working and you get divorced, it’s a “failed” marriage.
The only acceptable “win condition” is “you keep doing that thing forever”. A friendship that lasts for a few years but then its time is done and you move on is considered less valuable or not a “real” friendship. A hobby that you do for a while and then are done with is a “phase” - or, alternatively, a “pity” that you don’t do that thing any more. A fandom is “dying” because people have had a lot of fun with it but are now moving on to other things.
| just think that something can be good, and also end, and that thing was still good. And it’s okay to be sad that it ended, too. But the idea that anything that ends is automatically less than this hypothetical eternal state of success… I don’t think that’s doing us any good at all.
I think it definitely applies to relationships. It does you and any of your partners a disservice to say your relationship was only a success if one of you died.
A person isn’t a thing you possess. They have needs that grow and change with them. If those needs ever stop being compatible with the relationship, then the relationship should end. That’s not failure. It’s wanting the person you love to be happy.
Marriage is not just another relationship. It’s literally defined by people deciding, and vowing to stay together forever.
But realistically, we all know you can get divorced. While we might hope it’ll be forever, we also know we’re still not gonna stick around if things get too bad (nor should we). Nobody has the shocked pikachu face when marriage isn’t forever after all. No matter what the vows say, in practice we pretty well accept that it’s a big commitment, but not a permanent one.
How about this: things are allowed to fail and that’s OK.
If you marry someone with the intent of staying together for the rest of your lives but you don’t, the marriage failed. It doesn’t have to define you.
It’s also okay to fail. I agree with that as well. I just won’t see a relationship - marriage or not - as a failure if it brought two people happiness for a while until they amicably decide to end it. It’s only a failure when it makes them miserable or when they end it by needlessly hurting the other person. But… that’s still okay if they can at least see what they did wrong and learn from it. We all make mistakes.
It just depends on your definition of failure. Did the marriage fail to make people happy? Not necessarily. Did the marriage fail in its stated aim to bind two people forever? Yes definitely.
I personally think a divorce is usually a failed marriage (unless the marriage was specifically intended to be limited time) but I don’t think that failure is always a bad thing.
For me it comes down to how you use language. Mental health is important to me and I recognize the power of words, so I care more about the impact of language use. No matter how much you reassure people that it’s okay to fail, failing still feels bad. It makes people feel like … a failure. That seems counterproductive and unnecessary to me. Why make people feel bad when they did nothing wrong?
You can specify exactly how and why it’s a failure if you want, and you’re not technically wrong. I’m just not principally concerned with being technically correct in the first place. I’m reframing the standard narrative because I hate to see it go unchallenged. So for anyone who’s hurting and reads this and feels like shit, this time I’ll be the one to say something.
Then I guess you, like me, dislike the concept of marriage. Because the whole point is forever. The forever part is not even what I hold against it though. Some people can and want to be together forever. Feeling forced to be by culture is a bad thing though.
I see it mostly as a legal contract and legal status, but with a lot of extra baggage heaped on top. It’s an overloaded concept that tries to cover too many things at once, making them all suffer. Separate out the legal business and you’d lose the need for an explicit declaration that this union is to exist in perpetuity until cancelled by either party. Sure sounds full of romance when stated that way, doesn’t it?
And regardless of how you look at it, the idea is that it’s for life, from the ground up. I could go into how it’s rooted in other horrible things but yeah, the romance is retrofitted to get people to accept it. And it’s worked.
As you get older, you may realize “forever” isn’t actually forever. Its just for the few decades you have left on this planet in this existence. If you find someone that you like being around, they like being around you, and you’re both willing to put up with each other’s faults and shortcomings, then marriage can be a really good path forward.
When we age, our looks go, our health, and many times our minds too. Having someone that cares about you and has your back through all of that, is a wonderful thing as you will have their back too. You still see them as beautiful as you did when they were younger, and they see you the same way. You look past each other’s graying (or missing) hair, to lack of physique, the lines in your faces, the extra weight you carry in strange places, and eventually the loss of mobility you’ll have and they still want to be around you. You still want to be around them.
Old age frequently brings loneliness too. When you’re not forced to work a job with people anymore, it takes effort to maintain social relationships with other people. When you have your mate, you always have that company irrespective of other social connections (or lack of).
Finally if your partner dies before you, I think it will give you something to look forward to in your own eventual death. You know you’ll be at the same place as your mate, wherever or whatever that is. If there is something after, they’ll be there waiting for you. If there is nothing, you get to be nothing together. Life is really tough if you’re going it alone. A mate can shave off those sharp corners and make even the most unpleasant times bearable.
If you find someone like this, I encourage you to grab on and hold them tight. If you don’t, life will move them along and you’ll be left with just yourself against a cold and uncaring world.
That’s all well and good, but you absolutely don’t need marriage to stay together forever.
The point was that the concept shames you into it. Another option is just to stay together because you want to. Seems more meaningful to me that way anyhow.
That’s what I strive for in any relationship: staying together purely because we choose to. I don’t want someone to stay with me for any other reason, and I want my partner to know that I choose them. Not out of obligation or necessity, but because I truly want them close to me. It’s simple but meaningful.