Having been married only a year and a half, I’ve recently come to the conclusion that marriage isn’t for me.
Now before you start making assumptions, keep reading.
I met my wife in high school when we were 15 years old. We were friends for ten years until…until we decided no longer wanted to be just friends. đ I strongly recommend that best friends fall in love. Good times will be had by all.
Nevertheless, falling in love with my best friend did not prevent me from having certain fears and anxieties about getting married. The nearer Kim and I approached the decision to marry, the more I was filled with a paralyzing fear. Was I ready? Was I making the right choice? Was Kim the right person to marry? Would she make me happy?
Father’s Advice
Then, one fateful night, I shared these thoughts and concerns with my dad.
Perhaps each of us have moments in our lives when it feels like time slows down or the air becomes still and everything around us seems to draw in, marking that moment as one we will never forget.
My dad giving his response to my concerns was such a moment for me. With a knowing smile he said, “Seth, you’re being totally selfish. So I’m going to make this really simple:Â marriage isn’t for you. You don’t marry to make yourself happy, you marry to make someone else happy. More than that, your marriage isn’t for yourself, you’re marrying for a family. Not just for the in-laws and all of that nonsense, but for your future children. Who do you want to help you raise them? Who do you want to influence them? Marriage isn’t for you. It’s not about you. Marriage is about the person you married.”
It was in that very moment that I knew that Kim was the right person to marry. I realized that I wanted to make her happy; to see her smile every day, to make her laugh every day. I wanted to be a part of her family, and my family wanted her to be a part of ours. And thinking back on all the times I had seen her play with my nieces, I knew that she was the one with whom I wanted to build our own family.
My father’s advice was both shocking and revelatory. It went against the grain of today’s “Walmart philosophy”, which is if it doesn’t make you happy, you can take it back and get a new one.
No, a true marriage (and true love) is never about you. It’s about the person you loveâtheir wants, their needs, their hopes, and their dreams. Selfishness demands, “What’s in it for me?”, while Love asks, “What can I give?”
Marriage Isn’t For You
Some time ago, my wife showed me what it means to love selflessly. For many months, my heart had been hardening with a mixture of fear and resentment. Then, after the pressure had built up to where neither of us could stand it, emotions erupted. I was callous. I was selfish.
But instead of matching my selfishness, Kim did something beyond wonderfulâshe showed an outpouring of love. Laying aside all of the pain and anguish I had caused her, she lovingly took me in her arms and soothed my soul.
I realized that I had forgotten my dad’s advice. While Kim’s side of the marriage had been to love me, my side of the marriage had become all about me. This awful realization brought me to tears, and I promised my wife that I would try to be better.
To all who are reading this articleâmarried, almost married, single, or even the sworn bachelor or bacheloretteâI want you to know that marriage isn’t for you. No true relationship of love is for you. Love is about the person you love.
And, paradoxically, the more you truly love that person, the more love you receive. And not just from your significant other, but from their friends and their family and thousands of others you never would have met had your love remained self-centered. Truly, love and marriage isn’t for you. It’s for others.
This is reaaaaallly dumb. Anyone familiar with the basics of biology (see: “The Selfish Gene” by Richard Dawkins) knows that truly altruistic behavior doesn’t exist in nature. Not only that, but after you take down selfishness and its ill effects, your conclusion is as selfish as it could possibly be: “The more you truly love that person, the more love you receive.”
Homeslice, your argument is one big logical inconsistency. If you don’t want to be selfish, then why give love in order to receive love? That’s as selfish as it gets. Stop trying to conform to impossible stereotypes (altruism), learn a bit about biology and human nature, then take another stab at writing this article.
Your arrogance about it aside,I actually agree with you. No such thing as selfless love. We give it in order to get it back.
Yes, in a very fundamental way..we give love to get it. However, when you are married and you love the person and you feel that perhaps they are unhappy and it breaks your heart to see that you are not what they ‘need’ and you offer the option of divorce because you want them to be happy. How is that selfish? That is loving another person and wanting them to be happy even if being happy means without you (ie: not expecting their love back). In that case how is that selfish?
If a marriage is based on the fact that each wants the other to be happy and we keep our cups full with our hobbies, our friends and our interests (rather than making the marriage our only focus in life) it helps keep each person healthier and happier and easier to love and give love. However, at the same time knowing you each love the other so much that you would divorce if you were somehow keeping the other back or unhappy…that is not at all selfish. It is stable, happy, healthy relationship making.
Today’s ideal marriages seem (to me) to be an exercise in co-dependence which is not healthy at all. Rather than recognizing that something isn’t working and moving on … people stick around and then get married to people who they are not compatible with and then blame everyone else for the failure rather than looking in the mirror and asking what caused them not to see the person for who they were?
(Married 10 years to an active duty military guy who is amazing. One child and one on the way. We’ve been through *so* much and always come out stronger. It isn’t always easy but love is always there. We are eachothers’ ‘soft place to fall’.)
I feel sorry for you – I agree with the article the more you give the happier you are. I have always made my life about my husband and children. I guess that means in your opinion I’m dumb. And to say “why give love in order to receive it?” Now that’s out there. Maybe you should read a really good book, it’s called the “Bible” and it’s Gods plan that we think about others before ourselves.
Please don’t reference the Bible as a source for a debate about biology, mating patterns, and human nature.
Cody, at the very least the bible is a history of human behavior. A very long history.
What are you talking about? The Bible is the truest source you can get!
In fact, I don’t know why it isn’t a basic source in all studies.
It helps me in all things, It is plain to see that it helps, no matter what you’re doing.
Tolerance.doc not found. System rebooting…
First of all, more people have died in the name of god than for any other reason. The bible is simply evil, pure evil.
science has already proved that the bible is incorrect and that it was made up.
religion was created to control the masses and it is still doing it ohh so well.
What a sad existence you must have, Jeffrey K. Life is about living, loving, learning and hope. Lighten up a bit and you may find real happiness and love.
Thank you Seth for a wonderful and truthful article.
…system failure…overload….
Actually, The Selfish Gene is about furthering your own genes (hence the name), so it has everything to do with making sure your offspring survives to reproduce… not making sure you are satisfied in your romantic relationships. Arguably, that would mean supporting your romantic partner so he or she is better able to raise your offspring.
interesting you say that because love is not about reproducing offspring even if that can be a result of it.
You need to reread Dawkins. And then you need to move on to read De Waal and a few others. The selfish gene concept is a brilliant reduction of the elements of natural selection, but it is not about selfish people. In fact, our species would not survive and thrive without reciprocal altruism. This description of his marriage is a perfect example of the kind of reciprocal altruism (wrapped in kin selection) that benefits our species. Whether or not there is pure altruism is irrelevant to the context of having a fulfilling relationship.
an intellectual female.. they are the most sexy. however, I’m not gay….
Of course you’re a man, Jeffrey K.
It’s not implausible to put another person ahead of yourself. Because of “biology” as you so simply put it, we will, of course, always have selfish needs and tendencies that need to be fulfilled and expressed. But we don’t have to seek solely to please ourselves. We can seek to please our partners, to make them happy. And yes, in return, our needs too will be met.
It’s not about altruism or denying yourself. It’s about prioritizing, and being patient – having faith. Don’t rag on someone else’s feelings or revelations until you can open your mind to more than your textbooks.
Also, just a warning, but you may be hiding behind your “biology” so that you don’t have to fully commit to a partner. You might want to figure that whole thing out, because your life will be much more fulfilling if you can stop using human nature as a crutch and start living and loving like a gentleman.
Contradictions found: Usage of the word gentleman shows your lack of understanding of where it comes from. Chivalry has been glorified after its end, because people seem to forget, “gentlemen” treated women daintily because they saw them as frail and inferior.
Also, quoting Biology is unnecessary as in no way is his uses ironic, but your misuse of irony is.
Once more, it should be noted that at any point you feel obligated to fully commit to someone, you are doing it wrong. The desire (or lack thereof) should prevail in this case.
“Stop using human nature as a crutch,” she said. Alright, stop research development on all things relating to behavioral sciences. Yep, relationship counselors, child developmental disorder researchers, social workers, etc. are all fired due to the “crutch” that is human nature.
Man, Mr. Smartiepants here. Honestly, you can poke a hole into any theory about human behavior and psyche if you tried to. But you’ll never be happy doing that (Unless you just like to take pleasure in crushing other people’s feelings). Can’t you find just be happy for someone who has found something that works for him?
I’m not sure you’ve really done your field research if you believe that no one acts unselfishly without hope of something in return. What a textbook teaches you and what you learn when you open your eyes and live are often very different and I can honestly say I have been the recipient of true generosity, unconditional love, and selflessness from someone who expected nothing from me in return. It’s called having a mother.
Jeffery K,
There comes a time, in the most happy of relationships, when your love and concern for your partner’s happiness honestly, genuinely, then – through selfless growth over time – autonomically trumps your own; when that reality becomes a natural part of your life and your partner has equally reciprocated the same, your commitment and investment into your partner’s happiness then synergizes with their commitment and investment into yours; and this synergy magnifies your halpiness in a manner and quantity that cannot be achieved in any other way: Your argument cannot be valid until you first prove you have experienced this.
I expect human beings to transcend nature.
Humans are not bonded to nature, that’s what differentiates us from the average animal.
Love is not logical.
There is no love without selfless sacrifice, and there is no point in love without this selfsame sacrifice.
This is an explanation of a paradigm shift. People who regularly perform acts of service will tell you that they do so for selfish reasons –it feels good. There are varying motives: reciprocity, a promise of reward in the after-life, pity, duty, example, etc… However, the outcome is almost always the same –they forget about their own problems, or put their own problems in a new perspective. The paradigm shift requires a higher level of maturity and results in greater happiness.
Well said, old chap!
great take on perspective and understanding.
I respectfully disagree. Whole-heartedly. True love is NEVER given so that you get it back. If you truly love someone, it doesn’t matter what they do, you love them still. Is reciprocal love often a natural bi-product of selflessness? Sure. Read the comment about the guy who’s been married 14 years and it’s never been reciprocated. He calls it his “never giving up gene,” but it’s the fact that he really loves her that he’s now heading to do the dishes because he loves her still. Is it hard? Yes. Does he get frusrated? Yes, and he is obviously at a rough spot right now. However, he understands the eternal aspect of the promise that he made and loves his wife still. For better or for worse means when THEY are at their better or at their worse you’ll still support them and help them because you love them.
Even if half of all marriages end in divorce, the other half are still married because one or both of the parties determined that they love their spouse despite his or her mistakes. They love them come what may, and not to be loved in return. I know plenty of people who have been cheated on, beaten up, and lied to by their spouses. They stuck with them. The hurtful partner decided to change, and they are as happy as anyone else.
Lastly, Richard Dawkins, although a well-educated biologist and ethologist and a great mind, has never been, nor will be the ultimate source of truth. God is — and that can’t be changed. It is the nature of man to be selfish and, “nasty, brutish and short.” However, that is our physical nature. Our eternal and spiritual nature (which transcend long after the death of our physical bodies) is to love completely and selflessly as God and our Savior did and do. Neither of them expect repayment. Whether or not you choose to believe in them doesn’t matter. Jesus the Christ died for you and I, no matter what we do in return. That’s the ultimate example of true love.
I’m not writing to try to belittle or argue with your beliefs. You are welcome to them and, if they bring you true happiness, that’s awesome. I just wanted to get my thoughts out there for those who are still trying to decide from which source truth stems and provide another process of thought regarding true love.
Sorry you are unhappy Rick! đ
Well stated!!
Well it’s not reaaaaally dumb. It is a great writing about how his dad squelched his pre-wedding jitters; We all question before the wedding if this is the right choice and a lot of people ignore the most important and only reason to get married is for love. It really isn’t about anybody — its all chemistry, biology, and sex drive or whatever causes two people to fall in love in the first place. One thing is absolutely true – you can’t force it to happen – it just does.
He had been a total jerk for probably quite awhile and his wife somehow restored their love – she sounds like a saint!
âThe more you truly love that person, the more love you receive.â
I disagree. You’ve never done anything just to feel good? Not necessarily to receive love. It is very possible to just love someone to in order to feel good that that person is doing better.
Honestly, I think you need to seriously rethink your your understanding of love and giving and receiving. Best of luck.
Seth’s not loving his wife more with the sole purpose of receiving more love in return, Jeffrey. However, he lives with the reality of that blessing.
Richard Dawkins is one of the most hate-filled, vitriolic men alive. He’s bent on spewing forth his miserable venom because misery loves company, and he takes great delight in his diabolical mission to take as many as possible to hell with him.