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. 🙂 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 love—their 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 wonderful—she 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 article—married, almost married, single, or even the sworn bachelor or bachelorette—I 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.
The person you love is the one who expects you to subordinate yourself to their dreams and wishes. Really? How can that be reciprocal?
The longer people are married the more their dreams, and everything else, coalesce.
kk – that’s not what the article says
Guessing Mr Neal is single and very lonely LMFAO
I halfway agree with Jeff on this one. I think he may have oversimplified it, but he’s got the right idea. It’s too much to completely give everything of yourself, because that results in nothing more than relying entirely on THEM, and that’s not even remotely healthy.
kkollwitz, that’s nice in theory, but I’ve had to give up every dream I ever had (except, of course, the one about raising a family) in order to support my marriage. I’m not even close to living the life I wanted for myself, and while some of the sacrifices have been totally worth it to enjoy having my family, I can’t help but think about some other things I’ve always wanted and feel regret. Does that mean I’m not invested my marriage? No. Does that mean I don’t love my wife or kids enough? Hell no. My point is that the article is fit for storybook Prince Charming who has nothing better to do than surrender his soul to his lady love, and she the same. That’s just not reality.
You missed the point.
OH, really. So elaborate?
The person you love is the one who rightly expects you to subordinate yourself to their dreams and wishes. Really? How can that be reciprocal?
Love can not be a sacrifice. Suggesting that the object of our love can expect us to subordinate our wants and needs to his/hers is to condone a race to the bottom. Love – offering my support and kindness to another – can not be a mutual act of self-immolation without being a suicide pact.
Now, start the rock-throwing. Or, share with me the logical, rational argument that refutes my point. Since you can’t do the latter, I know I will get the former.
You have misinterpreted the meaning. The person you love would give you the world, just as you would give it to them. They would not expect you to be subordinate any more then you would of them. Just don’t be selfish….that is all.
That’s not what the article says – it’s also not the basis of a good relationship, as it’s impossible to do – what, you have a ‘it’s my turn to lose’ scoreboard?
Love can not be a sacrifice. Suggesting that the object of our love can expect us to subordinate our wants and needs to his/hers is to condone a race to the bottom. Love – offering my support and kindness to another – can not be a mutual act of self-immolation without being a suicide pact.
Now, start the rock-throwing. Or, share with me the logical, rational argument that refutes my point. Since you can’t do the latter, I know I will get the former.
Love is an abstract concept of emotional attachment (you may quote me). It only has meaning to the perceiver. If a significant emotion event occurs (cheating, deception, etc) that perception is shot all to hell.
So love is so mystical we can’t really comprehend it and marriage is the end result of that incomprehensible emotion? OK, I’ll pass. I prefer the real world to such fantasies.
No, Love is real…so real It took on flesh and walked the earth in the form of our Lord. You can choose to love even through “significant emotional events” that shake the ground…Love is only shot to hell if you invite Hell in. I chose to love and it was most pivotal when it wasn’t deserved. How long can you choose love like that? 26 years and 9 days for me….until the day I found his mortal self on the floor recognizing (painfully) that his immortal self had left.
Because the person you marry subordinates themselves to your dreams and wishes in turn. That’s reciprocal at it’s very best.
mutual self immolation. I pass
Because, in theory, they’re doing the same for you. You’re subservient to each other. I say in theory because most modern relationships are very one sided and they don’t realize it.
in theory they’re both subordinate to each other. that theory is self contradictory, so since the truth can not be contradicted, your theory is false by its own terms. try again.
Yes really…isn’t it wonderful. 35 years of marriage.
It’s a give and take relationship. My wife has goals and I have goals. I help her achieve her goals and she helps me achieve mine. At times I have to sacrifice my time and efforts in order help her, but she does the same for me. That’s marriage. If you choose the right partner, you become your best self, and you can help her become her best self. If you stay at it long enough, you might become a super hero partnership.
that’s not what the article says – it says (I paraphrase to be brief) marriage is selfless. Hogwash.
Jim broke the article down by sharing his own experience in the easiest way, and yet people still don’t understand it..
No… The person you love is the one who has the same expectation you do- they are dedicated to YOUR happiness, as you are to theirs. Otherwise, it’s not going to work.
so, marriage is a mutual self-immolation pact?
Then I’ll pass.
You’re annoying. I feel bad for the person who has to marry you anyway.
Allie – because I have a different, rational view of love, I’m a bad person.
OK.
So pass on marriage, and stop commenting on an article about the beauty of marriage. You’re acting like my 17 year old, trolling nephew.
Jeffrey really sucks.
75% match.
agreed
No, because the person you love is entering marriage with the same attitude … that it’s not about him/her but about his/her spouse. It’s a reciprocal attitude in which both parties put the other first.
so, it’s mutual self immolation. Sort of a slow suicide pact?
Putting someone else’s welfare, needs, and desires before your own equals self-immolation? Suicide? Not at all. To take an extreme example … Mother Teresa. Arguably one of the most “at peace” people ever to walk the face of the earth. To believe that self-involvement and selfishness is the path to happiness … that’s what’s irrational.
Wow. You prompt people to throw rocks at you? This – after posting comments that are incredibly bitter, hate-filled, and demonstrate a complete lack of any understanding or belief in something resembling what MOST would consider an emotion recognized as love – makes me wonder if you even have anyone in your life? And, if so, if you’ve ever asked them how THEY feel about your negative, depressing, and angry/hostile attitude? Even your “page” is full of twisted logic and negative ranting.
Your opinion isn’t worthy of any further commentary. You seem to hate yourself enough without adding on. You might enjoy it too much. Hope your life improves – it strikes me as incredibly sad and hopeless.
nothing bitter in defending rational love. you read bitterness there because you want to believe in a fantasy and the truth hurts.
what is to ‘believe’ in something – does that mean acceptance without reason, does that mean to act without rational basis? If so, I reject any such belief.
your saying that I’m unhappy is telling. you actually think that your opinion of me matters? That tells me all I need to know of your opinion of yourself – it hinges on what everyone but YOU thinks, so you are their slave. Enjoy.
DING DING DING DING!!!
you are forgetting one very important thing Jeffrey. LOVE is not rational and cannot be explained by logic!
You admire the irrational and the illogical? Really? Then, please stay away from me and my family – anyone who will advocate irrational, illogical behavior is prone to be violent, unpredictable and in the end, well, irrational. I’ll have none of that in my life.
Love is the most rational, selfish act known to man. That you refute that is to demean the beauty of love. If love is what you purport, one can just as well ‘love’ a lamppost as he can love his child or his wife. That’s where irrational takes you, and I love my loved ones enough to be rational and, yes, even logical about it.
I believe the principal of “all things in proper balance” applies here (?) Love is Very powerful,repairing the most hopeless of situations…but, not to be Give Give Give and never received either. Balances. Love does keep trying, just think of how far we go for ,let’s say ,our own children, much farther than for others, Why?because we love and we know our giving/love will help in all situations. Quite an amazing thing.
Debbie – amazing or not, if it’s based on a belief in magical powers rather than rationally derived thoughts, it’s not to be admired or praised. Emotions inform our behavior, they do not control us – or I should say, ought not control us.
The definition of love is to will the good of another and do something about it. It is not an emotion at all. (The emotion you FEEL, we call love, but really love is not love until you put it into action). It is very logical. Considering we are not in a plastic bubble here on earth, it is only rational to will that others succeed and are emotionally healthy, otherwise we will live in a world full of bitterness, depression and crazies. No one wants that. So we “lovingly” will that no one is starving, people find their purpose in life, are happy and everyone gets along, blah, blah, rainbows and kittens. It is even MORE important to will the good of your spouse. You care for her, then you put that into action. That action will appear selfless, all about HER happiness. In reality, it only helps you if she’s happy, it is secretly selfish, true to our nature. Not that you don’t enjoy seeing her happy if you really care for her, you will, independent of your narcissistic self, relish in her happiness, but ultimately, it’s hardly completely selfless in a true sense. You are sacrificing, though, your support, kindness, time and affection. Your children will be even more sacrificial, you will act even more selflessly. They are helpless and cannot give back like your wife. But is it still completely selfless? No, because they are carrying on your legacy and so you have a stake in it, one that will benefit you. ……It is suicidal to give up your natural tendency to think of yourself, care for yourself, benefit only yourself. You are killing that part of you when you commit an act for your wife that benefits you in no way but to ensure a happy home. Let me repeat, it IS suicidal. It is the most beautiful act you can ever commit, to SURRENDER yourself to another person, in service to that person with as little thought to your benefit as you can muster, given our nature. That is maturity and its frightening and that’s why most in the country today choose your path as evidenced by the divorce rate. When two people cannot offer themselves in a suicide pact (killing their base animal natures of ME and MY needs) to form a mutual self-preservation that is a marriage, then they are doomed to fall into a world of bitterness and selfishness. It is only rational, then, to think of another before you think of yourself, especially when it is the one you have pledged your life to. You are now considered ONE, without needing to lose yourself, only those parts of yourself that suck anyway. But if you want to keep those selfish, narcissistic, self-absorbed parts of yourself and be in control of exactly what your willing to give to your spouse and no more, then more power to ya!
Formatting required. This block of text looks like gibberish.
equating selfishness with narcissism is a common error and produces many fake ‘selfless’ people who lord it over others with their pretense of being better than anyone who lives honestly and openly as a lover of life – including his own. you can do better.
Your prospective is strange to me lets look at GOD’s relationship with us GOD loves us yet we a lot of times are selfish and show him disrespect and no love in return so does he stop loving us the answer is no that is the example for us to follow
comparing the relationship between two people to the mystical relationship some people purport to have with a god seems strange to me, so I’ll ignore your post
The nuances of reciprocity aren’t really addressed by Seth. Respectfully, I disagree with him and have written my rebuttal here: http://centerforwomenspsychology.wordpress.com/2013/11/04/marriage-isnt-for-me-really/