|
|
| From | Message |
|---|
tekoah
04-Dec-12, 15:15
|
 Marriage
My MI: (13.5/36.25) = .3724
So I have been married approximately 37.24% of my life.
What's your MI?
|
tekoah
04-Dec-12, 15:24
|
pennsylvaniadan's MI = 41/62 = .6613, based on the info I saw. This will be a hard MI to beat.
|
tekoah
04-Dec-12, 15:31
|
At my current age, in order for me to have a higher MI than pennsylvaniadan, I would have to have been married for 24 years. This would require me to have been married at age 12. Of course we can not change the age we were when first married. The only thing I can do to increase my MI is to stay married.
|
mistee
04-Dec-12, 15:32
|
Math makes my head hurt but...
I think I figured out my MI.
If I only count my current marriage, then my MI is .5386 or 53.86% (29.58/54.91)
If I count both of my marriages, then my MI is .6115 or 61.15 % (33.58/54.91)
OMG, that's over half my life. Wow.
|
|
My MI = 25/57=0.44; counting both marriages: 32/57=0.56, so Mistee has my beat.
|
brianinpdx
04-Dec-12, 23:48
|
I have to admit, when I read Runfast's post, I thought to myself--- Really? Who is this guy! So I popped his profile open and took note of his 18xx rating and chess team titled "Mathematic Nerds". Damn friend - I applaud you. You lived up to the reputation! Nice work!
-----
So I figure, If I count my marriage, plus move to Utah, plus get married to Mistee and Kneilca as well, I might have a high enough gpa on this thing to give Dan a run for his marriage money.
Wahoo!
|
|
Pie are round
|
|
Ah, the secret to 41 years of marriage-----learn to nod your head agreeing with whatever she says while at the same time not hearing a single word that comes out of her mouth----I call it the "wind tunnel effect"-----and I've got it down pat-----lol
|
pennsylvaniadan
05-Dec-12, 04:31
|
|
|
P-dan:
My wife calls that "wife hearing" when I do what you said.
It does work but I get totally busted occasionally.
|
|
Well, when you get busted, nod your head in agreement and forget about it----lol
|
brianinpdx
05-Dec-12, 19:24
|
I think we might need a regular "Ask Dan" column on here :>
|
|
Maybe I could get rich as Dr. Dan----it worked for Dr. Phil----I believe I could kick his butt---lol
|
|
My marriage index = 6%
My "time together with same woman" index = 38.8%
|
jmsd
08-Dec-12, 22:08
|
Never married. Don't care to be.
|
|
I can relate to that..been in a relationship for 18years..and we both agree why put stress on a relationship with marriage.
|
|
Marriage = stress
Many people seem to feel that marriage is not good for a committed relationship. In our parents' day, marriage was a venerable institution. Now it is considered a troublesome anachronism by many? What has become of marriage?
|
|
Ha, as a "Baby Boomer" I had a front row seat the the changes in our Society. In my opinion, it started in the mid-60's with the British Invasion---Hippies, Free Love, Riots, Vietnam, Protests, the "Me" generation of the 70's---Woman's Rights, increase in the drug culture, morality standards lowered starting with classics like "Deep Throat" and "Debbie Does Dallas". Religion participation decreased and the generation that became the Parents, Educators, and Politicians during this time led to the decline of the institution of marriage.
I kid about Marriage, but I would have no problem in returning back to the morals of the 50's and early 60's. In my opinion, the decline started when the music died "Doo-wop" and the "Fab Four" crossed the Atlantic---blame it on the Beatles----lol
|
|
Morals and values have certainly changed, not all for the worse, though. Could you have imagined a Black president in the 50s or 60s? Racial equality is certainly doing much better in the USA and around the world.
However, when it comes to marriage as an institution, is it morals that make the difference? Couples are committed, living monogamously and staying together as long as married couples. They prefer not to have the trappings of traditional marriage. Does living Common Law give a different set of expectations, roles and pressures to couples than legal or religious marriage? If so, what is the difference?
|
|
You're right--the piece of paper showing a marriage commitment can be equaled by the right kind of union, unfortunately, that percentage isn't as high as it should be and children end up with a less than acceptable environment---this subject is complicated and controversial---
|
|
Just extrapolating from Bearz2's comment that he wouldn't want the extra pressure of marriage in his relationship, I think there is something there. When I talk with younger colleagues about either their weddings or their wedding plans, there is so much "drama" that needs to be communicated through the actual ceremony and reception that follows. This summer I went to a family wedding in rural Manitoba (think Kansas, but with less corn and colder winters). Well, the ceremony was short and sweet and outside. The reception was in a big tent pitched beside the community centre and the dance was in the space defined by the boards of the outdoor hockey rink. Bales of hay and fire pits were set up at one end and guests could make their own s'mores with little kits in hand-sewn burlap bags. Well, it was a party; a community and family party. You could get your picture taken by a giant John Deere tractor in front of the decorated wheels. The event was a far cry from some the excess I've heard of when it comes to weddings. Just planning a big event and paying for it must be a pressure. Perhaps we need to return to the days of our grandparents where weddings were more like a Fowl Supper and dance; not much different from any Saturday night in a small town.
Maybe that is just the token or the symbol of all the other pressure. I get a feeling that if you make a personal commitment and live together, you have excluded the community. Trying to get the community involved in a relationship can never be an easy thing to do and with our sense of community having changed so much. My mom was born, lived and died within a 50-mile radius. She left that circle three times in her life: once for her honeymoon (went to Montana, just across the border and had a grass-fed beef steak and American beer, woo-hoo!), once to go to Kingston, RMC to attend the graduation of my brother and once to Victoria to see him graduate from Royal Roads. I don't live in my birth province and have worked and/or studied in 9 different cities in four countries. This has to have taken a toll on the sense of community.
|
jmsd
09-Dec-12, 10:21
|
That's most of the problem, as I see it. Too much drama!! There is nothing wrong with marriage, if that's what you want or need in life. But, guys like me are OK being single
and don't need someone else being around. If your talking about having sex, you don't need to be married to do that. Each individual has to decide what is important to them. Me, I have lived in a number of states in the USA, but have never lived in another country. Would like to someday. I do like Mexico!
|
|
Drama rather than just living. Could be the issue that leads people to reject marriage as an institution and embrace it as a personal relationship choice: open-ended and based on mutual consent. Perhaps this was who it is practiced in tribal cultures. Maybe this is more traditional.
|
jmsd
09-Dec-12, 11:09
|
Just living sounds good to me. Tradition is a fine too. I don't like trying to live up to
other peoples expectations or moral values, whatever they might be. That's where
all the trouble comes from, or most of it.
|
|
I think jmsd has put his finger on it. Personal values trump those of the community or society at large. This may explain why marriage as an institution has taken a backseat to personal choice; why all of the changes that society went through in the last 50 years were possible; why the Internet has compensated the erosion of physical community with the virtual, etc., etc. I guess we can all set our own moral standards and find groups that support us. If we cannot find them locally, we can find them on-line.
But, can a society where each individual can determine his or her own personal morality thrive? Or does it become the Libertarian paradise that eluded Joseph Déjacque and the French anarchists of the 19th century?
|
jmsd
09-Dec-12, 13:38
|
As long as you don't interfere with other peoples freedom of expression, its all good.
Can society thrive? I think we are doing that now, aren't we?
|
|
We'll know for sure in a few days---the Myan calender ends on Dec. 21st---
|
jmsd
09-Dec-12, 14:43
|
Its a new beginning. An end of old ways.
|
|
@jmsd
Not sure if we are thriving, but that is a very subjective judgement. I think my question is whether or not marriage and its variants are uniquely a matter of personal choice or whether the actions of the individual (at least in this instance) affect society at large and therefore invite society into otherwise personal lives. This may be the reason for or the meaning of the marriage ceremony and marriage as an institution, to include the community into the union. If we are increasingly rejecting this larger role of marriage, how does that change the "game", so to speak? Can we all increase our personal freedoms at no cost, or are there limits and are there in fact hidden "costs"? On the other hand, perhaps it really is "all good" or a moot point after Dec. 21st.
|
jmsd
09-Dec-12, 14:47
|
We will find out soon enough. My nephew will on a plane that day. The running joke is
he will be up in the air when the world comes to an end, and no place to land.
|
|
|
