[silverquiet]

It sounds like men should either not get married, or if they do, then endeavor quite seriously to keep their wives happy. Personally, I have to say I've never really "gotten it" so-to-speak - I really never felt a desire to get married and/or have children, so this is no great worry for me. But I do normally feel quite counter-cultural when I express it.

[wouldbecouldbe]

There is a great joy in building a deep bond with a partner.

There are definitely difficulties, but no need to throw out the baby with bathwater, if done right a partner & children are one of the biggest joys & sources of meaning for life.

[silverquiet]

I can't seem to maintain an interest in such a bond, and I've long since stopped believing in meaning. As I said, I'm aware that that sort of talk is frowned upon. But given the number of men estranged from their children (the number of kids being raised by single mothers is, I understand, at an all-time high in the US), and the consistently high divorce rate (lower these days probably only because the marriage rate is also lower), I don't think that I'm actually particularly unique.

[toast0]

I think it's important to think about marriage separately from raising children. You can do the activities separately or together.

For me, my spouse is someone I can implicitly rely on and vice versa. We are a team working towards our shared purposes, but we are still individuals. We each have skills that make the others life easier. It's a lot easier to get a ride from a spouse than from a friend, and a spouse will be more available to help tend to sickness and injury. That sounds emotionless, but of course emotions and emotional support are important too.

For me, having a spouse where we have compatible ideas on children, money, climate, travel, and most things is like an easy button for life. Research and problem solving is easier with two people. Decision making can be harder though.

If you marry someone who doesn't have compatible ideas, there's going to be a lot more conflict and a lot more deep compromise, and that may not be as appealing. And, of course, people change, and exiting a long term commited relationship comes with trauma, so there's risk. Maybe none of this feels appealing to you, and that's fine. There's some social and legal pressure to marry for lots of reasons, but we live in a world full of social and legal pressures, and you should reject those pressures if they don't feel right to you.

Raising children is a whole other thing. I don't think people should be pressured into it, and it's best to be on the same page as a potential spouse before considering marriage, otherwise one spouse is likely to have to make a big compromise and that's not great. Personally, I find raising children to benefit from a team approach, but it's not required and a marriage is just one way to form a child raising team.

[wouldbecouldbe]

It sound you are looking for datapoint to easier accept your lack of meaning in life. You can also do the opposite and look at the happy partners & families to prove yourself wrong.

But I understand, however I hope you find it, in which way works for you, it does make life much richer.

For me family is one of them & buddhism another one.

If I can give advice, the easiest way to experience meaning is to serve & help others. Easiest is to do voluntary work in obvious helpful things like food serving etc. Something where you just enjoy & give and not think deeper about what the point of it all is.

I think there is quite a bit of nihilism in Western evolutionary materialism (all our feelings are just side effect of evolution). But that's a very limited view on reality. Not sure if that's also part of your experience, but I do see this cause similar feelings to smart & technical people around.

[silverquiet]

Lol, I was raised Catholic; the serve others thing is quite a big part of the dogma, and I don't disagree with that necessarily (unlike quite a bit of the rest of that religion), but that doesn't mean that it works for everyone. Some people are just wired differently; the meaninglessness creeps in no matter the volunteer organization; the therapy, the drugs (licit or otherwise). It's an experience since young childhood and seems unlikely to change markedly. I'm actually quite happy that it's not something I'll ever have to subject a child to (and the probable hellscape that we're leaving them; glad I'll never have to have that conversation either). It certainly could be a post-facto rationalization on my part, but perhaps it's just the way I am and ever was. Honestly, accepting that has brought me peace as much as anything.

[wouldbecouldbe]

All the best.

[macintux]

~20 years ago I met a wonderful older couple: she was an astronomer and programmer who was actively engaged with the Debian community, and I can't recall his profession, but he was clearly delighted to support her interests.

It was inspiring to see a couple who actively supported each other's hobbies and careers, who engaged with each others' professional communities.

[freitzkriesler2]

Happy wife happy life is a lie.

Being a doormat to your partner is a great way to end up miserable.

You will have arguments and challenges. Those are good things and sometimes it needs to be said and worked out .

Marriage was always a partnership and a business in the past. Treat it as such anx you'll find it works way better.

[s1artibartfast]

>Happy wife happy life is a lie.

It is true, but an incomplete instruction for life happiness . What more do you want from a platitude?

Good luck having a happy life with a miserable wife.

[bitshiftfaced]

It may be true but not actionable. For example, some wives may be happy regardless of how much their partners bend over backwards to please them. Their partners are then more likely to have a happy life. Or, maybe your wife will be miserable no matter what you do. You're less likely to have a happy life. This is why I believe the most important step in vetting a spouse is to spend a long time with them first, the longer the better. How happy you both are isn't likely to change much after you get married.

[s1artibartfast]

It is absolutely actionable. Maybe not for every person in every situation, but that doesn't mean it isn't good advice.

It seems crazy to me that you think people are incapable of doing things to add or detract from the happiness of others.

If I treat my wife with kindness and care in the morning, she will be much happier than if I hypothetically berated or beat her.

[kamaal]

This is logical thought. Relationships run on emotions. For most of history marriage's sole purpose is to create social security for women. That is really a problem, because once a service is provided, there is always a scope for improvement. If there is a crisis people are busy solving the crisis, in times of relative peace people think they should be optimising for a better deal. There is always a man better than you. Somebody is more healthy, wealthy and spends more on his wife, and you are continuously benchmarked against him.

Heck in most cases you might even be getting benchmarked against a fictional figure who exists only in her imaginations.

The more you do, more that fictional figure gets better than you, and you are expected jump over the bar she just raised. Sooner or later you will burnout and she will hate you for being weak compared to the hero that exists in her mind.

[bitshiftfaced]

What I'm getting at is that, by adulthood, those behaviors are not easily changed, at least beyond temporarily. People know they'll live longer if they quit smoking, but despite the enormous benefits, it tends not to happen. I'm not saying it doesn't happen. I just think it's more realistic to go into a marriage with the expectation that the person you're marrying is not likely to change much.

[s1artibartfast]

> I just think it's more realistic to go into a marriage with the expectation that the person you're marrying is not likely to change much.

I think that is absolutely true. Hopefully by marriage, partners have some practice and success promoting each other's happiness.

[freitzkriesler2]

Here's a thought, maybe try not living under the thumb of a woman to derive your happiness.

Today my toddler asked for candy and my wife almost gave her a piece (it's 7:45am). I said no. When the wife rebuked, I said, "stop, you're going to make our daughter fat like you." Mad her piping mad but guess what?

Happiness comes from within and you know what makes me happy? Having a healthy family that makes good choices. The happiest wives are those that get gentlely pushed around from time to time.

So in short, stop being a push over and maybe your wife won't leave you for a man that does.

[c0pium]

If you consider why it’s only good advice for lesbians you’ll be on the path of understanding.

[cjbgkagh]

Once people are in the position to gain from not being happy they will never be happy, "appetite comes with eating".

[andruby]

I don’t understand. What is this trying to say?

Sorry if this is a common expression.

[useless_foghorn]

“If you are profiting from being unhappy you will find ways and reasons to be unhappy.”

I believe the idea expressed in ‘appetite comes with eating’ is that your desire to indulge in an activity is correlated (caused even) with that activity. IE skydivers will likely have a larger appetite or desire for skydiving than a layman.

In a larger context I believe cjbgkagh is arguing that women can retain an advantageous position in a marriage by pretending or presenting unhappiness because exiting a marital contract would be an especially poor outcome her partner.

[cjbgkagh]

It's more of a general phenomena that I believe commonly applies to this specific case. Often there is an assumption that a demand can be satiated once met, but quite often instead the demands simply increase.

[AussieWog93]

>It sounds like men should either not get married, or if they do, then endeavor quite seriously to keep their wives happy.

I'm happily married, and in the sense of being counter-cultural would be in completely the other end of the spectrum (very conservative about family, intend on having 6-8 kids that I will cherish even when they're adults).

That said, I think you've hit the nail on the head about "happy wife, happy life".

It's important to basically dedicate your life to being in service to her, but on the flip side it's important for her to do the same.

This level of dedication is almost counter-cultural in a sense, because you're not putting yourself first, but it's absolutely worth it in the long run.

On a visceral level, you feel always loved, always important, always worthy.

[silverquiet]

That's great, but you should realize that not everyone is wired the same way, and that's fine - you'll have a hard time catching me criticizing anyone's choices here. All I can really offer is my own feelings and observations as someone who's been around the block a bit these days.

> intend on having 6-8 kids that I will cherish even when they're adults

There's a wonderful Mike Tyson quote that everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face. I assure you that it's quite a rare individual who gets married and has kids with the intent of despising their spouse and estranging themselves from their children. Sometimes it works out, and other times it doesn't.

[svnt]

You are apparently speaking from a Christian perspective. What do you do when after childbirth your spouse exits that reciprocal context and begins consuming you as a resource, but not before experimenting with narratives that maximize sympathy for her, which, as you can probably guess, make you the Disney villain.

[cobertos]

> then endeavor quite seriously to keep their wives happy

Why not just find someone who is already content living their life single but enjoys the added social aspects of a relationship? That plus someone where those social aspects happen naturally without a lot of using the finite motivational energy.

Then there's no expectation or perceived responsibility to have a sort of dependency relationship, and the happy social reinforcing moments happen naturally.

[s1artibartfast]

>Why not just find someone who is already content living their life single but enjoys the added social aspects of a relationship?

The two ideas aren't mutually exclusive. Even happy and independent people have ups and downs, and can benefit from someone enthusiastically helping them promote their happiness.

It is a win win win for everyone involved.

The recipient of support is even happier, the supporter gets to enjoy the process of making the other happy, and then the supporter get the company of a very happy person.

Ideally this is bidirectional with each partner playing both roles.

It doesn't use finite motivational energy. It creates net positive energy.

[mgaunard]

Usually the idea of marriage comes from a romantic idea of building something together with a partner.

If you ignore the romance, and only consider the practicalities, there is no good reason to get married. It doesn't offer significant rights or benefits and mostly puts you at risk and restricts your option.

Me, I've been married, and I know I'll likely do it again. Not for personal gain, but because I'm a fool who believes in love.

[anonym29]

"Happy Wife, Happy Life"

[slowhadoken]

This always sounded abusive to me. Like the wife was holding the husband emotionally hostage.

[michaelt]

Allow me to let you in on a little secret.

When you don't want to do something, but you also don't want to be blamed for not doing it, you can transfer the blame to someone who isn't there.

Boss wants to go out drinking after work which is his idea of 'team building' but you don't feel like it right now? "Well gee boss I'd love to come, but my wife's expecting me home by 7pm. Happy wife happy life, right?"

About 75% of the time when you hear people in the workplace saying "happy wife happy life" what they actually mean is "thanks for the offer but no thanks, and don't bother trying to cajole or peer-pressure me"

(Veterans at transferring blame will go even further, transferring blame to abstract concepts like 'market conditions' and 'company policy' )

[slowhadoken]

Yeah that’s just as worse. You’re socializing around your wife being abusive. Makes the boss seem like a loser too.

[michaelt]

> You’re socializing around your wife being abusive.

Not at all, for all they know you're living some 1950s lifestyle where your wife has dinner on the table just as you get home, and it'll be cold if you're late. Or if they prefer, they can imagine you're a progressive modern father, going home to change diapers and help with bedtime. Or they can imagine you're deeply in love, and eager not to disappoint your best friend in the whole world.

There really is nothing abusive about a man saying he likes his wife to be happy. Making an effort to make the other person happy and them making an effort to make you happy is the whole point of a relationship, isn't it?

[slowhadoken]

I’m good at cheering people up and making them laugh. You can’t make people happy ESPECIALLY women. You’re just setting yourself up for failure. All you can do is support people and enable good decisions so that they can learn how to have a fulfilling life.

[rapind]

I don't think it needs to be "wife" other than to rhyme. Having a happy partner instead of an unhappy partner (regardless of gender) is certainly better (speaking from experience).

This matters in business too.

[slowhadoken]

I mean you just compared a wife to a business partner so that’s not a great sign.

[chongli]

Marriage has for most of its history been an arrangement for securing alliances and ensuring transfer of generational wealth. Since the sexual revolution [1] the pendulum has swung completely back the other way and attitudes toward marriage have focused almost exclusively on romance. The problem since then is that hormonally-driven romantic attachment is fleeting and unreliable, so security of relationships has dropped dramatically.

If people want to have a long-lasting and successful marriage they need to be clear-eyed and pragmatic about it. The fact that Hollywood makes a fortune selling romantic stories has not helped!

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_revolution

[slowhadoken]

And now forced marriage is included in the category of modern day slavery. Marriage is work but it’s not a hostage negotiation situation. I see a lot of guys crushed by marriage, this idea that it pure benefits men is nonsense.

[bigbillheck]

Surely this is not the first time you've heard 'partner' to refer to someone in the other half of a committed relationship.

[cobertos]

Honestly, the relationships are similar. They both require a lot of trust and companionship to be successful, you spend a lot of time with both people but in very different ways

Finding good business partners is like dating

[slowhadoken]

It’s kinda like a boss saying “we’re a family”

[rapind]

That's a pretty creative translation of what I actually said.

[cobertos]

Same... Or that the husband is objectifying the wife as a thing that just needs to be kept happy, regardless of what the husband actually truly thinks. Inauthentic.

[slowhadoken]

It always reminds me of that creepy old Lana Turner quote “A successful man is one who makes more money than his wife can spend. A successful woman is one who can find such a man.”

[teaearlgraycold]

It goes both ways, there just isn’t a cute rhyme for husband.

[slowhadoken]

As a man I have to say it creeps me out.

[svnt]

You’re not wrong. It does not by default go both ways.

[andruby]

I don’t think it’s suppose to sound like that. At least for me and the situations I have heard it, it’s a genuine expression that if you make your partner happy, it’ll also make your life (together) happy.

It works very well for me. We both appreciate each other and actively make an effort to make one another happy.

[slowhadoken]

Yeah it’s kind of the wife’s job to make herself happy. I mean it’s probably not in traditional wedding vows for a reason.