What's love got to do with it?

[Hermes]

These days, we marry for love—and are rewarded with a blistering divorce rate.

 

link removed

[Crazyaboutdogs]

Yes, but in those days of marrying for money and titles, and social status (which a great many people still do today) marriages stayed together even if the couple were unhappy. Cheating was rampant, men had mistresses, women were told they had to put up with it or some women also had lovers on the side. Marriages may have stayed together but they weren't happy unions. These days people may marry for love...but often they remain together even when there is no love left between them, because they want to maintain their lifestyle and social standing.

[greywolf]

Yes, but in those days of marrying for money and titles, and social status (which a great many people still do today) marriages stayed together even if the couple were unhappy. Cheating was rampant, men had mistresses, women were told they had to put up with it or some women also had lovers on the side. Marriages may have stayed together but they weren't happy unions. These days people may marry for love...but often they remain together even when there is no love left between them, because they want to maintain their lifestyle and social standing.

 

I think the point is that many people talk about how awful our society is nowadays because people can't even stay married, but if you look at what marriage was in the past, you can't really compare it to today.

[Hermes]

•16th-century Europe: Love's a bore—Any man in love with his wife must be so dull that no one else could love him, writes the French essayist Montaigne.

 

LOL. That made me smile

 

Hermes

[Hermes]

"...but also encouraging couples to cohabit until they're sure about their "soul mate." Marriage rates fall—but the fantasy of the perfect wedding is ubiquitous.

 

Yeh. It is the "fantasy" part that is the worrying trend today.

 

Hermes

[Hermes]

More

 

"...couples whose marriages begin in romantic bliss are particularly divorce-prone because such intensity is too hard to maintain. Believe it or not, marriages that start out with less "Hollywood romance" usually have more promising futures. Accordingly, and this is the third major finding, spouses in lasting but lackluster marriages are not prone to divorce, as one might suspect; their marriages are less fulfilling to begin with, so there is no erosion of a Western-style romantic ideal. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, it is the loss of love and affection, not the emergence of interpersonal issues, that sends couples journeying toward divorce.

 

 

link removed

[Hermes]

This can't be too happy either, CAD.

 

they remain together even when there is no love left between them, because they want to maintain their lifestyle and social standing.

 

A marriage in order to have social standing and lifestyle is IMO a marriage of convenience.

 

H.