Uncategorized

We Are Going To The Stable

Wednesday, June 12, 2019Wednesday, June 12, 2019 admin

I never would have thought a honeymoon would have much to do with getting divorced or not… hmm…. Think back to the financial situation statistics. Most couples that are able to go on a honeymoon, do. Things that may hold you back: Derek — A honeymoon indicates a couple is excited, romantic, successful, good at planning, perhaps idealistic. The other major problem is that this study surveys users on Mechanical Turk, not a representative sample or even an RDD sample. We could look at the religion one and say that religion makes a stronger marriage OR that people that are religious believe that God would frown on a divorce.

Because of the age limitations in that study, the probabilities for longer-term first-marriage survival are necessarily based on people who got married at younger ages which is correlated to a greater probability of divorce in and of itself. All that is interesting, but if it were boiled down to the one thing that will forecast marriage stability it is this. The male must be mature…emotionally and mentally. It does not seem to matter whether the female is mature or not. Sorry, but I called someone out earlier for making sexist generalizations, and I have to throw the flag here, too.

We can do it! If you have people attend your wedding, you will be spending a great deal of money on the ceremony, bridezilla or not. This appears to me to be bunk. Who did researchers interview. I knew my husband 6 months…. Each of these categories are superficial…. I have a big question concerning church attendance — Are these results only with couples that are already religious to begin with?

What about the statistics of non-religious couples? This seems like a big issue with this particular statistic. I guess this is more anecdotal, but I have a friend who is sticks it out in a marriage that he finds completely unfuffling lack of any sexual intimacy from his wife. His wife is prudish and controlling, but he has low self-esteem. Neither are staisfied, but both stay as they are codependent. Maybe it is just me, but this kind of situation is quite common.

I think this is more common than not. Most statistic show marital fulfillment sharply declining over a relatively short period of time. There are a few books on the topic, The Mirages of Marriage, being one. Unfortunately for most, stable is undesirable in and of itself. They only looked at mixed-sex marriages. I was confused by this at first, too. I believe the reason is because some people marry and remarry multiple times. So the data is showing that many women had several very expensive weddings between The data was collected from individuals, not from couples.

There may be systematic differences in how men and women mentally count the expenses, and how they recall them. As well as differences in how likely people from each combination of gender and spending were likely to participate in the survey in the first place. One thing that makes no sense in this survey is the less you spend on the wedding the more successful the marriage. This directly contradicts the more people who attend the more successful the marriage in terms of stability. These two factors are mutually exclusive and puts the whole survey in question.

Note that in the bivariate analysis, the correlation with spending level was the reverse, probably because of the correlation between spending and attendance number. Doug, this is what I thought too. But I think what Randy did is analyzing a correlation within the same levels of the other correlations. I did not find this very interesting or useful; in fact, I think there is a lot of dangerously misleading information, here. Not likely — the true explanation is probably something more like this: From the way you are writing this, one might think that an engaged couple should go on Omegle and invite the first people they meet, so that they may decrease their chances of getting divorced.

People who have honeymoons are less likely to get divorced? That may be true. And again might that be linked back to educational attainment..? Maybe educated people make more money, and can afford a honeymoon, and the common link to all of this is a good education? Randy said specifically that this was a correlative study, so of course none of these factors are intended to be explanatory causes. The point is that you get to know someone really well. I would propose that dating in the normal sense of the word is not likely to give you the clearest impression of a person.

Second, when dating, there is usually a strong physical attraction that can lead to other activities that might make talking to one another take the back seat. It is hard to talk to each other when you are keeping your mouth busy with other activities. Third, how honest are most people when they begin dating? This is why the longer couples dated the longer they stayed together because the real person had a chance to come out.

Talk to each other, do community service with each other generally do something that will bring out the real person.

El Trastorno Esquizoide (Spanish Edition);
Murder by Deadline?
What Are Stablecoins?.
Werke von Wilhelm Eichhorn (German Edition).
Saturn & Sphinx.
Recent posts.
What makes for a stable marriage??

The length of dating is not as important as how well you really get to know a persons true character. The financial aspects of this make a lot of sense to me. If you have a lot of friends who come to your wedding both of you probably have a good support system. Also a lot of those attending would be from church. Spending less indicates better financial management and priorities which eventually will increase your income.

Many marriages that dissolve have financial problems. For example, it may be due to increased pressure, or increased confidence in the marriage leading to more people invited. My husband and I dated for 8 months before we got engaged and got married 6 months after that. We were 31 and 32 respectively when we met. When you are older than most who get married you have a clearer definition of what you want and need out of a partner. When you know, you know….

Come to the Stable () - IMDb

Yep, going by this my marriage should never have survived. We got married one week after meeting in person having known each other on the Internet for a few years and figured out we were in love six months earlier. Our wedding cost virtually nothing except license fees and rings, and consisted of myself, my spouse, and two of my friends, one of whom married us. Plenty of people listed possible ways to have a large wedding without spending too much money elsewhere in the comments here.

Just wanted to point out that most of the suggestions for having a large, cheap wedding rely on a a large, nearby, and willing pool of helpers in the form of friends and family, b a religious generally Christian community that provides many of the larger expenses for free, or c lots of time and devotion to planning. Of course, lacking the resources of either a religious or a secular community might play a substantial role in probability of divorce.

Thank you for saying this. A large, cheap wedding is not possible for everyone. In particular, if you are neither a member of a church with a large social hall nor the owner of a large home, there is no way around paying a fair bit just to rent a suitable space. I think it is also worth pointing out that a potluck wedding reception would not be considered socially acceptable in all social circles.

While I like the idea, I am confident most of our guests would have found it offensive. This article was fun. How should I save my marriage from divorce? I had a small weeding that cost too much money with a man I dated for less than a year and we never went on a honeymoon! I can, however, give you a few starting points: There is a lot out there if you have the motivation to dig for it such as: His work is good, not flawless, but good and it is continuously evolving.

Here is part of his message:. Marriage is hard but nearly any marriage can also be a long-lasting, rewarding, relationship with another person. Another major factor — conflict resolution. There will be conflict — guaranteed. Your behavior towards your partner or any relationship is very important. When behaviors change — so does a relationship — for better or for worse. He has a list of successful, simple, behavior modifications available. Successful Marriage is about selflessness. Ooshy gooshy lasts only so long. A couple who are primarily focused on a huge, expensive wedding, or base their relationship on physical or materialistic characteristics, have little else left after the ooshy gooshy wears off.

The extent of the consequences involved in a divorce such as being taken to the cleaners by an angry spouse or the impact a divorce would have on your social status as in the case of many politicians and those who are deeply religious and for whom divorce is a sin , are more relevant to those whose cultures are pro-marriage in general.

Are these statistics based on all marriages, or just first marriages? I would think that second and third marriages have a lot better change of being lightly attended, and those that have divorced have a higher chance of having yet another divorce. The point of this post should be seen in its entirety and not in isolation.

Use all the data and then look at the outcomes. Many posts here identify with 3 more factors that are linked to their marriages long duration. I was skeptical as well until I reviewed the entire blog. It would be interesting to hear from those whose 3 or more associated factors are separated or divorced and what those common factors are. It is a learning experience for our all of us. I love being the exception. My husband and I dated for 2 months, got married by a JP with only us there, honeymooned in his truck he was an over the road driver and we have been going strong 18 years!

The 1 factor to whether a marriage will work or not is the commitment of the two people involved. If you are both determined to fix any problems together, then anything can be fixed! It would follow, then, that the more religious who are attending church much more often than the more secular among us have a lower divorce rate — but this has nothing whatsoever to do with how stable their marriage is.

I enjoyed reading the research paper Randal based his charts on.

Sign up, it's free!

Overall, I think the paper is interesting and will probably get published eventually. What I am concerned about is the way the results presented. Only 25,, and 50,, are different from the lowest category. However, regular church attendance seems to be a protective factor when the other option is never going.

He misinterpreted the reference categories. However, when you only look at women, they were 3. And Randal did a good job making the results look pretty and he linked us back to the original paper and encouraged us to look at it ourselves. Thank you for your thorough review of my article! Yet we still see an obvious trend of more money less divorce. Thanks for replying to my comment, Randy. I can definitely relate to the challenge of how best to present results to a general audience, especially when things start getting more technical, and you are actively doing so on top of everything else you do.

Good point regarding statistical significance—even though a p-value is important, we impose arbitrary cutoffs. Regardless, we can still see interesting trends that can be useful. Most of the trends highlighted seem plausible, though I wonder whether some of the categories may have been limited empirically by a smaller number of cases e. How can you avoid spending 20k when you have over wedding guests? This list is about as real as the Dr.

You invite them to the wedding, but you have a very simple reception without a lavish meal. Perhaps you even make it a potluck reception, asking everyone to bring a dish rather than a gift. Such things can be done. What about the number of previous diferent sexual partners? Is there a correlation with the divorce rate there? Marriage is a beautiful thing. To know that you are loved no matter how unlovable your behavior, warts and all, is one of the greatest gifts you can receive from or give to another human being.

I think my husband and I are an exception, though.

God is the foundation of our marriage, and He keeps us together. Do you have any data on the age disparity or closeness through the dataset? I wonder if the partern age is a correlation. Age of marriage and age difference. If you check the underlying research paper linked in the article , both of those are significant factors as well. It makes sense that the more money folks invest into a relationship-anything really- and the more people they ask to support their marriage, the more likely they are to stay.

Multiple studies showed that the longer you date, the higher expectations that you know the person and will be surprise to find after marriage. Staying married and having a good marriage are not the same. Some of these statistics likely apply to both, but you can impute different reasons for some of these correlations. Couples who attend church regularly are religious, and may not believe in or be willing to accept the stigma of divorce.

People who have a ton of people at their wedding may be concerned about keeping up appearances and concerned about what that large community would think were they to get divorced. I have to disagree. Seems like something is wrong. That seems to be some kind of mistake. Oddly,my marriage fell into lowest category for nearly every measure and none were high for risk of divorce. The stats that are missing are disparity of income and child-rearing.

My ex-wife, who divorced me, made much less money than me by choice — the vocational evaluation said she could make just as much as me and was less involved with the children. Many divorces are little more than scams to get money. The tidbit about half of all marriages in the U. S ending in divorce IS a fact, and the number is growing. He did provide a source for it. Randal — your posts have been very interesting. This one raises a lot of questions to me. For one thing, I think it would be super useful to see error bars on the charts they are in the paper, but the tabular presentation in the paper makes the whole thing hard to decipher.

Do you have the original data? It would be super interesting to throw into a PivotChart in Excel and look at the cross-correlational behavior of different factors. I was trying to figure out where the error bars were in their tables. Is that the numbers in parentheses? I appreciate the work you put into this, but your data visualizations and their lack of a numerical Y-axis are a little puzzling to me. Perhaps you mean for the reference point to be the Y-axis? Regardless, it makes it really hard to compare the relative importance of, for example, a big wedding versus low cost of wedding.

Were there any other ways you tried crafting visualizations? This does seem like a pretty challenging data set, and you set up the narrative to flow very well. I dig your logic and writing! The original research article chose a reference point for each category. Yes, the data shows they are less likely to get a divorce, but we can only assume the reasons why. You could also claim: I was about to make a very similar comment.

Java: Stable, Secure and Free. Choose Two out of Three

Your last statement is true….. The study states observed facts….. And may be it the support in the places of worship that makes the couples less likely to part. Yes, and it good to know pple will not divorce because they beleive its sin, that why they are in that religion, the same way non beleivers may not see anything bad about divorce….. Monica is right though.

The actual observed facts from the study is that divorce is lower if religious attendance is higher. Unless you define stability as meaning not divorced. None of the metrics or indicators is taken to mean these people have a healthy, happy, fulfilling marriage, they are just linked to the likelihood that they have or have not a marriage. I wonder which definition a careful reader would adopt in determining whether the author has stayed on task or not. The term is loaded and nebulous. While his data may prove length of marriage the loaded term is then tied to it.

Look I can play this same silly game too: I use the data of physical measurement to tie to the word beauty. The data should explain an answer to a question. In the 50ss, most U. Young people did not expect their friends to shell out hundreds for tuxes and dresses and expensive wedding gifts. Materialistic,self-centered brides and grooms who see the wedding gala as somehow proving to their peers how beautiful or how important they are are not likely to be mature enough or grounded enough to deal with the realities of life.

Those who need to measure their worth by how much they spend on a wedding are likely pretty shallow people, and as such they probably are incapable of the cheerful compromise and occasional sacrifices needed for any union to succeed. Additionally, the idea of a three year engagement being more successful than a shorter engagement does not factor in whether the couple was sexually active during that three years. It assumes noone will marry as a virgin.

Many who have fought to maintain sexual purity will marry in less than a year and still have marriages that endure because they have a similar worldview and consider many of the same things essential. I appreciated you summary of this study. For example, going to church may not be what is important to marriage but instead its what couples gain and share from that experience, like spirituality as well as relationships with others who support the couple. For those interested in learning more about what the research has shown to really make a difference in promoting healthy and stable marriages, check out the following resource authored by Extension specialist from various Universities: This FREE publication highlights 8 core qualities of healthy relationships.

Each state has a land-grant university that offers outreach services focused on youth development 4-H , agriculture, and family life nutrition, finances, housing, relationships, etc. Agents are available in every state through county or regional offices to share resources developed by content experts. I am the State Extension Specialist at the University of Georgia focused on family life and relationship education. The one stat I wish it showed was co-habitation living together, shacking up, etc.. I think a number of other studies have shown that couples who move in together before getting engaged or married are more likely to get divorced than those that do not.

Hence the trial run. Actually, this study found the opposite: One of the possible causes is change. Yes, when you live with someone, you do sort out some of the people who you could never live with, but as most people who are married knows, things change over time. Living with someone for years, does not mean after , either are not going to change.. And here is where the problem lies, when you are already living with them, and then they change, there is the problem..

Correlation does not equal causation as the article itself acknowledges at the end. The problem with all these graphs is that in each case, they compare the divorce rate based ONLY on that one specific factor, while ignoring every other factor. Wrong you have more time to get used to your partners behavior and habits at home before marriage. But the most recent ones like the Reinhold study mentioned above, and a one from the CDC, and a one in the Journal of Marriage and Family show that cohabitation neither increases nor decreases divorce risk. Doing a review of multiple recent studies on the topic, many still conclude that prior cohabiting is correlated with marital instability.

Further, another societal trend not accounted for in studies like Reinhold is the decrease in likelihood that a couple will get married at all. In years past, a cohabiting couple may in fact eventually get married, and arguably thinks less of the institution, positively correlated with non-religious couples etc. Today, less people are getting married at all.

So cohabiting couples, who are arguably more likely to view marriage as potentially temporary surely are among the first to forego the institution altogether, leaving prior cohabiting couples who do still marry to be among those who value marriage as a lifelong commitment, more similar to those who believe lifelong committed marriage is a religious requirement or value.

First Horseback Riding Lesson at a New Stable!

I appreciated your tweet and post after I read the study. I get the whole church thing, but people at your wedding? Perhaps this demonstrates that having a large wedding is a trait of conformity, and conformists are more apt to stick it out? Or perhaps it is due to the age of the sample? Larger weddings were more common 25 years ago? The results particularly apply to the US and I also think it demonstrates American cultures participation in the wedding industrial complex. I also know lots of outliers; no rings of any sort, bare minimal attendance, no frivolous things, nondenominational, and no honeymoon that are happy, stable and long lasting.

One last factor that was not in the study that might have provided more perspective about the results is if people lived together prior to marriage. Not sure how applicable that would be since the age of the sample seems to be high, middle age range. Hi Randal — really enjoyed this item, but most of all enjoyed the amount of commentary. To pursue the advice of the original assumption means convincing as many as possible to be excited about your wedding, and even more important, to attend.

Come to the Stable () - IMDb

Sign up, it's free!

Java: Stable, Secure and Free. Choose Two out of Three

Recent Posts