← Back to context

Comment by Aeglaecia

2 days ago

there is a part of the marriage vows where a loving couple promise each other til death do us part ... it's selfish to the max to go back on a promise like that for a reason outside of your partners control ... after retyping this a dozen times to stamp the snark out , I am now genuinely curious as to what has reversed the victim role in your mind ...

13 comments

Aeglaecia

Reply
blahaj  2 days ago

People being allowed to part ways and not having to stick with their partner until death is one of the great achievements of feminism. It goes both ways.

You cannot control that you will love someone forever, so you cannot promise that. What you can promise someone is that you plan on spending the rest of your life with them and that you have so much love that you trust it will last forever. Sometimes that does not work out. That is no one's fault and no one owes to anyone to stay together with a person they no longer love.

  • ryandrake  2 days ago

    > You cannot control that you will love someone forever, so you cannot promise that.

    Yet, people routinely do in wedding vows. Maybe that tradition should end. Maybe the traditional wedding vows should be changed to "Hey, we'll give it a shot but no promises!"

    • notanastronaut  1 day ago

      I'm a big fan of annual contracts versus the whole wedding model. As your next anniversary approaches you review your contract and decide to re-up with the same terms, make changes, or dissolve the marriage.

  • HiPhish  2 days ago

    > People being allowed to part ways and not having to stick with their partner until death is one of the great achievements of feminism.

    And it has been one of the greatest mistakes humanity has ever made. If there is a good reason, sure, you cannot be expected to live with someone who has been cruel or irresponsible towards you. But no-fault divorce just because you got bored? Fuck off, you made a commitment at the time. Relationships do take work, always have and always will. Especially when there are children a no-fault divorce is pure selfishness.

    With that said, we only know one side of this story, so I'm not going to argue for either side in this particular case. I'm talking in general here.

    • blahaj  2 days ago

      That's just not how humans work. Love can fade. People change. It's the natural course of things. Sometimes there is just no one at fault for love being lost and no way to prevent that. We just gave up the illusion that love in marriage is always forever.

      1 reply →

    • Jcampuzano2  2 days ago

      The problem here is the usage of "no-fault". It can be interpreted differently by everyone.

      Does fault only include cheating? Can the fault be on the same one who initiated the divorce? What if the fault is simply someone has changed so much that they're no longer compatible with person they fell in love with before? The fault could be on oneself without any inkling of infidelity.

      Til death do us part has been ironically dead for decades now since people have been divorcing at high rates for long enough that it doesn't really mean much anymore, and that's okay. Things change.

      1 reply →