SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

I think in our remarriage, my H and I “settled” for each other.

We each had a failed relationship between our divorce and getting back together. Our circle of friends made it out to be this “true love trumps all” story where we found our way back to each other, but in reality it was a case of settling for “the devil you know...”

I must be missing something.

6-9 partners: 26%

10+ partners: 33%

How is going from 26% to 33% significant? 0 to 1 is a much more significant increase -

0 partners: 5%

1 partner: 21%

The way people are talking about this you would think from 9 to 10+ it goes from 26% to 75%. A 7% increase is hardly that significant, IMO. Also, at one point does it hit 33%? Is that at 20+? 30+? 10+ is pretty broad.

It's certainly not enough of an increase to continue and try and push a point over and over and over and over again.

Again, I feel like I'm missing something.

On settling, I guess in a way you could say I settled. My dream guy is Bruce Willis. Since he's not an option, yeah, I have my current husband. If Bruce Willis suddenly decides he's in love with me though, I may reconsider my current arrangement.

It's funny all this talk about counts. Both my current WH and my exH had lower counts than me, and they both cheated.

The way people are talking about this you would think from 9 to 10+ it goes from 26% to 75%. A 7% increase is hardly that significant, IMO. Also, at one point does it hit 33%? Is that at 20+? 30+? 10+ is pretty broad.

It's certainly not enough of an increase to continue and try and push a point over and over and over and over again.

Again, I feel like I'm missing something.

Yeah, I feel the same way about this study. What was the sample size? And we kinda need to know what the divorces were about too. Was there abuse? Addiction? Infidelity? Who was the abuser, addict, or cheater? A lot goes into why a divorce happens and it isn't usually "he chews with his mouth open and I'm good at finding new sex partners". I mean...

And we kinda need to know what the divorces were about too. Was there abuse? Addiction? Infidelity?

Good point. I seriously doubt the divorces were 100% because of an inability to pair bond.

he chews with his mouth open

This is pretty gross though.

We all settled for someone. Of the almost 3 billion people of age that you could likely engage in a romantic relationship with, you will only know a very, very small percentage, like 0.0000001%, of those people on an interpersonal level in your life time. So, mathematically speaking, there is a 99.999999% chance you are dating/married to somebody who is less than your ideal match.

Since we are using the phrase settled for, "settled for" as a pejorative, it comes down to the valuation of the party the phrase is being used by. A man with self-esteem issues or other insecurities may charge his wife with settling when she may, in fact, actually believe she struck gold.

Also, marriage and monogamy are cultural constructs that have only been important in the last ~10,000 years when our species began living comfortably enough to farm, and thus, settle in one location with other families for a longer period of time. For the proceeding ~490,000 years of our species, polygamy is what kept us from going the way of the dinosaurs; it was necessary for the survival of the species. Mating would be akin to what we would likely consider today, transactional, at best, or at worst, rape. There was nothing romantic about it. Life was hard. You were lucky to see your 30th birthday.

These may not have been marriages in the way that we think of marriages today, but couples in this period would probably have stayed together for about three or four years before one, or the other, would wander off to start another family.

Yep....

Unfortunately the "settling" usually only happens in one direction. Meaning, it's never the female saying "Well I tried and tried and tried to find the right guy that was totally responsible, great with kids and can do calculus in his head. Eventually I learned my lesson and went for the beefcake."

Um, that's exactly what my stbxw did.(I can't do calculus but I can play a mean guitar solo)

But he's not a beefcake, I could pick him up and throw him in the trash and he's ugly as sin. But to her he's a magical unicorn.

He doesn't have a driver's license or a car, has been arrested for hunting w/o a license 3 times, likes to do cocaine, and left his two young children in South Carolina, but he's her unicorn. And he can have her.

People who are severely damaged can only be truly understood by other people who are damaged

Around non broken people they have to act and it gets exhausting for them .

I dont mean this as a shallow platitude but when people say “ you were too good for her “ its often true , the other part of it is “ she didnt like that about you “

Siracha, I literally had a guy tell me I had my shit together too much and it made him intimidated. He told me that he was used to dating "less fit" women who were financially dependent on him and the fact that I didn't NEED him made him feel bad about himself . . , I mean, all that could have been a cover for I have horrible breath or he thought I was ugly, but we met previously at a party and he stayed in my hotel room overnight, he liked me well enough after that to drive a few hours to visit me, but then got spooked apparently because I lived in a nice house and wasn't a train wreck. Who knows. Too much baggage. I was really sad about it at the time, felt horribly rejected but looking back, thank God.

[This message edited by JanaGreen at 9:07 AM, August 19th (Wednesday)]

From a marital standpoint, the primary problem we face today, as I've said many times, is that we've no compelling, and external, reason to remain with our spouse. That's fine and good when things are on the up and up, but what about when your spouse loses their job? Or gains weight? Or stops having sex? Or becomes irritable? Or doesn't focus on your needs to the degree that you desire? When marital unhappiness is encountered in the modern day, without the limitations of religious doctrine or legal repercussions or overbearing familial expectations, people remain in relationships based on whatever internal code they can muster and stick to.

I'm not sure that's bad for human beings.

I believe, all other things being equal, D is better than living in a bad relationship. I read some posts on SI and believe I would not stay in the relationship described by posters. That's one of the reasons I often ask members what they're getting from their relationships - I want to hear that they're getting something good.

*****

I think hikingout brought up a critical point - she didn't settle for her H; she settled for poor treatment from herself for herself. (Boy, I hope I got that right.) I'd bet a lot that she's right. I'd also bet a lot that what she says is true for many people.

Siracha, I literally had a guy tell me I had my shit together too much and it made him intimidated.

I know quite a few guys who find "successful" between moderately and highly unattractive in a partner. I think they are crazy, but, hey, to each his own. The one thing I can kind of see, if you're a really successful man and looking for a partner, you know what it took for you to get there in life, and I could kind of understand not wanting to marry or seriously date someone who was on the same "track". Put another way, I'm not sure I'd marry "myself"; it's way too much travel, too much time at the office, too much pressure that bleeds over into my home life; if both people are doing it/working jobs like that, well, there's not "much left" for one another. I was traveling, at one time, 100+ nights a year, if you assume I dated someone who did the same, well.. Maybe we'd overlap a few weekends now and then?

A lot of this is "ying and yang" stuff. If was not successful financially, I think a "high flier" woman would be very attractive to me, because she'd bring something to the relationship that I don't have. But that's not my situation, I have plenty from my job, so, to me, someone working a similar kind of job to me is unattractive; it means we're going to have lots of money and no time together, money that's not really going to change my or her life, but the lack of time together will. This is why wealthy men, in particular, generally look for other characteristics in their partners (other than wealth). More doesn't help, but what it takes to get "more" is a severe impediment to having time together.

Lol Jana , thems the perils of being an over achiever :)

I believe, all other things being equal, D is better than living in a bad relationship. I read some posts on SI and believe I would not stay in the relationship described by posters. That's one of the reasons I often ask members what they're getting from their relationships - I want to hear that they're getting something good.

Agree 100%. I think it's a myth that divorce is too easy and people do it frivoulously. You aren't meant to work through every problem. There are some incredibly good reasons to divorce and even then, it's not simple and easy. It's painful, messy, expensive, and awkward as hell. There's plenty of pressure to stay together even in bad marriages. There's a cultural nobility to staying and trying to make the best of a bad marriage. Divorce is seen as giving up and taking the easy way out. Sometimes it even is the easy way out compared to what staying would entail. I've never known anyone to divorce without having what I would consider a damned good reason. It wasn't "he/she gained weight" or "I'm bored". It's infidelity, addiction, abuse, complete personal incompatibility, religious differences, criminal behavior, financial irresponsibility. It's not "didn't cook good food" or "never buys me flowers" or "didn't like his/her mom". There are pretty predictable conflicts that lead to divorce and they aren't trivial.

Lol Jana , thems the perils of being an over achiever :)

The thing of it is though, I'm really not. I would call myself an achiever but definitely not OVER. The house was nice, yeah, but it was the marital home and I was selling it. My house now is much smaller. I had just cleaned so it looked nice and tidy, but on a normal day, laundry and toys everywhere. I have a decent job that pays the bills but it's nothing special.

I really don't mean to talk crap about him because he's a decent guy and we are still friends, but he is really pretty lazy, yet NEEDS to feel superior to his SO. He would never be able to feel superior to me. Apparently this is a somewhat common guy thing. The "my lady can't earn more" thing.

Jana

One way or another you dodged a waste of time

There are men who feel emasculated if they cant trade money ( their jobs) for marriage . Usually these guys know they dont have anything else to offer

To be fair there are other reasons at play from time to time - some men and some women are fixers and they need projects ; that group usually ends up self sabotaging and somehow always picks narcs to “ fix “.

Its always the tiny angel fish that just has to “help” the poor hungry tiger shark by jumping voluntarily into its jaws :)

[This message edited by siracha at 11:25 AM, August 19th (Wednesday)]

KingRat

We all settled for someone. Of the almost 3 billion people of age that you could likely engage in a romantic relationship with, you will only know a very, very small percentage, like 0.0000001%, of those people on an interpersonal level in your life time. So, mathematically speaking, there is a 99.999999% chance you are dating/married to somebody who is less than your ideal match.

I was going to post something like this. It probably gets worse, in that there will be a line of people at the front door to your ideal match.

It's VERY OFTEN that it's the WOMAN as in the BETRAYED woman who feels settled for.

Yet again I have to defend BWs pain being minimized by BH.

Women are capable of feeling inadequate too you know. If you haven't seen threads about this you clearly aren't reading them or taking them seriously. There's no difference in pain from a woman. You know betrayed women who feel like damaged goods when their husbands cheat andor replace them with girls 20 years younger.

After giving their youth to their husbands and carrying his children which ruins thr body he compares with a 20 year old.

Yeah. Women. BETRAYED women get that. BH wouldn't understand that though and evidently don't appreciate what it would feel like. Somehow apparently, it's easier to feel settled for when you're NOT the gender who pursues and gets and society approves of it, girls young enough to be your daughters. As if

It's VERY OFTEN that it's the WOMAN as in the BETRAYED woman who feels settled for.

Yet again I have to defend BWs pain being minimized by BH.

Women are capable of feeling inadequate too you know. If you haven't seen threads about this you clearly aren't reading them or taking them seriously. There's no difference in pain from a woman. You know betrayed women who feel like damaged goods when their husbands cheat andor replace them with girls 20 years younger.

After giving their youth to their husbands and carrying his children which ruins thr body he compares with a 20 year old.

Yeah. Women. BETRAYED women get that. BH wouldn't understand that though and evidently don't appreciate what it would feel like. Somehow apparently, it's easier to feel settled for when you're NOT the gender who pursues and gets and society approves of it, girls young enough to be your daughters. As if

Onebiglie -

I get that bc it's very common to feel less than after getting cheated on. However, we are talking more about directly after marriage. Were you the one he wanted THEN? Or did he settle bc others didn't want him?

I'm not so sure it's possible for me to feel anything except that my wife settled for me...until she opened her eyes a bit and saw a pretty-okay looking guy that has aged well, makes his family his priority over himself, has built a successful business which has provided well for us, has a stellar libido that may never slow down , can come up with beautiful words to whisper into an ear or encourage a friend to put up the needed and challenging fight for his life, loves to laugh and make laughing possible, can carry a conversation with a millionaire or a dolliar'naire, etc.

I don't mean to sound pretentious or anything but I've accepted that regardless of what she thinks, I am a pretty-alright catch. But it's kind of nice perceiving that she knows she won't easily replace me now.

If you feel settled on, accept that feeling and use it as fuel for your own internal engine. Don't let it define you but there's no reason you can't utilize it as motivation to improve yourself. Too, just "consider the source" of any unflattering feelings.