Would you consider your spouse getting fat a good reason for divorce?

[merithyn]

I said it before but I think you are putting things into her situation that she never said. That woman said that she is done trying to lose weight and is learning to live with her own fat body. Nothing in that suggests that it is step 1 of a process. After all, if that was the case that's probably something she could have talked over with her husband.  It seems odd, given that ample time has passed during their therapy seesions, that if that was her mindset - that she wouldn't have mentioned it in the article.

So, I hear what you're saying but I don't think it applies here.

Fair enough. I'll happily accept that I could be terribly wrong when it comes to this particular woman.

[garbon]

I find it sad how quickly and easily people are willing to walk away from a committed relationship. I think that, for me, this isn't a good enough reason to walk. Do I understand it for someone else? I suppose I could, though I think that it's a poor reason to do so.

That being said, there were any number of people who thought my reasons for leaving my exhusband were poor, too, and ultimately, it's none of my business. I just think it's sad that people would use weight as a reason to leave a committed relationship. It's so inconsequential compared to all of the other variables in play between two people.

Fair enough - though I think you are being a little unfair on a few points. I'm not sure that it would be a quick and easy decision to walk away as your spouse balloons and is unwilling to make changes. Clearly that wasn't the case for Jaba and he wasn't even married.

Also, as I've heard many say throughout the thread, the weight issue here is on some level a proxy for other problems - particularly the a spouse who has gained a bunch of wait and doesn't want to do anything about it. Or more specifically a person who has given up.  It isn't just the weight gain but also the mentality that there's nothing to do or nothing that needs to be done.

[derspiess]

Should someone with anorexia nervosa be made to feel ugly and unattractive? Should she be shunned and ostracized? Or should she say, "Look at me! I'm awesome! I'm tiny, and I'm beautiful!"

I don't think any of those things happen. I think what happens is people say "Oh gurl, let me get you an extra helping. You need to put some meat on those bones."

I don't think Ide could pull off a matronly black grandmother without being insulting.  Mmmm, greens.

I can.  I've practiced a lot

[derspiess]

How would reaching a state of delusion empower and enable her to make other changes?  I have yet to ever hear a self help program say 'the first step is delusion'.

Step 2: Eat lots of cheesecake

[Legbiter]

So that's what the hubbub was about, meri turned it all into being about her. 

[derspiess]

So that's what the hubbub was about, meri turned it all into being about her. 

She wouldn't be the first woman to do that

[garbon]

[Berkut]

Okay, but would you find it problematic if someone left their spouse (or boyfriend/girlfriend) because the spouse decided to see herself a beautiful person DESPITE her weight and that someone was unable to feel the same?

I find it sad how quickly and easily people are willing to walk away from a committed relationship. I think that, for me, this isn't a good enough reason to walk. Do I understand it for someone else? I suppose I could, though I think that it's a poor reason to do so.

That being said, there were any number of people who thought my reasons for leaving my exhusband were poor, too, and ultimately, it's none of my business. I just think it's sad that people would use weight as a reason to leave a committed relationship. It's so inconsequential compared to all of the other variables in play between two people.

While I generally agree with you, I do think that our society kind of over-states the importance of "commitment" in a manner that is not really conducive to good relationships, happiness, and even personal responsibilioty.

This entire weight thing is a good example. Should person A consider physical appearance so important that they would leave person B if their physical appearance changed enough, assuming a "committed" relationship?

Probably not.

On the other hand, I think there is this kind of "ideal" that people should be saints - that one should expect that their partner not just be human, but if they were really the wonderful people we demand, they would be willing to put up with our depression/weight/attitude/drinking whatever. Why, True Love is bigger than any of that! If you REALLY love me, it should not matter if I spend all our money, or don't take care of myself, or drink a little too much, or don't do the dishes now and again.

Personally, I think most people, and most relationships, would be better off if each person had the attitude that the other is not some wonder-saint whose incredible devotion to them will allow them to overlook our flaws. Again, using the weight thing as an example, even if your partner doesn't care, or would not leave you over it, I think it is in fact healthy to at least operate as if they might. You SHOULD be thinking "Hey, in addition to concerns about my personal health, etc., etc., *I* have a responsibility to my partner to do what I can to keep the physical part of our relationship strong, and there is nothing at all wrong with the attitude that I want my wife/husband to continue to find me physically desirable".

Lust is not a bad thing in a relationship.

But more to the point, and more in general, I think the idea that your relationship is so strong and swell that you don't have to continue to work hard at keeping it fresh, exciting, and interesting is very unfortunate. And not just because it may lead to the relationship falling apart (after all, maybe it really is that strong), but even if the relationship continues to survive, it won't be as good as it could be if both people, at least a little bit, approached it as if it was something that *would* fail if they don't take care to make sure it doesn't.

Frankly, I think the entire "till death do us part" concept in our society sucks. Not because it isn't a noble goal, but because the idea that if your marriage is really right it will last that long makes people stop working on it. There should be at least SOME element of the continuing awareness that you need to "sell" your partner on the continuing value of the relationship.

[Malthus]

But more to the point, and more in general, I think the idea that your relationship is so strong and swell that you don't have to continue to work hard at keeping it fresh, exciting, and interesting is very unfortunate. And not just because it may lead to the relationship falling apart (after all, maybe it really is that strong), but even if the relationship continues to survive, it won't be as good as it could be if both people, at least a little bit, approached it as if it was something that *would* fail if they don't take care to make sure it doesn't.

Frankly, I think the entire "till death do us part" concept in our society sucks. Not because it isn't a noble goal, but because the idea that if your marriage is really right it will last that long makes people stop working on it. There should be at least SOME element of the continuing awareness that you need to "sell" your partner on the continuing value of the relationship.

Well put.

Way I look at it, is that it's a fundamentally good idea to put concious effort into a relationship - and one way is to take care of one's appearances (leaving aside health matters for a sec).

I personally don't think that the motivator ought to be fear that the other person would leave if you don't, but rather the desire to make the other person happy. Though I suppose it amounts to much the same in the end.

Fear often isn't all that realistic as a motivator in some situations because leaving would be so very difficult (even if no ideal or stigma attached). If you have a house together, you have kids, and your social lives have been entwined for 20 years, it would take a pretty major amount of discontent for someone to uproot and leave, purely as a practical matter.

[derspiess]

Okay, gays do it, too.  You people just *have* to be included in everything, don't you???   

[fhdz]

But more to the point, and more in general, I think the idea that your relationship is so strong and swell that you don't have to continue to work hard at keeping it fresh, exciting, and interesting is very unfortunate. And not just because it may lead to the relationship falling apart (after all, maybe it really is that strong), but even if the relationship continues to survive, it won't be as good as it could be if both people, at least a little bit, approached it as if it was something that *would* fail if they don't take care to make sure it doesn't.

Frankly, I think the entire "till death do us part" concept in our society sucks. Not because it isn't a noble goal, but because the idea that if your marriage is really right it will last that long makes people stop working on it. There should be at least SOME element of the continuing awareness that you need to "sell" your partner on the continuing value of the relationship.

Well put.

Way I look at it, is that it's a fundamentally good idea to put concious effort into a relationship - and one way is to take care of one's appearances (leaving aside health matters for a sec).

I personally don't think that the motivator ought to be fear that the other person would leave if you don't, but rather the desire to make the other person happy. Though I suppose it amounts to much the same in the end.

Fear often isn't all that realistic as a motivator in some situations because leaving would be so very difficult (even if no ideal or stigma attached). If you have a house together, you have kids, and your social lives have been entwined for 20 years, it would take a pretty major amount of discontent for someone to uproot and leave, purely as a practical matter.

A lot of fear is a terrible, terrible thing. A little bit, though, is a fairly powerful motivator.

[Berkut]

But more to the point, and more in general, I think the idea that your relationship is so strong and swell that you don't have to continue to work hard at keeping it fresh, exciting, and interesting is very unfortunate. And not just because it may lead to the relationship falling apart (after all, maybe it really is that strong), but even if the relationship continues to survive, it won't be as good as it could be if both people, at least a little bit, approached it as if it was something that *would* fail if they don't take care to make sure it doesn't.

Frankly, I think the entire "till death do us part" concept in our society sucks. Not because it isn't a noble goal, but because the idea that if your marriage is really right it will last that long makes people stop working on it. There should be at least SOME element of the continuing awareness that you need to "sell" your partner on the continuing value of the relationship.

Well put.

Way I look at it, is that it's a fundamentally good idea to put concious effort into a relationship - and one way is to take care of one's appearances (leaving aside health matters for a sec).

I personally don't think that the motivator ought to be fear that the other person would leave if you don't, but rather the desire to make the other person happy. Though I suppose it amounts to much the same in the end.

Fear often isn't all that realistic as a motivator in some situations because leaving would be so very difficult (even if no ideal or stigma attached). If you have a house together, you have kids, and your social lives have been entwined for 20 years, it would take a pretty major amount of discontent for someone to uproot and leave, purely as a practical matter.

Yes, I don't think the motivator should be actual fear - it should almost be fake fear.

You should go around *thinking* like it is real, even if it is not. Some healthy self-deception, although not real per se.

And yes, the actual motivator is in fact the desire to make the other person happy. But a smidgen of "Hey, I want this person to WANT to stay with me for the same reasons they wanted to be with me when we started dating, NOT just because we are so entwined that separation just isn't realistic" is very, very healthy.

I guess it comes down to simply not taking your spouse for granted, and I mean that in a very practical manner, not in the cliche "Words that we all say, but don't actually result in any change whatsoever in our behavior" manner that so many people seem to take it in.

You really should act as if they may say "Fuck it, I am out of here" if you don't make sure they want to be with you, even if you really do know there isn't any practical chance of that happening.

[fhdz]

[Valmy]

Yeah you guys are laying it on sorta thick don't you think?

[merithyn]

While I generally agree with you, I do think that our society kind of over-states the importance of "commitment" in a manner that is not really conducive to good relationships, happiness, and even personal responsibilioty.

This entire weight thing is a good example. Should person A consider physical appearance so important that they would leave person B if their physical appearance changed enough, assuming a "committed" relationship?

Probably not.

On the other hand, I think there is this kind of "ideal" that people should be saints - that one should expect that their partner not just be human, but if they were really the wonderful people we demand, they would be willing to put up with our depression/weight/attitude/drinking whatever. Why, True Love is bigger than any of that! If you REALLY love me, it should not matter if I spend all our money, or don't take care of myself, or drink a little too much, or don't do the dishes now and again.

Personally, I think most people, and most relationships, would be better off if each person had the attitude that the other is not some wonder-saint whose incredible devotion to them will allow them to overlook our flaws. Again, using the weight thing as an example, even if your partner doesn't care, or would not leave you over it, I think it is in fact healthy to at least operate as if they might. You SHOULD be thinking "Hey, in addition to concerns about my personal health, etc., etc., *I* have a responsibility to my partner to do what I can to keep the physical part of our relationship strong, and there is nothing at all wrong with the attitude that I want my wife/husband to continue to find me physically desirable".

Lust is not a bad thing in a relationship.

But more to the point, and more in general, I think the idea that your relationship is so strong and swell that you don't have to continue to work hard at keeping it fresh, exciting, and interesting is very unfortunate. And not just because it may lead to the relationship falling apart (after all, maybe it really is that strong), but even if the relationship continues to survive, it won't be as good as it could be if both people, at least a little bit, approached it as if it was something that *would* fail if they don't take care to make sure it doesn't.

Frankly, I think the entire "till death do us part" concept in our society sucks. Not because it isn't a noble goal, but because the idea that if your marriage is really right it will last that long makes people stop working on it. There should be at least SOME element of the continuing awareness that you need to "sell" your partner on the continuing value of the relationship.

I agree with everything that you say. It is, to my mind, congruent with my earlier point, not contrary to it. BOTH parties should work hard to make the relationship work, and when one side gives up entirely (on the relationship, not on one aspect of themselves), then it's time to seriously decide if it's worth carrying the load on your own or getting out and finding someone who can be a true partner to you.

Well said, Berk.