She writes that her remarried friends help her to remember that there is value in keeping a marriage fresh and keeping ourselves fresh by dressing to “look good.” She states that “Venerable relationships often falter on the question of compromise. Second marriages, not so much.” She states this as a fact (and here is where I am disappointed) as if lack of compromise is the reason for divorces. She even cites a friend who admits that her marriage “imploded over birdbrained tiffs.”
I do not recognize any of this and I am one of those who survived a divorce. I do not like the article, because fundamentally, one should not make claims (even if secondary) about such a world breaking experience like divorce, unless you have lived it. It is like a man describing childbirth – it’s not done. When this author takes the position that compromise is critical to successful marriage, I can’t argue, after all, she is still married, but when she makes the supposition that lack of compromise is a cause for divorce, she steps out of bounds. Who can discuss the soul-shattering experience of a spouse who dismisses you? Who can tell of the spirit-crushing experience of a spouse’s sexual betrayal? Who can enumerate the daily pains of living with addiction and alcoholism? Those who have climbed those mountains and crawled through those valleys of tears, they can speak of these things, no other.
No one ever starts out a marriage wanting a divorce, no one. And learning to compromise comes with age, which is why second marriages often successfully compromise – the couple has learned through experience that life is better with agreement. Anyone over the age of 40 will tell you that compromise wins in the long run. You don’t have to be divorced to understand this.
I’m not sure why I was annoyed with this author’s treatment of divorce and second marriages. I just know that life is a lesson that cannot be explained by an onlooker. You have to experience the depth to understand the breadth.