« Marriage appears to make you happy | Main | What if Weiner hadn’t lied? »

June 08, 2011

Comments

Married people tend to be more religious, and religious people tend to be more happy.

It's certainly possible that there is a missing variable, such as religiousity, general mental health, or physical attractiveness. All of these things affect one's chances of ending up married and also affect one's happiness.

Another possible missing variable is the fact that married people have more status in our society than unmarried people.

Still, I agree that this data disproves the idea that married men are generally speaking miserable.

If the question was "Are you happy and married? then there's a biases to say your happily married, who would actually admit to being unhappy and married?

There's a difference between recently married and married over time as well. I assume some people happy and married now might not be in the future.

Also, what's the difference between "very happy" and "pretty happy? These words are too vague. It's like saying someone is 95% happy and 67% happy. Which seems ridiculous.

Lastly, there's a stigma against being older and unmarried in America, unless your a monk, thus those who are unmarried have to deal with the prejudice that comes with that.

IMO, I think marriage makes those happy who are independent by temperament and see the self-sacrificing greater good. Those who "need" someone to fill the void in their lives will only make it bigger.

On a side note, happiness depends on values. Those happily married (both partners) likely have good jobs, compatible hobbies, and are higher class as a result. Those unhappily married probably met in a bar and have no compatibility other than physical attractiveness, which of course, is a fleeting trait. Those who never married either were confident in making such a decision or are simply too weak to reproduce. I assume the former are happy and latter not happy.

On another side note, there is a golden mean between a PUA lifestyle and stable lifestyle. When single, you want to be the best PUA possible. When in a stable relationship, you want to best partner possible. I don't see these two things as mutually exclusive.

Married people tend to have higher incomes. Also, if husband and wife were asked the question at the same time, of course they'll say their very happy, lest their spouse smacks them on the head.

Chris,

Excellent summary.

Half Sigma tends to fail at simple statistics tests, anyone who was really paying attention in intro stats ought to realize the bias's introduced by the poll he posted.

I don't get it. Other surveys have said that people's happiness is correlated with how much control they feel they have over their own lives, and how free can you feel with all the financial and legal obligations that marriage piles on you?

On the other hand, PUAs-in-training forget that some guys actually do win over and marry their "oneitis." Behind every PUA wannabe is a guy who has had a few "oneitis" crushes end in tears, and now he's too old and cynical to get that feeling again.

Reminds me of the Onion article "Area Man Achieves Your Dream."

"Hochenko joins a long list of people who have achieved your dreams, including...the people who married your longtime crush and potential soul mate in April 1998, June 2001, and last Saturday."

http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-achieves-your-dream,5493/

can you split this out by race?

So is it better to have loved and lost, or never to have loved at all? According to this data, it's close, but the people who never got married are a bit happier than the ones who were formerly married.

quote:
"The impetus for posting this is that there is an attitude on “game” blogs that marriage is for chumps, and there are anecdotal stories about some “AFC” they know who’s in an unhappy marriage. PUAs say they are too smart to be suckered into marriage."

Have you ever been on an investing / day trading forum? There's no shortage of "traders" who enjoy talking big about how smart they are because of their profitable "trades". One has to wonder how much of it is the actual truth. My guess is maybe 20% but that's being on the generous side.

PUA and these so called "traders" have the same psychological profile. They're just a bunch of guys who like to talk big. I wouldn't take game bloggers or the game movement too seriously.

Speaking of marriage HS, you should be more concerned with the MGTOW movement.
-- For every 100 men who go on the internet and claim to subscribe to MGTOW that's probably 90 men for real.
-- For every 100 men who go on the internet and claim to subscribe to game that's maybe only 20 men for real.

Posted by: Drole Prole
"Married people tend to have higher incomes."

That's what statistics often claim
but...
We need to Differentiate between:
1) single people who have divorced
2) single people who NEVER got married

If you're talking about option one, (considering a man can get financially raped in divorce court) yeah I agree married folks have a whole lot more money.
However I fall into option two, and IMHO I'm doing better than most of the people I have met in my life.

What drivel you posted Half Sigma. Even Roissy says that the same benefits of marriage can be had with an LTR.

Marriage IS for chumps, especially considering the threat of divorce rape. This is the only day and age where men can ignore children and family to enjoy their hobbies, rampage through a new slut every week, and just be themselves.

Absolutely. The key to happiness is get married and stay that way (because you want to.)

The key to financial success, is to never buy stocks right before a bear market.

It would be interesting to see the amount of infidelity the "happily" married couple do to stay content. Not to mention that the married couple's quality of happiness could be substantially lower and easier to appease than a single bachelor. A husband might be happy, if he gets a new golf club. While the bachelor might need a new yacht or sports car to say he is happy.

From personal experience, the married man is envious of bachelors of the same age and status. Unless the man has a Harlem of mistresses, his biological makeup will make him sexually miserable.

@Fiddlesticks
"Behind every PUA wannabe is a guy who has had a few 'oneitis' crushes end in tears, and now he's too old and cynical to get that feeling again."

Or maybe some men have just sampled enough girls to realize that no girl is that special, and thus no longer get "oneitis." No elderlyness or cynicism required.

I agree that fewer than 20% of those who read game blogs practice game. Fewer than 20% (maybe fewer than 2%) who buy pick-up materials or seminars actually practice any game.

But so what? As with anything, the knowledge is plentiful. The knowledge is out there. Whether it's Game, trading stocks, lifting weights, etc. But it's actually getting off your ass and doing something, and taking a risk (putting your ego on the line with pickup or money on the line with trading). And few people ever do that with anything.

Most people are content to observe, live vicariously, and keep on doing exactly what they've always done, and settle for the same miserable results. MRA sites do serve the useful purpose of drilling the truth of female hypergamy so deep into you that you don't start thinking of marriage next time you kiss a girl.

For all those who talk about a swinging bachelor with his own private harem, this describes maybe 5 percent of all the single men out there. Regular access to sex makes marriage a more appealing option for most men.

"Other surveys have said that people's happiness is correlated with how much control they feel they have over their own lives,"

In fact, Game can be used to keep either a marriage healthy by teaching the husband how to keep his wife satisfied with their marriage.

Game is simply a tool that can be used in many different ways, for either good or evil (I encourage everyone to use Game for both good and evil, just to keep things interesting and your acquaintances on their toes...)

"The impetus for posting this is that there is an attitude on “game” blogs that marriage is for chumps, and there are anecdotal stories about some “AFC” they know who’s in an unhappy marriage. PUAs say they are too smart to be suckered into marriage."

While many of the factual claims in the PUA-sphere often grossly exaggerate* exactly how brutal the dating world is for beta males, arguments over statistical flaws in Game concepts are beside the point. The purpose of Game is to help get good looking women, not be data warehouse for Excel spreadsheets.

I disagree with the PUA world on some details. For example, I strongly disagree with the Game bloggers about how it's rarely if ever worth a man's time to go after women over 30. There are beautiful looking women over 30.

If a good looking woman can keep her collagen together by cutting back on carbs, working out, and using a Resveratrol-Curcumin-Quercetin supplement combo to maintain her collagen's youthful bounce then there is no reason why she can't be sexually desireable a little bit past 40. But my disagreement with PUAs over factual details such as the sexual worth of women over 30 doesn't change the fact that the principles behind Game work in the real world and add real value to every practitioner's love life.

If you are looking for raw numbers about sex relations, then you turn to Charles Murray.

But if you want to learn how to win over women, then you Game is your answer as long as you keep your expectations to a realistic level.

* And really, since PUAs call themselves "Pickup-Artists" rather than "Statisticians" shouldn't they be allowed to get away with telling a few tall tales? It's not like they are presenting themselves to be something they're not.

"In fact, Game can be used to keep either a marriage healthy by teaching the husband how to keep his wife satisfied with their marriage."

Agreed with this. Many divorces happen because the husband frankly falls off his game and becomes uninteresting to his wife.

A lot of the aspects of game are useful. My disagreements with the PUA community have more to do with their view that every man should go out and bang every woman possible, which isn't really healthy and isn't for everyone. Some men will be far more satisfied with a fulfilling relationship, which game can help them achieve.

@ The Undiscovered Jew
"I disagree with the PUA world on some details. For example, I strongly disagree with the Game bloggers about how it's rarely if ever worth a man's time to go after women over 30. There are beautiful looking women over 30."

Women over 30 might be "worth a man's time" because they might be easier, thus presenting a higher return on effort. But 20 year-old girls beats 30 year-old girls every time*. When you have filet mignon vs. a McDonald's hamburger in front of you, the choice is obvious.

*In fact, I would wager that even 16 year-olds would beat 30 year-olds when it comes to sheer looks.

Posted by: Tom
"For all those who talk about a swinging bachelor with his own private harem, this describes maybe 5 percent of all the single men out there. Regular access to sex makes marriage a more appealing option for most men."

I'm a bachelor and yeah I admit it, my sex life is boring. However I have chosen the single lifestyle primarily for financial reasons.

Income minus (taxes, rent, groceries, and gasoline) equals "fun money"
There's a lot more "fun money" leftover for yourself if you are single as opposed to being married to a wife, having an average of 2.3 children, and paying off a big fat stupid home mortgage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ubsd-tWYmZw

According to statistics married people have more "wealth". But we all know that's being intellectually dishonest. The true test for wealth is not your income but how much "fun money" you have. Nothing beats maximizing your available fun money then being a bachelor.

yeah I know this is the part where women are going to say I need to grow up
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41MGUEOdtlL.jpg

Sorry ladies you can't psychologically bully me into submission by using shame words. The jig is up marriage is a scam. It's financially rigged against men.

Posted by: Commander Shepard
"Marriage IS for chumps, especially considering the threat of divorce rape."

Bingo!
As what my co-worker an older gentlemen once told me, "if you think you're equal to a woman you haven't been in divorce court yet." hmmm lets see here thanks to our kangaroo court legal system.
If I were to become married with children.
My wife can divorce me simply because she got bored of me, take my kids, kick me out of my house, find a new man, and I'd have to pay for all of it. The law would be on her side 99% of the time because I'm a man. Failure on my part to make financial payments would get me thrown into jail.

ooh but if she wants to be a real bitch it gets better!
She can falsely accuse me of domestic violence or rape and the burden of proof would lie on me to prove my innocence. I'd have to register as a sex offender.
Try to imagine the "inconvenience" of getting a job or apartment with that on your record. Assuming you survived the legal rape, now imagine the social problems you're going to have for the rest of your life. I'd have to try to explain myself to friends, family, relatives and who knows who else. The only people who would take my side are close friends. Everybody else in society will automatically pass judgment simply because I'm a man.

"Marriage IS for chumps"....I AGREE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvhIMT4iu5Q

Tom:
" Regular access to sex makes marriage a more appealing option for most men. "

Needless to say, you've never been married. Marriage kills sex... among other beautiful things.

Although I agree that being married makes you more appealing to other women. Women are more available to married men than to bachelors ... because you're suppose to be unavailable. Hence all the cheating. I'm sure Roissy has an answer for that.Probably along the lines: wearing a golden ring enhances your alpha status while at the same time reminding women they can't have the ring-bearer, which makes their ginas tingle.

" Regular access to sex makes marriage a more appealing option for most men. "

Roissy addresses this. In addition to sex decreasing after marriage there is a simple rule: marriage won't keep a girl that doesn't want to be with you. If she wants out she will either divorce or cheat heavily. Either way you ain't getting laid.

AFC's who think they can "lock up" a woman and then stop trying are mistaken.

I've been married before- twice/ lived with women for years- all that. I know that kind of happiness well. It's a feeling of inclusion- a 'feeling' of being needed & security- especially when there's children involved.

I put the word 'feeling' in quotes because that is all it is- a 'feeling' and an ILLUSION. Why there is still this idea that marriage brings about more security for men in 2011 is simply beyond me- all I can deduce is that all of these men are completely ignorant of family law, VAWA, the nature of women, and the current attitude women have about marriage. Men today are still living in the 1950's inside their heads. It's sad really.

The reality is you are NOT necessary to her- you are expendable and seen only as an accessory. She so much as gets bored with you, she can eject you any second as well as have you jailed over false accusations. This is because she has 100,000% god-like control over you through the state and you are ALWAYS walking under the hammer. I don't know any sane person who could live like that. This is the extreme opposite of security and happiness. How could you possibly 'happy' under these kinds of circumstances? Just 'hope for the best?' Why don't just jump out of a plane without a parachute and 'hope for the best?'

The guys I work with and meet all the time who are married don't look happy at all, but if you ask them if they're happily married you're met with an arrogant/cocky kind of response. It's no coincidence that these are the same kind of guys who are "that could never happen to me" smug prick types- i.e., you tell them about someone who had a car accident and ended up in a wheelchair & they're like "haHA, that could never happen to me." Good luck with all that.

The men who are 'happily' married now are simply the men who are not divorced... YET. For some odd reason our culture & society has lost all concept of the future- your wife WILL divorce you at some point or you'll have to divorce her because she's cheating or a monster. I contend that the divorce rate when looked at this way is more like 98%. Virtually ALL women today cheat- how do I know? Because they're hitting on guys like ME.

The kind of happiness that the old married me didn't know was the kind of happiness I have today.. and that is PEACE. I never had PEACE when I was married or co-habitating.


Do I have a feeling of emptiness? As if something is 'missing' from my life? Am I 'lonely' for someone/something? Lonely for what? That kind of nightmarish insecurity where everything can be ripped away from me by someone who has God-like legal power over me? Am I lonely for THAT? Uh, right.

Lonely for a cheating bitch monster who does nothing but constantly complain that is the modern day American female- 100% entitlement, 0% accountability, and 0% empathy, cheats and blows up to the size of an economy car?

A married life can be taken away from you at any second- YOU HAVE NO CONTROL OVER IT. I REPEAT: YOU HAVE NO CONTROL OVER IT- AT ALL.

When you're single, you have 100% control of where your life is going. Until the laws change and the culture/American women change, marriage today for men is extremely foolish and virtually suicidal.

This is interesting stuff. When I think of the people I know who are married, I dont' envy them. So it makes me wonder why they'd be happier.

I think it's this - The people I know who are married generally live more stable lives than the single people I know. They move less. They stick at jobs longer. They have more settle routines.

The single people have more freedom to follow their dreams. This sounds good, but it generally isn't. It makes them restless. They'll take a few years off to go to grad school and study something worthless. I know a couple of people who decided to build their own houses in the country. Both failed. They'll move to the other side of the country in hopes of some great new gig/life that *never* works out like they hope.

So, my guess is that it isn't living with someone per se that makes the difference, it's that *settling down* is usually a better way to go than the alternative.

The comments to this entry are closed.