I once had an elderly, widower tell me that his marriage was one of convenience. And he appended that by saying that “it was very convenient”, with tears in his eyes.
I do think he “settled” for her. I think he did well.
Its not a bad thing at all.
This. Several, months back I wrote about a post about a woman I was planning to dump because of vague feelings of hostility. This is what it was, the woman obviously settling for me when it was clear she really wanted someone “not me”. This doesn’t say bad things about either of us, well except the settling part.
I think the notion of an “optimal” marriage partner is troublesome. It verges on suggesting that somewhere out there is your one true soulmate with whom you will be perfectly matched. I don’t think that’s true, and I think that people who get caught up in looking for a soulmate can let a lot of happiness slip past them.
Interestingly enough, my wife had pretty firm height standards before she met me; she’s extremely tall (6’2"), and had always wanted men taller than her so she didn’t feel huge or freakish.
I’m actually about an inch shorter than her, but apparently my build and personality give the impression of someone much more imposing, and she went for me.
I wouldn’t say she settled; she realized that maybe her rule of “taller than me” didn’t need to be as hard and fast as she’d thought.
One thing that hasn’t been mentioned is that ‘settling’ can just mean that your abstract idea of the ideal marriage partner dissolves when it hits real life.
I know a woman who had very specific ideas about what her husband would be like: tall, talkative, in the arts, there were a couple of others I can’t remember. Then she met a medium-height, quiet guy who works in IT, and she fell head over heels in love with him. She didn’t ‘settle’ emotionally, at all - her relationship has all the emotional intensity she was hoping for - but her specific criteria for what would constitute ‘ideal’ versus ‘settling’ totally went out of the window when they were faced with the reality of this guy.
I think that’s relatively common - to varying extents - and healthy.
What’s the difference betwee settling and compromising? People may deny settling because they don’t experience it as settling, not because they’re trying to avoid the stigma. My requirements are must live in or be willing to move to New York, no smokers, must wear glasses, no antisemites, and a few other things that are difficult to articulate. I got all that, but I also have non-mandatory preferences.
The statistics argument is a weird one, because tastes vary. There’s no mathematical reason we can’t each marry somebody in the 99th percentile of characteristics we like.
I find neuroticism attractive, and acne and chubbiness, and being atheist, and having close set eyes. Loads of people would look at each one of those as problems, but I wouldn’t be settling if I found somebody with all those characteristics. If I got hooked up with Taylor Swift, now, that would be settling.
I don’t think I “settled” in any sense of the term. I do think, however, two vaguely paradoxical things, both of which are true:
[ol][li]If The Lovely and Talented Mrs. Shodan had married someone else before she met me, there are a reasonable number of other women with whom I could have been just as happy, and[/li][li]I would not have been happier with any of them.[/ol]It is sort of like the woman who said she wasn’t looking to marry a rich guy - she was just hanging around with rich guys until she fell in love with one of them. [/li]
I didn’t “settle” unless you consider “making as realistic an assessment as one can manage if this other person is someone with whom I can spend the rest of my life” as “settling”. But it seems incredible to me that one would marry without doing that first. “Marry in haste, repent at leisure” is at least as true as “every pot’s got a lid”.
Regards,
Shodan
That’s not settling at all, to me.
I’m in the process of house shopping. Every day, my agent sends me and my fiance a list of houses meeting the 3 or 4 criteria that we gave her. I estimate that only one of every 10 house makes us truly excited; the rest strike us as either awful or just okay.
“Just okay” is the kind of house that 1) has all the necessary basics, 2) no features that are so egregiously ugly or faulty that they couldn’t be improved upon with a little handiwork and money, and 3) is cheaply priced. A “just okay” house would be the kind of place I would be fine moving into if we were in a rush to move, we had few alternatives, and this home was expected to just be a temporary residence.
But because none of these things are true for us, we will not be settling for a “just okay” house. We will be holding out for a house that excites us, has more than the basics, and will not require extensive repairs and upgrades just to nudge it past tolerable. We want a house that we’ll be proud of, that we’ll be happy to host company in, that we’ll feel lucky to have found. And personally, if we’re having to fork over hundreds of thousands of dollars for a place, I don’t want any nagging fear we’re buying a lemon. At closing, I want every initial and signature we make to be done confidently, with zero reluctance.
To me, settling would be marrying someone whom you’re not really proud of attaching yourself to, you’re not eager to show off to your friends and family, you’re not enthusiastic about, and you don’t feel lucky to have found. They are “just okay”.
To me, marriage is a lifetime commitment. Given that starting point , there is absolutely no way I would “settle” where it related to choosing a spouse. OTOH, my criteria were not so superficial as height, weight, beauty (what does that mean, anyway?), or wealth. Mine were more geared toward personality traits, shared beliefs, compatible (not necessarily shared)interests, similar views on having/raising children, etc.
I just got lucky when I found all that in a stone fox!
I’m incredibly shallow, and looks are important to me.
I mean, not the only important thing (and my tastes overlap with and are heavily influenced by societal standards for conventionally attractive, but are not identical to those standards).
Everybody is and has to settle somewhat, expecting your partner to be perfect and please you in every way is childish and silly. In the sense of settling being that you’re never going to find someone who never challenges you, wait for the sex bot in that case.
Man I love you and we’re perfect and all but you’re a fan of Star Trek?! I hate ST, I’m calling it off! 
If you mean settle in the sense of marrying someone you don’t even love or like just cause they are there, yea really bad idea.
So many folks are looking for that special “one”.
The key to happiness is to find that special “0.85” and rounding up.
Seriously?
I only got married because my brain was scrambled by hormones. Up until that point I had planned to stay single. You people who were all clear-headed about it…I just…wow. It is not like buying a house. (First rule of house shopping, do NOT fall in love with a house.)
When I got married there was no question of settling. I found the one guy on the planet who was absolutely right for me. Dumb, blind, luck.
The concept of settling came up was when I started dating again after my husband died. I met and dated several really guys who probably would have proposed if I’d wanted that. But as much as my head told me it was a good idea, my heart was screaming in outrage ‘no no NO’. Every once in a while when I get tired of taking myself out to dinner, or wish someone would be around the house to talk to and cuddle, I wonder if I should have settled. But each time I realize it never would have worked out for me. Alone is not an optimum condition for me, but it is the more workable one.
My only quibble with this is that it is not nearly geeky enough. There are many parameters in finding a mate, and we weigh each one. Then you sort all the potential partners you find, filtered by the probability that they will give you the time of day. Then you determine the goodness function that it the minimum acceptable.
If you wind up picking a mate below the threshold you are settling. Above you aren’t. However your weights may change with experience. If your new weights more nearly match your partner, then you get happier. If they get further away you get divorced.
Makes note: title for book - “A Better Love Life Through Linear Algebra”
Before we were married, my wife complained that my love letters had bullet points.
Regards,
Shodan
Probably not; just worked out that way. But I’m unwavering on the no antisemites thing.
I don’t have any, the idea doesn’t apply to me.
I’ll ask my wife, though 