Political disagreement: can these marriages be saved?
The other day I was at the house of some friends who have a mixed marriage.
It’s not the type of mix you might think. This is a case of a woman who’s a diehard Obama supporter married to a McCain guy. This sort of split isn’t unusual for them; they nearly always disagree on politics.
One way they deal with the situation is that they hardly ever discuss the topic. They’ve been married a long time and like to do things together: traveling, camping, gardening. So they can lay off politics and it doesn’t go to the heart of things for them. In addition, he’s more into the subject in general than she—he does a lot of online reading about politics and she avoids it—so she doesn’t bring it up much in their private life and he is happy to acquiesce for the sake of peace.
My in-laws had a mixed marriage of the same type (she liberal, he conservative)—and a good marriage as well. But they had another solution. They did talk about politics often, and sometimes the discussion got very heated. But then they’d stop on a dime and go back to regular life without any lingering hard feelings, although they’d tease each other now and then.
James Carville and Mary Matalin are a bit of a puzzlement, since both are highly vocal and partisan spokespeople for opposite sides. But they’ve been married fourteen years now, so obviously something works for them. Perhaps it’s the fact that even though they disagree, they both share an intense love of politics and positively relish the fray.
But such a marriage is hardly for everyone. In fact, I know a not inconsiderable number of people who’ve been divorced in recent years and report that political disagreement wasn’t just an issue, it was the main issue. I haven’t found any statistics on this, but my anecdotal experience is that a larger number of my acquaintances report significant marital stress over politics, especially in the years beginning around the 2004 election. The widening of the political divide seems very real, and it affects some people on the most personal level of all.
[ADDENDUM: I’ll add that I think the death knell for a politically mixed marriage is when one partner or the other—or perhaps both—begins to consider that those on the other side are not just mistaken but are in fact evil.]
“James Carville and Mary Matalin are a bit of a puzzlement…”
Here’s a hint: They’re ACTING! Other than the benefits their careers bring them, they don’t believe a word of it one way or the other. They’re not into Parties, they’re into politics.
I just had a long talk with my cousin last night. We don’t agree on most political issues. I am “conservative” and she is “liberal.” For the most part, we agree to disagree and discuss family stuff instead of politics. I am not going to convert her, and she is not going to convert me. So what is the point of trying?
While her ideology would predispose her to disagree with my stances on Latin America, she concedes that my working and living in Latin America would give me insight into the region that she lacks.
Pingback:The Daily Elephant
“James Carville and Mary Matalin are a bit of a puzzlement…”
People living the high life without a ‘job’ are normally called con’s. Lying for money is nothing new.
These mixed marriages seem to be becoming a more common problem. I heard a woman call into Dennis Prager to say that her husband was still a liberal and hadn’t forgiven her for becoming a conservative. Prager said that, while he agreed with her politically, his sympathies marriage-wise were with the husband — she was no longer the woman he married.
I therefore think that there’s a difference between the Carville/Matalin marriage, where they go in knowing their differences, and the kind where one partner changes and the other doesn’t. The changing partner has, to a certain extent, broken the marriage contract and the unchanged partner can rightly find that fairly unforgivable.
“For better or for worse…” 🙂
Say what?
“The changing partner has, to a certain extent, broken the marriage contract and the unchanged partner can rightly find that fairly unforgivable”
I’m sorry, I thought we were talking about POLITICS here, not sexual orientation or something that really affects your life together. Your partner has “changed”? Well, I certainly hope so! Anyone or anything incapable of change and growth is either dead or inanimate.
The changing partner has, to a certain extent, broken the marriage contract and the unchanged partner can rightly find that fairly unforgivable.
Ummm, no.
In that light, there are no sucessful marriages. People make two assumptions going into a marriage (1 for each partner):
He assumes she won’t change. She assumes he will change.
I would go so far as to say that change is the only constant in the universe.
Before US invading Iraq, no mix marriage for politics. Wife not voting, not having opinion, no problem. Now everything bad, woman making voting, all mens humilations and having to beat womans with stick. This against all Iraq sovereignty. US leav Iraq and let Iraq mens their votes only.
“I’m sorry, I thought we were talking about POLITICS here, not sexual orientation or something that really affects your life together.”
It is going to depend on what one means by “your politics changed”.
For many people politics is like a favorite sports team – yea you normally have some reason why you chose who you like/dislike but it has little to do with *you*. You can change sides and not really have changed.
From what I’ve read here Neo was more of this type – still the same person but as politics moved from the “sports type” of decision to one that better reflected her (generally due to increased interest and knowledge of the matters) there was a “change”.
Then there are people, like me, who have always been active in politics and cared/read a great deal about since they were teenagers. My political beliefs reflect many of my core beliefs – for me to change would require a major shift in personality. There are examples of this – David Horowitz is a prime example of the failing of his politics (communism) causing an personal crisis and his political change occurred because of a fundamental change in internal beliefs.
I can easily get along with any political person who is mostly of the “sport type” as their voting position has little to do with their own beliefs. I can not, however, generally get along well true leftists because of several fundamental differences in personality. Not because they are leftist, but because of what makes them support the leftist causes.
The political change of the type Horowitz went through is just as much of a change as sexual preference within a marriage. In fact that type of change is one of the more major ones someone can go through and pretty much entails MANY other changes too.
Good point, strcpy.
My politics are driven by personal philosophy, namely, belief in the individual and individual responsibility. Hearing lefties babble about how we’re all to blame for something (e.g., assassinations in the 60s), or conversely how no one is responsible (e.g., crime), drive me wild.
I also have a problem with people who reflexively blame America for any and all world problems by virtue of applying incredibly tortured reasoning, while giving a skip to those who are actually responsible (e.g., 9/11 hijackers – their fault, not ours – simple as that).
I find this interesting on several levels.
I am a devout Christian, I believe right and wrong and good and evil exist. I can’t conceive – due to religious belief as much as anything – being married to someone who believes the act of intellectual discrimination – of making judgements about right and wrong and good and evil, et al – is a big source of problems in the world. So, off the top, for religious reasons, I would exclude many left-side women from potential partnership.
If my wife were only mildly interested in government/political issues, I would have little problem with her being liberal.
If my wife were quite interested in government/political issues, and was on the left, I would need her to explain why she believes more government is superior to less government in the various instances she may broach in convesation. Then, if she didn’t bring me around to her way of thinking, I would need us be be able to understand each other’s views, and to amicably agree to disagree.
I would need my wife to be more interested in truth than in the virtuous purity of being liberal.
I’ve given a really serious off-the-cuff reponse, if such is possible (though surely not advisable). I will let this marinate, and more light-heartedly.
I know of a few marriages that have run into the same difficulties that NN’s observed. What’s interesting is that in all of these cases it wasn’t a change in political commitments, but an intensification on the part of one party that aroused problems. It’s typically been a liberal wife who’s recently become more politically ‘aware’ and more strident in her views. The war and Obama candidacy seem to have motivated a lot of people who’d otherwise never thought too much about politics.
as my one friend put it..
“.. her politics are like something you’d expect from a college sophomore..”
I don’t know why a liberal/conservative couple should be a problem. I’m in one. It seems to me that any successful long term relationship involves compromise and accommodation. We disagree about politics. Big deal. I didn’t marry her because of her politics.
Mature adults should be able to disagree without the entire relationship crashing down about their ears. If politics does cause an unrepairable rift, I think that perhaps there might be other bigger issues, and that the problems caused by politics may be a symptom of some deeper problem.
One of my dislikes about (and I’m generalizing here, so don’t rake me over the coals) many strident leftists that I encounter these days is precisely that they make the personal, political. I know that some strident conservatives display the same behavior, but as I’ve said before, this seems, to me anyway, far more prevalent on the left.
That being said, I think that strident partisans of all stripes have more in common with each other than with reasonable people who are willing to listen to and respect the views of others, while still disagreeing.
I seldom talk with my husband about politics and we don’t even disagree. It’s just no fun at all to talk to someone about something they get upset over. I’d prefer to avoid it.
But I can’t really see how disagreeing about politics becomes a problem unless and until one person decides that the other person must be converted.
I suppose religious disagreement is the same. It doesn’t become an issue until the education of children is involved or one person demands the other be converted.
The New Testament even covered the issue of what to do in a marriage when someone converted; changed in a fundamental way. Essentially… if they don’t throw you out, stay put. Entering into a partnership is different. All effort should be made to find someone who’s basic values match your own. But change is a fact of life, as has been mentioned, and if change itself was reason to leave a marriage we’re all screwed.
I’m in a mixed marriage, more or less. We were both liberals when we met. Then, very early on, he evolved a long way right-ward while, for many years, I stayed put. His politics were more of an issue for our friends than for me. We lost quite a few friends over it. As for each other, sometimes we had stimulating discussions about politics, sometimes we had arguments, and once in a while we had fights. But the fights were rare. Most of the time, we made each other think, we learned from each other, and we kept each other honest. Over time I moved rightward too — not quite as far as he went, but well out of liberalism, anyway, and quite a way over the line and into “the dark side” on some issues. With that, we lost even more friends. But to heck with them, we’re still married.
It could never work, me marrying or even dating a liberal. I just can’t intellectually respect someone who would hold fast to what I consider to be some of the most damned stupidest pile of steamy gooey moose crap that could ever pass for political discourse. Could you imagine being married to Phil Donahue? God in heaven.
In reality though I think I may only be referring to those who take their politics very seriously. There are liberals, and then there are LIBERALS. The ones that might say for example that Obama has some “good ideas” I might not have a problem with. The ones that might go, “OMG Obama is my Gd he’s Jeeeesuz I want his babiez i luv him ya ya w00t!!!!” I would very much like to see dumped between a Russian tank and Georgia.
In the end, I think in most cases the success of a relationship depends on the person rather than the politics.
There’s no way I could marry a conservative. I’m going to be looking for an intelligent woman.
I’m in one of these marriages too. When we got married eleven years ago, my wife was the liberal and I was the libertarian (although I nearly always voted for Democrats, being correctly convinced that while both parties would take my money, the Republicans would take my freedom as well). But 9/11 turned her into a security mom and the Bush administration turned me into a liberal (around here, he’s known as “Mommy’s president”). She’s the one who first turned me on to the neo-neo site, which I used to read more thoroughly before everyone but the raving lunatics abandoned the comments section.
We now cringe at each other’s politics. I’m eagerly awaiting the Obama administration (“Daddy’s president”) so that I go can go back to my libertarian whining once America is back in good hands.
Hyman Rosen:
She’s the one who first turned me on to the neo-neo site, which I used to read more thoroughly before everyone but the raving lunatics abandoned the comments section.
What was it that Freud said about projection?
Peter:
There’s no way I could marry a conservative. I’m going to be looking for an intelligent woman.
Such smugness has been part of the liberal outlook since Ike and Adlai II , perhaps before.
Tom Lehrer touched on the issue.
That being said, I consider Ted Stevens a scoundrel.
OTOH, maybe there is a sense of humor in these two posters.
“There is nothing so good and lovely as when man and wife in their home dwell together in unity of mind and disposition”– from Homer’s Odessey, cited in a marvellous recent work, “Corelli’s Mandolin”.
Well, I screwed up the HTML on the previous comment, but the part of the original post I meant to quote was:
“[ADDENDUM: I’ll add that I think the death knell for a politically mixed marriage is when one partner or the other–or perhaps both–begins to consider that those on the other side are not just mistaken but are in fact evil.]”
You’ll be looking forever then. Though I could be wrong, I imagine it shouldn’t be relatively difficult to find a woman brighter than you. In fact I’m sure there’s quite a few amoeba specimens out there brighter than you.
😀
Lincoln, on Peter’s website, you can find the following quote.
He’s a bright high school kid. Yes, he lacks the perspective that real-world experience can give an adult. It would not be a bad idea to take that into consideration before replying to him. I did so by giving him some examples to show that his point of view is nothing new under the sun, for example.
As he is apparently trying to provoke a reaction- did you not ever make a statement in high school or college to do so- a measured reaction might be best.
Gringo, should have figured. I hate teenagers. When I was a teenager I hated myself too.
He’ll come to his senses someday maybe. But then again I came to my senses when I was only 5. =D
As strcpy mentioned, political differences might be the result of personality differences, of differences in world view.
So it’s not the White Sox or the Cubs. It could be, although that’s not what we’re talking about.
The issue is not the political differences, but the personality differences which cause them. And a major political change may mean either a change in personality or world view, or a manifestation of a personality component which, in other times, was not particularly important.
I have a relation who suffers from BDS. Among other things, she blames the Texas high school football overemphasis on Bush. Irrational. She has always “thought” by whatever was warm/fuzzy vs. whatever was sharp-edged. Her three daughters are the same. They are, it goes without saying, liberal.
conservatives thinking liberals are stupid while liberals think conservatives are evil? i’ve seen comments about liberals on this and other right-of-center sites that … well, i don’t even recognize the real-life people i argue with! there’s enough on both sides to make you sick.
There are actions today which have influence on the future, and there are intentions. The Bush-haters assume Bush is evil, first, then interpret his actions, and the results, based on that assumption. But they do it with good rhetoric, while the conservatives look at the results and claim the facts show that liberal policies are misguided, based on the stated goals of the liberals arguing for the policies. This is ugly / boring/ complicated rhetoric, plus it doesn’t feel as good.
Now that I’m happy with an extremely intelligent conservative woman, we can agree to disagree about my desire for drugs to be legalized (to reduce murders, etc., despite likely increasing addictions). I think in discussing policies, most conservatives are fare mor aware of the possible bad consequences of any policy, than are liberals (and big-gov’t supporters, in general).
What makes many conservatives outraged is the assumed “moral superiority” of the PC folk. This has become a hotter and hotter hot button issue. The culture war is a battle for defining what is moral.
The Bush-hate was merely a prelude for McCain hate, and a disguise for Republican-hate. Anybody who genuinely hated Bush, but now seems to hate McCain, should be asked which Republican they wouldn’t hate? I guess they would have trouble with that question.
I don’t hate Barry. I do think Iran will get a nuke if he gets elected, and that a nuke will be used against an Israeli city (Tel Aviv) — so I’m against him. I suspect the US economy would be a bit better with him, because the minority Reps would fight the worst economic junk, even tho the higher taxes would mean less job creation/ raises; the US could probably use a real recession to more rapdidly make adjustments.
The Supreme Court becoming more big-gov’t liberal would be terrible.
So, where does Mr. Neo-Neocon fall with respect to politics?
My wife was a Democrat when I met her. She is now an Independent who mostly votes for Republicans. However, she wasn’t hard-core about politics, so I had a chance of converting her.
> Perhaps it’s the fact that even though they disagree, they both share an intense love of politics and positively relish the fray.
Speaking from the lofty perch outside of any such situation, I believe that it’s partly a key requirement for ANY marriage: R-E-S-P-E-C-T. As long as the two people respect each other, there’s no real problem.
> I am not going to convert her, and she is not going to convert me. So what is the point of trying?
It’s not a matter of conversion, it’s a matter of the Reality Check. How good are your positions if you never test them against the ideas of the opposition? How good is the basis of your beliefs if you never allow them to be challenged by the unbeliever? Further, “facts” change. Ideas used as the basis for consideration are sometimes later found to be false, or other overwhelming but invalidating arguments are found to be true. By forcing yourself to re-validate, you identify any problem areas where you cling to old inaccuracies by simple human inertia. Plus the mind’s reasoning faculties are no different than muscles — it does ’em good to get a workout regularly.
My own experience is that most of the arguments favored by those on The Left stand up to scrutiny like a wet paper towel in the Big Easy on 08/29/05.
It’s not hard to get them agreeing, either.
But they inevitably use the Liberal Reset Button to set their views back to Officially Defined Liberal Positions(tm) every midnight, so such concurrence generally doesn’t stick.
But in the meantime, you’ve gotten both the Reality Check and a good mental workout…
When my husband and I got married, we were a mixed marriage. He was a conservative, and I was a very strident leftist. We had many, many heated political arguments with me doing most of the heating. Now I’m probably quite a bit more conservative than he is.
We have some fun memories from the mixed marriage time. We still laugh about the time, soon after we got married, that I asked, “So, you’re a conservative?”
“Well, yeah.”
“You make me sick!”
I am in a mixed marriage. I a liberal, he a republican. We are having a hard time. I am called stupid, dumb and some names I will not mention. I have stopped answering the phone when he calls ( he is away from home most of the week), because he listens to talk radio and just rants and raves about liberals. We spend what little time we are in the same house in different rooms to avoid talking. I never belittled him when Bush was in office, but have had to like through 8 years of Clinton and now Obama being degraded. I have lost all respect for my husband and am considering leaving him.