Gaming, Adults, and Growing Up

[Vegepygmy]

A marriage doesn't have to be perfect... Goodness knows mine isn't. But marriages have always had the expectation of being a lifelong partnership.

There is a difference between hoping something will happen and expecting that it will happen. Currently in the United States, the divorce rate for all marriages is somewhere in the neighborhood of 40-50 percent. Statistically speaking, an expectation that one's marriage will be a lifelong partnership is probably unreasonable.

Your chances of losing at roulette are not very different than your chances of getting divorced. Would any sensible person placing a bet on a roulette wheel say they expect to win?

 

[WizarDru]

There is a difference between hoping something will happen and expecting that it will happen. Currently in the United States, the divorce rate for all marriages is somewhere in the neighborhood of 40-50 percent. Statistically speaking, an expectation that one's marriage will be a lifelong partnership is probably unreasonable.

Except that the "divorce rate" so commonly quoted does not mean what people seem to think that it means. It's calculated by the number of marriages in a year in an area by the number of divorces. It's comparing two UNLIKE populations and drawing a conclusion about the whole population. It doesn't tell us much, other than how many people are marrying versus divorcing in a certain area over a certain period of time. It doesn't speak to the mean.

What we DO know is that someone who gets a divorce is likely much more likely to get another divorce...and that the chance of someone getting a divorce decreases as they get older. A 20 year-old is much more likely to get divorced than a 50 year-old. According to one source, 63% of the women who get divorced are under the age of 24, for example.

So the actual percentage chance that a marriage will end in divorce is a much more complicated statistic, and the reasonable chance of it occurring is not so easily guessed as a straight percentage.

 

[Janx]

divorce law is varies from state to state. In California, you're pretty screwed.

In texas, not as much. If I recall, in TX what you owned before the divorce is still yours. It's only assets gained during the marriage that have to be split up.

Its not as big a deal when both parties have comparable salaries, because then, for the most part, the purchasing of stuff would likely be equal.

But when it's lopsided, thats where the trouble starts. Firstly, because couples argue most about money, and the one making the money will be less likely to be the one spending it, hence the arguments.

From there, the person with more money will be forced to split assets they feel they paid for and thus own. This can be made worse with alimony payments, etc. Which then tend to be abused by the other as they will NOT re-marry deliberately, to keep the payments flowing.


I don't have a pre-nup. I haven't been divorced, and we're coming up on 14 years. But I totally understand the tactical wisdom of doing a pre-nup. It's the same thing as the exit clause in any good business plan. Or for a rock band to denote the split of pay, credit on songs, etc before they start writing, gigging, or actually getting successful.

These are things the non-planners feel like is "planning to fail", "putting negative energy into it", and 'sucking the fun out of things". However, it's better to plan a fair split BEFORE its needed, when nobody's pissed and actually planning revenge.

Without it, it's yet another reason divorces are so ugly, as both sides are trying to take revenge and get as much as possible. Lawyers don't help the situation.

 

[S'mon]

Except that the "divorce rate" so commonly quoted does not mean what people seem to think that it means. It's calculated by the number of marriages in a year in an area by the number of divorces. It's comparing two UNLIKE populations and drawing a conclusion about the whole population. It doesn't tell us much, other than how many people are marrying versus divorcing in a certain area over a certain period of time. It doesn't speak to the mean.

Exactly right. Vastly less than 50% of real marriages up to this point in time have ended in divorce. Due to falling marriage rates, the 50% figure is wildly misleading. And we have no way of knowing what the divorce rate for marriages in 2010 will be.

 

[pawsplay]

Exactly right. Vastly less than 50% of real marriages up to this point in time have ended in divorce. Due to falling marriage rates, the 50% figure is wildly misleading. And we have no way of knowing what the divorce rate for marriages in 2010 will be.

And yet we know that once you divorce once, you are more likely to do it again ... It's almost as if someone has studied how often marriages end in divorce.

Oh, but wait...

One data set based on age of the bride indicates that the rate is 48% for people under 18, 40% for ages 18–19, 29% for 20-24, and 24% for 25 and older.

Mind you, that's only for a ten year span.

 

[WizarDru]

And yet we know that once you divorce once, you are more likely to do it again ... It's almost as if someone has studied how often marriages end in divorce.

Oh, but wait...

I'm not sure what you're pointing out, there.

According to that report, seen here, they're determining statistics about the probability of a lot of things...but divorce rate is not one of them. If you mean that as evidence of 'marriages end in divorce', the stats don't actually say that. For example, the percentage of women actually married by age 18 is less than 4%. So the fact that the divorce rate for them is 48% doesn't mean much...because that only applies to less than half of 4% of women in toto.

 

[pawsplay]

I'm not sure what you're pointing out, there.

According to that report, seen here, they're determining statistics about the probability of a lot of things...but divorce rate is not one of them. If you mean that as evidence of 'marriages end in divorce', the stats don't actually say that. For example, the percentage of women actually married by age 18 is less than 4%. So the fact that the divorce rate for them is 48% doesn't mean much...because that only applies to less than half of 4% of women in toto.

I was kind of eyeing the 24% rate for those 25+.

 

[ggroy]

I think a fair number of gamers have girlfriends/wives who don't like them gaming. But if you have a healthy relationship, and your gaming is not excessive, it'll work out.

I met my now ex-wife and got married during the years when I was on a long hiatus away from rpg gaming. Rpg gaming didn't even cross my mind for a long time, until a friend called me one day out of the blue and asked if I was interested in playing a weekend pickup game of 3.5E D&D.

I didn't know it at the time, but it turned out my now ex-wife hated gamers of all types. Before I had met her, she previously dated guys who ended up spending too much time playing muds and video games (back when the internet was just becoming popular), instead of giving her attention. She thought I was a "breath of fresh air" at the time, when she found out that I didn't play any video games or muds and didn't waste too much time netsurfing online.

After getting back into rpg gaming shortly after 3.5E D&D was released, after awhile I was hosting my own weekly or bi-weekly D&D games at my place. Initially she was fine with it. But after several years of weekly or bi-weekly gaming sessions, she eventually blew a gasket over it. Subsequent gaming campaigns were either at somebody else's place or at nearby gaming stores.

After awhile we separated, and eventually divorced. She ended up getting almost everything in the divorce, except my personal library and a few other things. (She had no use for computer books, nor any rpg gaming type books).

My advice: Don't get married to somebody who has an intrinsic dislike or hatred of your past, present, and possible future hobbies and pastime activities.

 

[Pbartender]

I think that's subtly different from the "150% into it" thing.

It's normal to have some doubts and fears and misgivings and problems. I think you'd agree -- it's not smooth sailing. There are problems. I understand that folks who perhaps take their relationship cues too much from the media might think that, I dunno, a husband caught leering at another woman isn't 150% into it and suddenly it becomes "Why would he do this unless he doesn't love me anymore?! Does he even want to get married?"....and that's not a positive place.

I think the distinction is that you need to be prepared for those inevitable moments of rockiness. You can't expect everything to be perfect, and you can't expect marriage to change a person's behavior. You CAN expect that even if it's not perfect, that the SO still wants to be with you, is still into the relationship.

You're not always going to feel like you're wildly in love with the person, but you should be able to trust that those moments are largely momentary, and not destroy everything.

Absolutely... Perhaps I said it poorly in the first post.

The question isn't, "Can we live together and never argue about anything, ever?" That's certainly an unrealistic expectation.

It's, "Can we live together and find ways to respectfully work out our differences, or at least live with each other's differences without resentment?" Which I think is perfectly reasonable, if you can find the right person. It's all about empathy, respect, responsibility, and emotional flexibility.

The trick is taking the time to find that person and knowing that person (and yourself) well enough to answer that question with certainty.

 

[Merkuri]

To the OP: You really need to find out if this is a big deal for her. Don't shy away from the subject because it makes you uncomfortable, because issues like this are things you need to work out before you get married, not after.

This reminds me of conversations I used to have with one of my ex-boyfriends. We both had things that we deeply wanted to change in our partner. I won't mention specifics because they were mostly differences of political opinions - we were polar opposites when it came to politics. But I kept hoping I could change him and he kept hoping he could change me, and eventually I realized this was not going to work and I broke it off.

If it were just a passing comment due to her not understanding how much you enjoy games and how much of a childish thing they are not then it might not be a big deal.

But if she is really and truly waiting for you to "grow up" and give up that stuff and it is something that will grate on her as you get older and continue to game then you need to realize that this is not a sustainable relationship.


As far as why RPG games aren't childish, they exercise your brain, improve your creativity, help you socialize. Some RPGs can be very mature in nature, depending on the wants of the players.

Computer or video games help your hand-eye coordination (there was some article I read a long time ago about how surgeons who play computer games end up making fewer mistakes on the operating table) and exercise your puzzle-solving or decision-making skills.

And both of them are just hobbies. They're no different than poker night, watching TV shows, model building, putting together puzzles, knitting, collecting penguin sculptures, etc.

Looking over at my husband's computer desk, I see that he's got toys scattered all over it. I mean real toys, like transformers, a jar of putty, a poseable viking figure, etc. I bought him half of the things up there. I get him a transformer of some sort each year for Christmas. He does not actually play with them (at least, not when I'm looking), but he gets joy out of having them, and I like being able to contribute to that silliness. Growing up is overrated.