How the Brangelina + Jen love triangle has affected us.
Remember when you loved Friends and thought Jennifer Aniston was like the GND? She was so relatable that women saw themselves in her fictional role on Friends. She was even relatable to guys. She wasn't all fake like the other celebrities and gave hope to guys everywhere that they could find their 'Jen'. This phenomenon then turned into relating to her on the personal level. We liked Jennifer Aniston. We wanted her to succeed. She was pretty, nice, and more 'human' than other celebrities at the time. She made B- movies and made us laugh.
Remember Brad Pitt and all the awesome movies he made? Se7en, 12 Monkeys, Meet Joe Black, Fight Club, Ocean's 11? Or I guess his hot bod and amazingly chiseled face sent from Heaven? Brad was the crème de la crème of social people. He was the sexiest man alive, making amazing movies, and he was single. He was the typical fantasy for women everywhere.
So inevitably, all of America was hot in their panties when they heard that Brad Pitt was dating Jennifer Aniston in the late 90's. It was a dream come true. A match made in heaven. When they decided to marry on July 29th, 2000, it was the cumulation of our (societies) dreams being crushed in one hand and new dreams popping up in another. I say dreams being crushed because Brad was now 'off the market'. The new hope/dream was if this dream couple would actually make it.
For the most part, the Brad + Jen saga was going without a hitch. After the honeymoon stages, some issues would arise about Brad wanting babies and Jen (couldn't or wouldn't I forgot). Either way, the tumbling began to happen. Here is a great timeline of the fall out.
The third point in this love triangle is Angelina Jolie. The vixen who stole away Brad. The girl you dread because she does everything 'bad' and gets everything she wants. Every woman's nightmare. The marriage crasher. The woman who stole our dreams and hopes. During the blissful years of Brad + Jen, Jolie was going through her own separation with Billy Bob. Like a well orchestrated symphony (check out the timeline), Mr. and Mrs. Smith was the perfect time for a weak, selfish Brad to meet the UN Ambassadored vixen Jolie. You can read between the lines of the timeline to see -ish was going down on the set.
So after this, we were left with a lonely Aniston and the vixen winning out again by taking what she wanted. America was left with an image that you can do whatever and get away with what you want. Hmmm sounds vaguely familiar with the financial crisis we just went through..... you have one paystub? PERFECT! Here is a loan you won't be able to afford!!
Now don't confuse Jolie's humanitarian efforts and adoptions, which are awesome, with her being 'good person'. If you are going to be a good person, you wouldn't adulterize/seduce/vex another woman's husband.
So why am I writing about this? Well I got thinking after reading some Bill Simmons' mailbag. I don't know if it is more interesting or ironic but in Mr. and Mrs. Smith, the movie opens with the couple discussing their marriage woes and that they had been married for "five or six" years. Another interesting subplot was the Vince Vaughn was in Mr. and Mrs. Smith. Vince is pretty much the rebound to Jennifer Aniston, as they dated for a bit while filming The Break-Up.
So how does this all affect America? Whether you like it or not, our celebrities mirror some of the images of our society and what we think. If it wasn't the case, we would disregard those who are 'not aligned' with our views and they would not be on TV. But they are on mainstream TV because we, as a society, are associated in some way, entertained in some way, and desire in some way, something about them. You can't just appreciate their beauty, because when you advocate someone, you are promoting them as one person. You are subconsciously accepting their personality. We have accepted and made more tolerable those who 'crash houses'. People who ruin marriages and ultimately, ruin the union of one man and one woman. Divorce is a big issue. I believe a huge part of how America was founded, was upon the foundation of the family. We get guidance from the father as well as the mother. When you are missing one of those pieces, we get lost children.
As a society, the 90's could be labeled as Jennifer Aniston. The 00's could be labeled by Angelina Jolie. What does the 10's have in hold? I guess we will find out... for better or for worse.
Share on FacebookThe ‘List’: Dating ≠ Marriage
This is the second post in an ongoing series on Relationships. Part 1 was on Proverbs 31: the Hard to Find Woman? It was just my thoughts on what I read. My hope is that this series supports and intentionalizes more quality, Godly relationships; and stops some of the childish bickering that happens through an insightful and funny series. Forewarning: this is not against 'dating with the intent to marry'.
Dating ≠ Marriage
I am going to say it again: Dating does not equal marriage.
Dating is a step in the process toward marriage. That is why they are two separate words. I feel like, particularly in the Christian culture, there is this association that dating equals marriage. There is good reason to think so because Christians should not be hopping from the next person to the next person, having a flavor of the week. You may disagree with me on this one, it is just how I was taught, you can help me expand if you disagree.
Another reason is Christian parents or parents in general ask 'what are your intentions for dating my son/daughter?' This is such a trick question. Obviously, if the relationship is progressing positively, the ultimate goal is marriage. For the guy, it is usually the dad who asks this question, who is a GUY. He already knows what your intentions are!
Going out for coffee, going to grab a bite to eat, does not mean marriage. I repeat: Going out for coffee, going to grab a bite to eat, does not mean marriage. It should not be awkward. And it should be commonplace. I see it done time and time again. Girls bringing down other girls. I say girls because guys don't really bring down other guys..........................then again, there is a different breed of guys...
The Femin-itro (Fem-I-KNEE-Tro): like Oh My Gosh! like do you see who he is sitting with? Like O-M-G!!!
Immature Single Girl: like Oh My Gosh! like do you see who she is sitting with? Like O-M-G!!!
The Guy: Do Work Son!
How else are you going to build relationship? How else will you know if important interests align? Facebook stalk? No thanks, not for me. And anyone who doesn't think so can reread this post every day for the next 100 days.
I think another reason why we associate dating with marriage even before we date is that most of the spiritual figures we look up to were one and done. If not, then we don't hear about it, for good reason because they are married!, and assume they were one and done. Assuming is bad. You hear these 'Cinderella-tale-esque stories' of how they met, one side got a Word, waited a year, then courted, dated, and married three months later. However, if you grew up in the church and that is all you saw as an example, in your mind you will begin to associate the fact that once you date; it will end up in marriage. Grow up in a public high school, even junior high, dare I say elementary, you realize hook ups and break ups happen every week. So when you associate dating with marriage; you are puting unnecessary pressure on the whole dating process. Maybe this explains why guys aren't asking as much? This does not go against 'dating with the intent to marry'. I am not saying you should just go around from date to date. What I am saying is that you put WAY too much pressure on yourself if you think you will marry this girl/guy before you even go out on a date.
On the flip side, there is a negative view on those who have dated several people and it has not worked out with any of them. We think 'oh this person is just sha-moozing around'. We bring down those who are actively looking! We dont honor courage. We degrade it.
Now I should point out that before any relationship you start, that you have your 'ish' together, min. (I may do a post on this later) And if you dont, that you are working really, really hard to get your 'ish' together. A reason why I get confused at elementary or junior high relationships. There is a thin line between properly going about dating and it not working out & going from relationship to relationship, using that as a crutch to the REAL relationship that you need.
The 'List'
Everyone has a 'list'. Some are short. Some are long. I have one. You have one. The 'list' are requirements for date-ability. For some people, you may need to only hit a couple requirements. For others, you need to complete a five page application. For my awesome single women friends, I require a five page application for them. I only hope they do, too.
A good friend recently said, 'Some girls are getting desperate'. So I asked what do you mean by desperate? And the friend replied that some of the older women were 'settling'. Now, I don't like the word settling. I would say reprioritizing priorities or shortening the list. Look, I dont believe anyone should settle. Your 'list' has changed. My 'list' has changed. Our priorities change with time. We appreciate some things more as we grow older, and other traits become less of a desire. The friend went on and said 'there is only so much a woman can do'. I cant even imagine being a girl. It is easy for me to say to my friend 'ya but they can do more'. But can they? All but ask the guys out? Are we THAT blind? Dont women want to be chased? Dont women want to be sought after?
I am not going to just fault the guys though. The 'list' has deterred would be high quality men because they didn't meet this 'requirement' or that minimum net worth. So for the 32 year olds out there, I appreciate you not settling but I would definitely re-evaluate the priorities needed for a potential mate, even date! Ahh! Even I convolute dating and marriage! Because the 'one' is not going to come on a Disney white horse with long lushious dark hair, and abs washboarded like Cristiano Ronaldo. Then there are other girls who I meet and got to know and am like 'dang-girl-I-know-why-you-aint-married-!' Please don't misinterpret me here that I would just say that about someone after just meeting them. Unless they're straight CRAZY!
In part 1, God gives a 'list' for guys. Does this woman sound too good to be true? Perhaps she is, but not really. The woman described here is an idealized woman, a composite of many capable women. How do I know they exist? My mom is one of them. After all, not all people have the same skills. Some women’s strengths are in music or art. Others may be in mathematics, teaching or business. Some are better managers and organizers than others. While some women may excel at coming up with ideas, others may be more skilled at creating or producing what has been invented by someone else. No one excels at everything.
So please do yourself and others a favor by re-evaluating your 'list'. And stop asking every dating person when they will get married, because they've only been on one date!
Share on FacebookI Don’t: The Case against Marriage…
IAIRTH – Interesting Article I Read This Week
In the Newsweek, I read an interesting, thought provoking yet troublesome and unsettling. The main argument of the article is plainly stated in the title: I Don’t: the Case against Marriage.
The numbers are familiar but staggering: Americans have the highest divorce rate in the Western world; as many as 60 percent of men and half of women will have sex with somebody other than their spouse during their marriage. Maybe it’s a testament to American crass consumerism, but despite those odds, we still manage to idealize the ceremony itself, to the tune of $72 billion a year.
To me that is a shocking number. 60% seriously? This got me thinking about the essay The Life Cycle of Empires and America's Destiny. And how people are no different today than they were thousands of years ago. Here are just two excerpts from the essay:
The growth of wealth and comfort clearly can undermine the values of character that led to a given empire’s creation through self-sacrifice and discipline when it began.During the last stages of decadence and decline, an empire’s people often think most highly of and imitate the athletes, musicians, and actors. They tend to do this regardless of how corrupt these celebrities’ private lives are.
More generally, what are some common features of an empire’s culture in its declining period? Glubb Pasha and Bernard Goetz in “When the Empire Strikes Out” (which usefully summarizes Glubb’s book) describe developments like these: 1. The decline of sexual morality, an aversion to marriage in favor of “living together,” and an increased divorce rate all combine to undermine family stability. This happened in the upper class of the late Roman Republic and early Empire. The first-century A.D. writer Seneca once complained about Roman upper class women: “They divorce in order to re-marry. They marry in order to divorce.”
Does that describe some people? Kobe Bryant anyone? Tiger Woods? I, too, get caught up in celebrity's great feats rather than their character…
He goes on to argue several other criteria in declining empires:
- The increased economic and political power of women
- Many foreign immigrants settle in the empire’s capital and major cities
- Both irresponsible pleasure seeking and pessimism increase among the people and their leaders.
- The government provides welfare for the poor extensively.
I think I see a problem here...
But anyways, back to the Newsweek article:
The percentage of married Americans has dropped each decade since the 1950s, and the number of unmarried-but-cohabiting partners has risen 1,000 percent over the last 40 years. At 28 for men and 26 for women, the median age at which Americans are marrying is at its highest point ever—and even higher among our cohort of urban and educated. Turns out that waiting is a good idea: for every year we put off marriage, our chances of divorce go down.
As of 2013, “unwed Americans may find it even more advantageous—financially, anyway—to stay single.”
Not to be cynical but that would be another factor that people got married, although probably very low on the list, hopefully last or not even thought of, was the tax breaks married people would get compared to their individual counterparts. Now it looks like there will be legislation that may switch it around…
To tell you what you already know, the American family is in the throes of change. Gone are the days of the nuclear nest; in its wake is a motley mix of single parents, same-sex couples, and, yes, unmarried monogamists.
Anthropologist Helen Fisher, who studies the nature of love, might say that’s a symptom of our biology: she believes humans aren’t meant to be together forever, but in short-term, monogamous relationships of three or four years. For us, it’s not that we reject monogamy altogether—indeed, one of us is going on six years with a partner—but that the idea of marriage has become so tainted, and simultaneously so idealized, that we’re hesitant to engage in it.
Another puke statement. For the first part, the crazy thing is it won't be a shock to see that in our lifetime. I mean it already is happening.
Since the early 1900s, the driving force behind marriage, along with procreation, was that women couldn’t land well-paying jobs: we relied on our husbands to survive. As recently as 1967, two thirds of female college students (versus 5 percent of men) said they would marry somebody they didn’t love if he met their other criteria—primarily, the ability to support them financially. But today, we no longer need to “marry up”: women are more educated (we make up nearly 60 percent of college graduates) and better compensated (urban women in their 20s actually outearn their male peers). We are also the so-called entitled generation, brought up with lofty expectations of an egalitarian adulthood; told by helicopter parents and the media, from the moment we exited the womb, that we could be “whatever we wanted”—with infinite opportunities to accomplish those dreams.So you can imagine how, 25 years down the line, committing to another person—for life—would be nerve-racking.
The result, they say, is “a generation that loves choice and hates choosing.”
Share on Facebook