No shit
“She wont fuck me any more because I started sucking Charlie Kirk’s cock!”
Ben Shapiro?
Why date someone who actively votes against your family’s best interests?
It’s good to challenge and confirm common sense scientifically. There are many examples where common sense wasn’t as sensible as originally thought.
I couldn’t imagine marrying someone with totally opposing political views. Disagreements on some issues sure, but totally opposing political views is essentially like having totally opposing values, morals and ethics to a degree, etc. Base things that play a role in determining compatibility.
Dating someone with opposing views is the easier of two situations people can find themselves in.
The harder situation is when you date and marry someone with similar views to yours, but then 5, 10, 15, etc years into the marriage they get radicalized by family members or YouTube. And suddenly their opinions change overnight and you are legally bound to an angry, hostile stranger.
The good old dehu-Manosphere. Malignant, cancerous trash run by grifters and signal boosted by insecure mysognists.
Edit: I see we have some fans of Joe Rogaine, Jordan Small-Peterson, and or Andrew T-hate on here.
Yeah, if my wife didn’t think other people deserved the right to exist it would put quite the strain on our relationship.
Who is funding this calibre of research, they also found dogs are more likely to bite if you kick them in the head.
In the western scientific model, this is how we differentiate truths from anecdotes and assumptions. Not sure why this needs to be repeated in every thread about the results of research.
No one is casting aspersions on the scientific method or the value of research, what is questionable in this case is that the conclusion simply follows naturally from the hypothesis. The proposition here is that people who have opposing political views are more likely to be antagonistic to each other, that is a tautology.
No one is casting aspersions on the scientific method or the value of research
In your original comment, it seemed like you were questioning why the study was funded, then compared it to another obvious cause-effect about kicking a dog. Did I misunderstand?
the conclusion simply follows naturally from the hypothesis
The conclusion might have confirmed your personal hypothesis, but we don’t assume that any conclusion “naturally follows” a hypothesis without measuring it.
The proposition here is that people who have opposing political views are more likely to be antagonistic to each other, that is a tautology.
The way you phrased it is a tautology, but the study didn’t measure antagonism. It measured whether couples broke up or not.
The research subject as quoted is a tautology, people separate because they have irreconcilable differences, opposing political views is an irreconcilable difference so the conclusion of the research is that couples with irreconcilable differences are more likely to suffer from the problems associated with irreconcilable differences.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Tautology doesn’t mean obvious or predictable, and you’re basing your argument on faulty premises. The study measured how many politically-aligned couples separated in a 1-year period compared to how many politically-opposed couples did so.
people separate because they have irreconcilable differences
Yes, sometimes that’s a reason people separate.
opposing political views is an irreconcilable difference
It’s sometimes irreconcilable, and sometimes not. Couples with opposing political views are more likely (but not guaranteed) to separate than couples who agree.
the conclusion of the research is that couples with irreconcilable differences are more likely to suffer from the problems associated with irreconcilable differences
Nowhere in the study do they declare political heterogamy an irreconcilable difference, nor could they without 100 years of data. You keep referring to “the proposition” and “the research subject” and “the conclusion” and then inserting your own phrases and concepts that were literally not a part of the study. And this is all in defense of your original comment in which you cast an aspersion on the value of the study and then claimed that you didn’t. You’ve made previous comments with the same low-effort “study finds that water is wet” so I don’t believe we’re both speaking in good faith here.
Why would anyone marry a person who openly hates women, minorities, LGBTQ+, and anybody they deem different?
Because one or the other person in the relationship isn’t being honest which happens quite frequently. People in relationships lie by omission all the time.
My wife has a friend who is a quirky anime loving girl with no desire for kids, not religious, and makes good money in healthcare.
Her friend is married to a hardcore Trump cultist that really wants kids, is very religious, and despite not having a good paying job, wants his wife to stay home and tend to the future kids.
My wife and I just honestly don’t understand how they are married.
Lol that divorce is coming, it’s just a matter of “when” not “if.”
Don’t worry, it’s only a matter of time and they will join you in not understanding.
I cant imagine marrying a fascist
deleted by creator
Considering we are reaching a point where the political differences May very well might be whether your spouse deserves to exist and not be chattel breeding slaves, yeah easy to guess why it’s a deal breaker.
Couples with opposing views on many things face higher risk of separation, is this a surprise to anyone?
No shit sherlock
I would never be with someone who doesn’t find MAGA repulsive.
At this point, anyone who votes Republican is complicit, and I’ve cut all of them out of my life except for my parents, and even then I don’t invite them to social events and have stopped giving them money when they run low.
Several comments on here read like prime examples of “anyone who opposes me is a fascist”. Of course in conservative forums it’s similarly “anyone who opposes me is a lunatic Marxist”. Try having a relationship across aisles in this climate!
The study took 30 years to conclude but I wonder whether the current political climate makes it even more unlikely that people across political divides can form really any kind of relationship. I know I have found it difficult to maintain a relationship with anyone staunchly conservative even if political leaning has never been a main criterion for me in mate selection or in friendships.
The current political climate is different than before. It not falls along the lines of empathy. I don’t see how marriages survive that in a healthy way.
That isn’t to say they’ll all divorce. Divorce rates are very tightly coupled to economic well-being and children. But I do think a lot more people are staying in horrible marriages if their partner has no empathy.
People that disagree about fundamental things in life tend to not be good matches romantically…news at 11.
Tune in Saturday to watch our round table where several overly serious and over paid people discuss why the relationship between the Jewish woman and her literal Nazi husband fell apart.
Well when one side wants to literally murder the other, Yeah.
