On the loss of appeal of divorce...

I read the other day an interesting article on NYTimes, on the loss of appeal in divorce by the recent generations.

Amid the observation, that the divorce rate among well-educated couples are going down, even though it's relatively easy to get divorce these days. There's so much psycho-analysis on what went through the women's mind, when they come to the conclusion that they want out. But a few points stand out to me.

I read this with personal interest because I've gone through some of the same internal thought process in the past myself, when my marriage hits some low points.

Here, we're talking about women with means, oftentimes women with career. In any case, alimony from a well-to-do ex-husband could have sustained these women and their kids, should they go down the path of divorce. So, let's jump to the assumption that financial concerns are not the major factor in the discussions.

Much was said about these women, and men, who want to keep the family intact, for the sake of the children, are actually very true. At least the same thing has gone through the minds of myself and my husband. We want to do the best for the kids. While much was also said, that if the divorced parents hold up the family traditions together, be civic and what not, it won't impact much to the kids, this argument/suggestion is so half-hearted and lame. It's almost like, saying out loud the half truth enough times might make it a reality. I personally feel that it's never the same when the kids see the parents separate, particularly when they're younger than teen years. So, let's face it, to say that it won't impact the kids, and the adults do whatever they see fit and convenient, is more for the adults. It's really just a justification for the actions (divorce) that the adults take, in order to make themselves feel better (that divorce has no impact to kids as long as the parents spend holidays together, for example).

Childrearing is hard. Even if money is not the issue, and we (the mothers) can get outside help on looking after the kids, it's not the same as sharing the duties and concerns and worries with our spouse/partner. The fact and value that we have a partner to share the pain and pleasure with cannot be underestimated at all. That's why I have tremendous respect for single mothers, because I can appreciate how hard it must be, to make it work.

On another side of the coin, I'm not so sure about the stigma of divorce on women, particularly in this day and age. I have no doubt that in some society and community, the stigma that they fail somehow in making the marriage work, can be high. Personally, that's probably the least of my concerns when I was contemplating the idea of divorce during the low points of my marriage. I thought the peer pressure thing would work mostly in teenage years, not women with established life and career in their 30s and 40s. If those women (and mothers) let the others, their peers in the park, babies in tow, influence them that greatly, one way or another, then they're really quite weak. I have very little patience for weak-minded people, albeit politically incorrect to utter it out loud.

And then, the article mentions this notion that women tend to feel the "freedom" (You go, girl!) when they become divorced, going back to the singles dating scene. I'm, like, really? seriously? That would probably the last thing I want, to go back to the singles dating scene. Do women really see more success in Jennifer Aniston (the gorgeous, single, childless 40-year-old who serial dates but never has a steady relationship for longer than a few year since the implosion of her Brad-Pitt thing?), or Angelina Jolie (the equally gorgeous, married, 30+ year old who have big families, alot of kids, and a loving husband whom she shares joy and sorrow with)?

I know, I know. this is such a hot topic, the Aniston-Jolie feud. Then again, Aniston should have been over with and moved on from her break-up with Pitt. Afterall, it's been, what, more than 6 years ago, for goodness sake. But as much as Aniston tried to diffuse the subject, blaming Pitt as philanderer and Jolie as a homewrecker, there's more than an ounce of truth, that kids and extended families can help gel a couple's relationship, which invariably will move through stages in life, from love and passion, to becoming life partners. Personally, however gorgeous I might still look, I'm not sure if I want to drag my 40-year-old body out there every night partying and bar-hopping to find another partner.

I don't want to disparage Aniston or anyone who goes through divorce. I honestly don't. Afterall, everyone's situation is unique, and I'd want to avoid casting the first stone. It would, however, be tremendously helpful to other women, if we, for one, are honest to ourselves, about what works and what doesn't, and the motivation that drives us one way or the other.

As to my own marriage, most of those arguments during the low point of our marriage came from difference in opinion in childrearing. Interestingly, as time goes on, and as the kids get bigger, we have come to see that we have more similarities than differences in our approaches (eg. a stricter versus more relaxed parenting style). If one comes to appreciate the pros and cons of different appraoches, while keeping an open mind, it could go a long way.

I know, I know. It takes two to tango too. Oftentimes, divorce has nothing to do with the women, but the men have simply drifted apart/away. In those cases, hey, you do what you need to do. If divorce is what it comes down to, so be it.

On the sovereign debt woes of Greece...

Looking at the deteriorating sovereign debt situation in Europe, in particular, Greece, is like watching a train wreck in slo-mo.

I've always wondered how Euro could have worked, with countries having a garden variety of economies and state of affairs coming together to join in hip by only their currency (thereby fiscal policy), and nothing much else. Back in late 1990s when one of my projects in a big bank was to convert all transactions and contracts from various European currencies into euros, I've always wondered to myself how this could have worked. I have my doubts because I don't see how it could work. Then again, I'm not economics type. I thought the economists and all the talking heads knew better (or knew something that I didn't), since everyone was so gungho and excited about this whole euro thing. I let that idea/doubt go. My project went through with flying colors, and that's what happened to me then. I still miss some of the currencies (like DEM, FRF, and more). At least GBP is still around, so I'm good.

And then, the worldwide economic recessions that started in US in 2008 - the Great Recession, as some call it - put everything under harsher spotlight, in particular, the PIIGS economies, Greece being one of them.

The first bailout of Greece came in 2010, now they're talking about the second bailout. It's such a big white elephant in the room. Everyone knows it's going to fail. Everyone knows Greece won't make it. But no one wants to admit it. No one wants to call the default, a default, which is what Greece is. The idea of "buying Greece some time" to sort things out, to clean up the house, whatever the actions might require, is so weak. Don't get me wrong, I would not want to see a whole country fail, thereby pushing the Greek livelihood over the edge of the cliff. The fact that big brothers, like Germany and France, who want to keep Greece in the fold of euro, yet are reluctant to embrace full rescue, both fiscally and monetarily, are simply self-defeating.

But we all know, Greece is like another Lehman (that collapsed in 2008), except that, unlike Lehman, Greece is another "too big to fail" basket case. No one wants to see a repeat of Lehman - just ask Hank Paulson - particularly given that Greece is considered the birthplace of western philosophy and democracy, and its failure would have not only financial, but symbolic, significance.

So, what do we do?

The US is too busy trying to rescue itself. Europeans are in the I-don't-want-to-help-but-maybe-I-need-to-do-something mode. Everyone knows that ECB and other European countries will step in, one way or another. However much the haircut the bondholders are going to take, they're going to come out whole, one way or another. So, emerging big brothers like China are going to step in the void and scoop up whatever resources and assets and bonds that Europeans and PIIGS are selling. In a decade or two, everyone will be working for the Chinese to pay off their debts; so, everyone is looking up to the new master (China) now already. Learning mandarin is only the first step.

Surprisingly (or not), the credit agencies, who were accused to have been sleeping on their watch during the subprime meltdown in US, are the watchdogs that everyone is looking up to again, without any meaningful reforms whatsoever on how to avoid their conflicts of interests they committed during the subprime mess. Some things in life never change. Sad...

Nothing of these is news to anyone anyways. Ireland will tough it out. The Irish people have the kind of fortitude and resolve to tough it out, but the Greeks don't. The celtic tiger is going to come out from this mess roaring again, but the continental peers like Greece and Portugal and Spain are going to continue dragging their feet.

I would be very interested to see what's going to happen to the small eastern European cohorts who newly join euro.

Then again, as I said, I'm not an economics type. I hope I'm wrong (I really do), but I have this nagging feelings that something seriously wrong is in this whole picture. Everyone wants to see the rosy colors, but no one wants to consider the worst-case scenarios. The future generations around the world are going to be paying for the sins and mistakes that this generation commits. Very sad...