The LDS Guide to Dating & Marriage, Part 8: Discrimination and 'Acceptability'

[Previous posts in the series:  Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7]

I knew a guy who would not--under any circumstances--date a girl who was taller than he was.  Just wouldn't do it. I knew a Chinese girl who would not go out with non-Chinese guys, saying she felt a responsibility to marry within her own race.

Everyone, when trying to find the 'right' person to marry, will have to make decisions as to what to accept and what to reject. For a faithful, single Latter-Day Saint whose goal is temple marriage, some requirements (being a Church member and having a temple recommend) are fairly mandatory.  As noted previously, though, those two requirements alone are not very useful in choosing an eternal companion. In many cases, the question becomes, not "what do I want", but "what am I willing to accept"?  Are you willing to marry absolutely anyone who meets those two basic requirements?  What else is important to you, personally, in a husband or wife?

As previously mentioned, since there are no perfect people to choose from, everyone will have to accept some imperfections in their spouse. The trick is to (1) figure out what those imperfections are ahead of time (if you can) and then (2) decide if you're willing to 'accept' that particular imperfection in your spouse, even to the extent of having to put up with it throughout the entire marriage. (Don't fall into the trap of thinking, "I don't like that...but I'll get him/her to change after we're married."  Famous last words...) As the saying goes, you like someone because of who they are, you love someone in spite of who they are...

From a broader perspective, though, there are personal attributes and circumstances which are unrelated to 'imperfections', yet will create equally important dating decisions for which there is no obvious yes/no answer. Like the two people mentioned at the top of this post, everyone will have to make personal decisions above and beyond the basic recommend holding requirement, deciding what kind of person is 'acceptable marriage material' and what kind is not.

These kinds of decisions cannot be judged strictly on a 'right' or 'wrong' basis. You might reasonably claim that a guy who refuses to date a girl who's taller than he (or a girl with freckles, for example), yet meets all the other 'quality' requirements, is being too discriminatory.  Personally, I would agree...but here's the point: my opinion doesn't matter here, and neither does yours.

The problem is everyone has to be 'discriminatory' in some way when choosing a spouse (remember, we discounted the 'recommend and a pulse' philosophy...), and the line between 'too discriminatory' and 'not discriminatory enough' is not at all clear. (The egg on the rooftop problem again...)

One of the tasks we are given in this mortal life is to decide for ourselves what person--and what kind of person--we're 'compatible' with.  And in the end, we are all responsible for our own choice, including the marriage we create (or don't create) because of it. In that sense, Guy X who decides Girl Y (or vice versa) isn't 'acceptable' doesn't need to justify his decision to anyone...since he's the one who holds the ultimate responsibility for his own marriage.  If he says she is 'unacceptable', he doesn't need any other reason...

In the same vein, there are many who would claim dating only within a particular race is 'racist'. Yet, there are significant, documented advantages to marrying someone from the same country and culture as yourself--and since building a successful marriage is the ultimate goal, such a decision cannot be easily dismissed by outsiders as 'wrong'. Since each of us has to accept responsibility for the success (and failure) of the marriage(s) we enter into, we hold the absolute power to decide who is 'acceptable' to us and who isn't...and that right must be respected by others, since those others aren't going to be direct participants in the marriage after the vows are taken.

As everyone knows, my wife (The Baroness) is a Taiwanese native.  There are many in her culture and in mine who say we should have married within our own races.  And had we not gotten married because of the difference in race, there would also be many who would criticize that decision for being ethnocentric.  It's not my point to say which side is 'right' (although you can probably guess which side I come down on), only that neither of these groups matter in the end.  Only "The Baroness" and I matter, and our decision to marry (or not) is ours and ours alone.

It may be that most people will naturally meet and marry someone who is just like them in age, race, culture, and background--and the issue of 'acceptability' won't really come up. Many others, though, may have to make difficult decisions about dating and marrying someone 'different' than themselves, which will likely bring inherent challenges to the relationship. The real challenge is to determine whether those differences are acceptable or not...

For example, you might ask yourself: How easily would I consider marrying someone who:

(a) is from a different country than me

(b) speaks a different language than me as their native one

(c) is over ten years older or younger than myself

(d) has been married before and/or has children from a previous relationship

(e) is blind, deaf, or handicapped in some way.

Under our working theory #2, we've decided that "All marriages can succeed", therefore a marriage to any of the above would not guarantee failure. Yet differences in background and life situation will bring particular challenges to the marriage--making the trek to the finish line longer and harder.

The question is: is it reasonable to decide personally that (for example) "I will not consider marrying someone over twenty years older than myself, because that would bring more challenges to the relationship than I think is wise for the building of a successful marriage."?

A decision like this, while inherently judgmental in nature, cannot absolutely be condemned as being wrong--since each person is wholly responsible for the success of the marriage that follows. Likewise, it is also unfair to criticize someone who does decide to enter into such a 'challenging' relationship, since if they are committed, they have the potential to build a successful marriage just like everyone else.

The Baroness and I know several couples where one or both of them are on their second marriage, and/or have a difference in ages of twenty years or more. Those situations bring inherent challenges to the relationship, yet the couples we know are all happily married to this point and face those challenges willingly...even cheerfully! [One wonderful sister I know has a husband twenty years her senior, and says, in a moving display of self-martyrdom, that she prays daily his life will be extended and hers shortened so they won't have to be apart for any length of time...]

These factors show why deciding what you're looking for (and what you're willing to accept) in your future spouse is an extremely inexact science. You might never have had to consider whether you would date a girl in a wheelchair, for example, until you happen to meet one you can't seem to get out of your mind. Or you might not ever have considered marrying a guy from a different country...until you meet Pablo, a 23 year old convert from Brazil with a white-hot testimony of the gospel...not to mention an impressive physique and a smile that makes you feel weak in the knees.  As always, you're stuck with an impossible quandary--you don't want to be too picky and miss your chance at a happy marriage entirely, yet you don't want to make things too difficult for yourself by accepting a relationship filled with challenges you're just not prepared to handle...

As in all things, though, the principle of free agency applies here--each person decides for his/herself what to accept in a spouse, and then, for better or worse, accepts the consequences of those decisions...

Next: Knowing your potential spouse is 'right' for you...