Although my divorce was almost ten years old, I am not at a stage of full recovery. It is
bad in form and substance to dwell on such an unpleasant topic; I hope my real-life
experience will help other Lighters or their children. Since most of the Lighters are
happily married, our percentage of divorces are much lower than the national average of 33
to 50%. Very few Lighters met my ex-wife, and your verdict on my failure will be solely
based on my inputs without the ex's distortion.
Firstly, I got married late, in 1976, to a ten years younger overseas Chinese (Hakka) from
Durban, South Africa after a very short courting (less than three months). I realized that
I have to make up the age difference by treating the spouse leniently in all respects. She
became the speaker of the house, the finance minister, and more. My theory on treating the
wife leniently stems from my singular belief that the amount of leniency equals the ratio
of percentages of married years to the actual ages of the two, with the wife's on top
(numerator), and the husband's below (denominator). It becomes obvious that the ratio is
almost independent of the number of years together, but only dependent on the ages when
the two first married ( the initial condition). and the incremental years thereafter.
The fallacy is that the man has to be lenient towards the wife even if he is only one year
older than the wife. To illustrate my theory: Three couples A, B, and C with their ages
(man's/wife's) of 55/25, 34/24, and 28/27 respectively. The leniency factor is 55/25 =
2.20, 34/24 = 1.42, and 28/27 = 1.037 at the beginning. Ten years later they become 66/26
= 1.83, 45/35 = 1.29, and 39/38 = 1.026. Sixty years later (if they all live that long)
116/86 = 1.35,95/85 = 1.12, and 89/88 = 1.011. The numerical analysis clearly shows that
"sugar daddy" (couple A, 55/25) must be valid at all times; however, sixty years
later the sugar daddy can treat the wife like couple B (34/24 when first married) after
less than ten years. To treat the wife almost equal to that of couple C (28/27 when first
married) takes more than a thousand years (i.e., 1056/1026 = 1.03, 1035/1025 = 1.02,
1028/1027 = 1.001) if they live that long! To top it all, the couple A's husband has still
to treat the wife of 1026 years old only a little bit less than that of couple C when they
were first married (1056/1026 = 1.03 < 28/27 = 1.037).
I practiced what I preached, and more. I got divorced after eleven years with the
splitting-up started three years earlier when she successfully withdrew the proceeds of
selling a three unit apartment from the joint account. It was for a 1035 exchange, and the
money was to stay in the bank over the weekend. I know it's no use to cry over spilled
milk, but I like to know what should I do in case my luck changes tomorrow?
¡@
|
Get
your own Free Home Page 