Quality of Parents' Marriages

     There is evidence that the love-shys' parents had somewhat less
satisfying marriages than did the parents of the non-shys. However, the
issue of divorce versus non-divorce did not differentiate between the
three groups of parents. In other words, the love-shys' parents were no
more likely than the non-shys' parents to have ever divorced or sepa-
rated. For example, 20 percent of the non-shys' parents had either
divorced or separated. The analogous figure for the older love-shys was
17 percent, and for the younger love-shys it was 23 percent. Looking at
divorce alone (excluding separation), only 6 percent of the older love-
shys' parents had been divorced. Eight percent of the younger love-
shys' parents had divorced. And just 7 percent of the non-shys' parents
had been divorced.
     However, I asked another question which may constitute a better
barometer of marital quality than the issue of divorce/separation itself.
I asked each man: "If your parents were not divorced, about how happy
would you rate the quality of their marriage?" Excluding those men
whose parents had actually been divorced, fully 45 percent of the older
love-shys and 41 percent of the young love-shys classified their parents'
marriages as having been "not too happy" or "unhappy". Among the
non-shy men, 31 percent classified their parents' marriages this way.
     In another question I asked: "Did your parents get along with each
other during your childhood, or was there conflict, fighting, and dis-
satisfaction?" And here only 6 percent of the non-shy men indicated
that their parents had gotten along with each other less than moderately
well. In contrast, fully 36 percent of the older love-shy men together
with 31 percent of the younger love-shys indicated that their parents
had gotten along with each other less than moderately well.
      I also asked each man: "While you were growing up, about how
often did your father praise your mother?" And only 12 percent of the
non-shys responded "rarely or never", compared to 30 percent of the
young love-shys and 35 percent of the older ones. This question may
have some implications in terms of modeling. Most sons, including even
those who do not get along very well with their fathers, model their
own behavior to some extent after that of their fathers. The love-shys'
inability to relate to young women in a positive way may be partially
attributable to deficits in the ways in which their own fathers had failed
to openly model this behavior vis-a-vis their mothers. Of course, as so
much evidence presented in this book indicates, most of the love-shys'
mothers had been far from charming or attractive. And perhaps their
objective qualities and characteristics had done little to inspire praise or
admiration from husbands or sons.
      To be sure, praise had not flown in a particularly generous fashion
in the reverse direction either. I asked each man: "While you were
growing up, about how often did your mother praise your father?" And
only 6 percent of the non-shy men indicated "rarely or hardly ever". In
contrast, fully 28 percent of the young love-shys and 33 percent of the
older love-shys said "rarely or hardly ever".
      In sum, it would appear that the love-shys' parents had had sig-
nificantly less emotionally satisfying marriages than those of the non-
shy men. And this had doubtless been reflected in the ways these parents
had openly comported themselves vis-a-vis each other around the house.
      However, it also appears that the love-shys' parents had had some
aversion to the divorce option. Perhaps there had been an unhealthy,
symbiotic dependency between the husbands and the wives in many of
these marriages. In other words, frequent turmoil and tension may have
been perceived by many of these people as less threatening and less
distressing than the idea of divorce or permanent separation. In essence,
a tension-filled relationship may have been viewed as preferable to the
absence of any close primary relationship at all.