"Is it easier if you're both Stoic."

Yes, of course it is. Of course it's easier when you're both on the same page (in concerns to anything).

But, again, challenge, or individual differences, aren't a reason to abandon a relationship.

Your mom isn't Stoic. Your sister or brother. Your dad. Etc.

Ah, and then: "Is divorce Stoic?"

The answer is, it depends.

A Stoic doesn't tuck tail and run the moment he or she runs into friction.

If you've not really tried, I would say divorce is a pretty un-Stoic route.

If, on the other hand, you have tried, genuinely, then divorce could be Just.

So, to review:

1. Partner doesn't need to be a Stoic
2. Partner may well be right, and you should be willing to be wrong
3. Be firm in your practice, and explain your reasoning when asked
4. Don't try to "teach them" (unless it's through example)
5. Don't badmouth them to your kids
6. Let them grow

...they may, in a few years, mature, change, become better people, and if you've planted an unjust and evil visage of them in your kids, then you've made it harder for your partner to have a healthy relationship with your children. Don't do that. This is seen a lot in divorces. This is unjust.

...instead, you set an example. You keep a cool head, you keep a fair and Just measure. If your partner presents a danger to the kids, you get them out of harms way but you don't do it in a way that demonises the other parent.

This is important because your partner is on a journey same as you...

Lastly, and this is critical if you have children, you must be a consistent human being with your kids and you cannot say things to them than diminish their other parent... that is unjust. If your partner throws an emotional hissy fit, you don't tell the kids their mom/dad is crazy...

Then, we should always be willing, when asked, to explain our reasoning. Just because we might view our partner as irrational, doesn't mean we're right. Even if we are right, irrational people can arrive at valid and rational conclusions. We should be willing to explain AND be challenged.

Next, because we believe they are wrong we may be tempted to attempt to correct them. I advise against this. Instead, we should be firm in our positions and not waver, so long as our positions are, as we reason them to be Just. We do not leave our path in order to appease our partners.

What I have found to be the Just response is to accept that whatever philosophical journey they are on, and destination they work towards, is entirely their choice. They are making those choices because the believe they are the right choices to make so, if they're wrong, they don't know it.

Surely, we need to consider and concern ourselves with it. We may not see the indulgence in negative emotions useful, we may, and indeed we do, believe that they are incredibly dangerous to safe, rational decision making, but our partners DO NOT.

However, Stoicism doesn't instruct us to manage the emotions or personal beliefs of other people. So your partner, and mine, are not an influence on our own practice HOWEVER, at the same time, we need to ask, "What is a Just way to manage this major difference between us?"

Second, I know, form first-hand experience, that it can be extremely frustrating at times. Some people are deeply rooted in the feeling part of experiencing life. I'm married to a Filipina, so I can tell you that I know all about this. My wife regularly tells me not to be logical about emotions.

First, much of the world isn't Stoic, and we get along with most of it just fine. So your partner not being a Stoic doesn't mean your partner needs to go. Or, for that matter, convert.

“O shit, Stoicism”

Owens.

It reminds me of how I felt the day I realised the bus driver from Mrs. Doubtfire was also the narrating voice of Grampa Time the 1980s children’s bedtime clock. Sydney Walker.