Aah, okay, I see.
No, I wasn't referring to divorce, because divorce is actually a pretty healthy failure mode (or can be, at least). The worse failure modes are the ones where people do not disengage for whatever reason and stay in the situation indefinitely.
What I wanted to get at is that "relationship turning sour" is (usually) nothing one has zero control over.
Because the logical chain proposed was "Things can always turn sour" -> "You always need a way out". Or at least that's how I read it.
So I've put the prerequisite into question there.
My point, in a gist, is that I think it should be possible to greatly reduce the probability of "things turning sour" by doing much much more work upfront (before committing to a situation), and through that, the need for an out could be shrunk.
Probabilities are of course probabilities, but still.
Or, even simpler, I feel like people, generally speaking, could spend more time _actually_ getting to know each other before moving forward; and it would only do them good + they would treat each other better + they'd actually see each other (more).
___
Moving fast and breaking things is everywhere, and it seems to be breaking people too.
=> So the friction of _really_ looking at who a person _actually_ is (which might be unpleasant) might be necessary.
Even though SV would love to have you believe that frictionless existence is desirable.
It is, up until it isn't. And then you're fucked.
But the solution is not to assume that everything is broken, but to build healthy stuff instead.