Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course they're marriage minded men. But hear me out and this is how alot of young men in their 20's are looking at it
If I'm getting all the benefits of marriage without having to actually get married....Why would I do it unless its my dream woman? Hell I know guys who have a different women for each thing. One they date, sleep with casually on the side, one that has their children, one that cooks for them etc. I mean you have to put yourself in the position of guys and ask yourself the same thing.
To put it Simply... There's too many women giving out all the benefits of marriage that it offsets all the women who won't without the ring. If you say I'm not having his child unless we're married that's fine but there's tons of women who are willing to(40% of babies in America in 2011 were had outside of wedlock). I've been in good to great relationships in my life, but in 2012 a woman would literally have to sweep me off feet to Tie the not
And what you highlighted is the exactly what I'm talking about. One foot in and one foot out, why do it if you don't have to. So most of them don't. I'm not saying I blame you either, no it's probably not right, but it's only directly affecting the women crazy enough to go for it.
How is her situation any different than if they had gotten married before moving in together and divorced after breaking up?
I explained it earlier in posts no. 258 and 262. No there's no guarantee with anything and yes a married man could do the same exact things as those 'cohabitation men.' But the difference is the mentality and brad highlighted it well in post no. 279.
Most of the people who stay in this area who marry do it either right after high school or right after they graduate college, which puts them in the 20s.
Not in the areas I've lived. No one I know has gotten married right after high school. Most of the people in my family and social circle got married in their late 20's or early 30's. 25-27 seems to be the average age range nowadays.
I explained it earlier in posts no. 258 and 262. No there's no guarantee with anything and yes a married man could do the same exact things as those 'cohabitation men.' But the difference is the mentality and brad highlighted it well in post no. 279.
But there is no mentality of "permanence" these days, that's why there are so many divorces. And it isn't the marriage license that keeps a man from bailing on a whim, it's the kids and real estate. And that, esp. the kids, is often there in long term cohabitation.
Marriage is financial ruin for a man, when you have to deal with community property and alimony.
How so? Alimony is rare these days and community property is assets gained since marriage. Splitting the 401k has no effect on current cash flow and splitting household goods is trivial. Real estate can be sold if the receiver cannot buy out the equity.
I think it's kids that are financial ruin because that essentially means supporting two households and gives the wife a basis to stay in the home.
But there is no mentality of "permanence" these days, that's why there are so many divorces. And it isn't the marriage license that keeps a man from bailing on a whim, it's the kids and real estate. And that, esp. the kids, is often there in long term cohabitation.
You can accept what you want as far as these things go and I will do the same. If you accept there is no such thing as 'permanence' going in, then that's what it is. Even so, the alternative to that for me isn't 'Oh well, throw up my hands and shack up for 5, 6, 7 years!' If you think the divorce rate is high (which people love to throw out there), look at the way these cohabitation situations play out. How many of these cohabitation couples will become 'Mr. And Mrs. Chows?' I'm not talking about these people who met 20, 30 years ago like they did. I'm talking about these 22, 24, 25 year old couples who have met in recent times. Most of them I see are a revolving door of cohabitation every couple of years and there's almost always 2 or 3 kids in there somewhere as well. It all looks very unstable to me, because it is. The 'Mr. and Mrs. Chows' are few and far between when you're talking about these modern couples.
I also said in the other post that a marriage license is not a rulebook or a protective shield, it is in fact, a piece of paper.
How so? Alimony is rare these days and community property is assets gained since marriage. Splitting the 401k has no effect on current cash flow and splitting household goods is trivial. Real estate can be sold if the receiver cannot buy out the equity.
I think it's kids that are financial ruin because that essentially means supporting two households and gives the wife a basis to stay in the home.
I wish we'd avoid stating kids = financial ruin.
For the average couple that divorces, the man is not supporting two households, he may indirectly be contributing to a portion of the costs though through child support. If the woman wants to stay in her home post divorce for the average person, she's giving up quite a bit, or working more.
How so? Alimony is rare these days and community property is assets gained since marriage. Splitting the 401k has no effect on current cash flow and splitting household goods is trivial. Real estate can be sold if the receiver cannot buy out the equity.
I think it's kids that are financial ruin because that essentially means supporting two households and gives the wife a basis to stay in the home.
Regardless of how uncommon or common alimony, it still hurts men a lot more than women.
In California, if the couple was married 10 years or longer, the guy has to pay alimony to his ex-wife as long as she lives or until she remarries.
You do realize that many women are now making as much or more than their SOs?
I've only dated one guy that made more money than me and he was a jerk that didn't last long...if I had gotten married and divorced from my last boyfriend I would have owed HIM alimony.
Maybe you should just find a woman that is your equal.
Not so fast JetJockey.
While more women have careers more than ever and are making more money than ever, more men still have to pay alimony than women because in MOST relationships, the man does make more than the woman.
I for one think alimony is a crock in most cases. I only understand it if a guy (or in smaller cases women)is paying until the spouse gets back on her feet. I do not support lifetime alimony and not in most cases because it is rewarding lazy people. I dated a man paying his ex alimony and she refused to work. Then there are the cases like in Florida where the second spouse often has to pay alimony to the first wife, imagine that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
