How do you deal with ultimatums? (partner, wedding, looking, relations)

[Yellow Jacket]

I tell them to screw off.

[kitkatbar]

Originally Posted by DR2012

I think a decision vs ultimatium is how it's put. If she wants to discuss their future, that might be OK. Perhaps asking him if he felt marriage was something he believed in, was he open to it? Kids? Was he the marrying kind, was it in the future, that sort of thing.

The problem is, the sort of guy we're talking about (the kind who wouldn't have proposed by the two-year mark anyway) is the kind who is fine with discussing vague inclinations for the future... they're just not okay with the idea of ever following through. I remember the OP's other posts. He's been in this exact situation and has strung a nice girl along when she wants to get married, he's met her family, lived with her for years, gotten pets with her... but now her fertility is reaching that point where they need to poop or get off the pot and he needs more time to dither over it. I really can't blame her for not wanting to waste any more time on a guy who loves all the free milk but never wants to buy the cow.

Originally Posted by DR2012

Talk about it... was she the one, an actual discussion of feelings and the future and what they both wanted, expectations. And, maybe she would tell him that she did want to marry, not just date infinitely and she felt that if he didn't agree she would probably decide that she may not be able to be in that scenario indefinitely for life.

But how is that any different from stating that you either want to get engaged by X point in time and married by Y point in time or you plan to move on? Honestly informing your partner of your standards isn't better than blindsiding them by leaving one day because you've reached your limit of how much B.S. you'll take without a real commitment? The truth is, guys who want to string women along and get the benefits without any commitment will whine about the technicalities of it all day. And it's all a smokescreen. The truth is, they wouldn't be happy with ANY scenario except the woman continuing to follow the no-commitment arrangement and demanding nothing of them.

Originally Posted by DR2012

But if she says point blank, "I expect a proposal by the end of the year (and it's say today, Nov 3rd) or I'm dumping you" then, that would be the ultimatium, and I wouldn't handle something like that well. I wouldn't want to be that girl, because to me I wouldn't want a forced proposal.

I think the point is more, if the guy is such a wuss that he both can't propose honestly and doesn't have the stones to end it, the girl doesn't want him either. Hence the dumping option if it hasn't happened by then.

Originally Posted by RogersParkGuy

Frankly, I would sort of see her point.

Whether two years is a reasonable timetable is debatable. But some kind of timetable is reasonable.

Let's lets be honest. Most men who say, "I don't want to be put on a timetable" just don't want to get married. Period. They want to keep the woman with them, but they don't want to make a firm commitment. So, they just string women along with vague promises of marriage "someday." But someday never comes. In the end, the woman realizes she has invested years of her life in a man who just won't follow through. I cannot blame women (or men, for that matter) who take steps not to get played that way.

Exactly, this. It's actually quite pitiful and entitled that after wasting years of a woman's life where she's devoting everything and planning on a future, some men would have the gall to act put out over being the recipient of what they term an "ultimatum." If you don't want her enough to make a commitment after two years, stop wasting her time.

[carnivalday]

I see nothing wrong with this at all. This gal knows what she wants, she wants to be married and have a family. If she is dating someone for 2 years, and can't get a committment after that time, there obviously won't be one, and she needs to move on to find someone she can be with. It does her no good to be permanently dating someone. Its not what she wants.

People know after 2 years of dating if you want to get married or not. If you dont, then you're not dating the right person. Or you just don't want to be married. And theres nothing wrong with that. But don't be surprised when the person you are dating who wants to be married, moves on. I dont call it an ultimatum, its simply expressing what she wants in life. If she doesnt get it with you, she'll find someone else.

[nybbler]

Originally Posted by kitkatbar

Exactly, this. It's actually quite pitiful and entitled that after wasting years of a woman's life where she's devoting everything and planning on a future, some men would have the gall to act put out over being the recipient of what they term an "ultimatum." If you don't want her enough to make a commitment after two years, stop wasting her time.

Wasting? You mean the relationship is merely a means to the end of marriage, and not an important thing in itself? Yeah, the guy should run, run very fast.

(seriously, what is this, the 1950s? Or the 1850s?)

[Yellow Jacket]

Originally Posted by nybbler

Wasting? You mean the relationship is merely a means to the end of marriage, and not an important thing in itself? Yeah, the guy should run, run very fast.

(seriously, what is this, the 1950s? Or the 1850s?)

Antiquated thinking indeed. It is devastating in the modern world. It's the equivalent to the Civil War when they had more modern weapons but still used battle tactics back in the days of the American revolution. The result? Absolute carnage.

[DR2012]

Originally Posted by kitkatbar

The problem is, the sort of guy we're talking about (the kind who wouldn't have proposed by the two-year mark anyway) is the kind who is fine with discussing vague inclinations for the future... they're just not okay with the idea of ever following through. I remember the OP's other posts. He's been in this exact situation and has strung a nice girl along when she wants to get married, he's met her family, lived with her for years, gotten pets with her... but now her fertility is reaching that point where they need to poop or get off the pot and he needs more time to dither over it. I really can't blame her for not wanting to waste any more time on a guy who loves all the free milk but never wants to buy the cow.

But how is that any different from stating that you either want to get engaged by X point in time and married by Y point in time or you plan to move on? Honestly informing your partner of your standards isn't better than blindsiding them by leaving one day because you've reached your limit of how much B.S. you'll take without a real commitment? The truth is, guys who want to string women along and get the benefits without any commitment will whine about the technicalities of it all day. And it's all a smokescreen. The truth is, they wouldn't be happy with ANY scenario except the woman continuing to follow the no-commitment arrangement and demanding nothing of them.

I thought this scenario in question was coming up for the first time though.
If he had been stringing her along, and it had been in a vague discussion time and time again, then yeah it would be different.

Originally Posted by augiedogie

Here's the situation. The young lady has found her "prince charming", but the prince is hesitant to tie the knot for some very good reasons. Once the man gets married, in the eyes of the law, he is in the weaker position. If after a child or two, she can divorce him, force him to pay child support, maybe alimony, and maybe get the house and other goodies. He will see his children occasionally and have a big child support bill. 50% of marriages end in divorce, and 70% of these divorces are filed by the wife. So the man has put himself in a precarious position and that means it puts him in the weaker position. He had better be nice and give her what she wants or he will be accused of being abusive and find himself divorced. Many men have logically decided to opt out of the marriage trap. Lots about this on Youtube. I'd advise any young man to be very careful and very selective in whom he chooses to marry. EG If future mother-in-law is divorced, your chance of being divorced goes up considerably. If MIL is married, observe how she treats her husband. That's who your future mate sees as an example.

Also, keep in mind that after the children come, she will most likely value her bond to her children more than you. This was proved by a thread in City-Data. So keep in mind, in the eyes of many women, a husband is the means to get what she really values in life, children and a good provider for her and her children.

What a sad scenario. Not all women are like this. Yeah all men should just stay single and cellibate or they are doomed to THIS life!

[redrocket2]

Originally Posted by InternetTroll

I'd dump her then and there. I do not do well with people telling me what to do, especially with stuff like that. Also on a totally unrelated note 2 years would not be enough time for me to make that decision anyway. I'd say more like 4.

Yeah but if you ask around most women scoff at even taking 2 years to make a decision when you are 30 something years old... theorizing that it's an ahe old enough where you are supposed to know these things quickly.

[nearnorth]

Originally Posted by redrocket2

Yeah but if you ask around most women scoff at even taking 2 years to make a decision when you are 30 something years old... theorizing that it's an ahe old enough where you are supposed to know these things quickly.

They do? The 30-something marriages I can think of, with a couple of exceptions, involved at least 3-5 years of dating before marriage.

[kat949]

Originally Posted by redrocket2

If a woman told you that she will not wait for you past the 2 year mark, meaning that if you do not propose by then you are history, how would you interpret it? Would you think that was reasonable? Or would you interpret it as meaning that you are not something worth enough to wait it out and that you are just replaceable with another man?

If a woman found the man of her dreams would she really put a timeline on a proposal? Especially if it's just 2 years? Or conversely, if a man does not propose within 2 years then is it reasonable to assume that he is just not that into her?

I don't believe in ultimatums, but I can see how a person can get frustrated and want to know where they stand.

At that point, I suggest the person demanding an ultimatum to leave.

Because:
1. Nobody has the rights to tell a person how they should or should not live their lives
2. Ultimatums infringe on the rights of others
3. Ultimatums are an indication that the relationship isn't mutual

I think when a guy knows he wants to marry someone, he comes to a point in his life where he realizes how happy he is with her, how much he cares and loves her, and he wants to be there for her for the rest of his and her life.

That knowing is far more romantic than a chick demanding her bf to marry her (stereotypically speaking in these scenarios). Vice versa, with men too. Perhaps the party on the questioning end needs to walk away and grow a backbone.

Besides that, most people get a feeling early on whether or not the relationship has potential. It's those who continue lying to themselves that they feel they have to convince themselves this is 'right.' But usually, that warm feeling inside will indicate one's answer. No need to push for ultimatums.

[shortnblack]

Originally Posted by Dewdrop93

What's the difference between an ultimatum and just making a decision? Some posters seem to be okay with one but not the other but I guess I don't know what the difference is.

Ultimatum is more of a threat. Making a decision is just making a decision.