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.
On the other hand, what does it say about your relationship if the parties involved are not willing to make such a commitment that would make it more difficult for them to walk away? As if the option of an easy way out should always be on the table like a get out of jail free card.
Well then why stop at marital contracts? Let's have contracts barring parents from walking out on their kids too. The whole point of a contract is to enforce an agreement, which implies that it needs enforcing. I might agree to lend you money. But if all we do is shake hands, what's to stop you from running off and never paying me back? That's what a contract ensures. It gives you an incentive to pay me back. But a contract on a relationship makes no sense to me. It contradicts what it means to love and trust someone. "Honey, I'm unhappy with you and want to end our relationship. But since it'll be too expensive to divorce, I'll just stay here and continue to be miserable."
Think about it this way. Imagine you came from a culture where there was no such thing as marriage. If you were in a serious relationship and wanted to commit to your partner, would you think to draw up a contract that made it harder for you or your partner to walk away? And what does that say about your relationship if you need to do that? I understand that marriage is more than just a contract. But my point is that commitment happens in the heart and the mind, not on a piece of paper. And think about why we have contracts in the first place. It's to ensure that both parties honor their agreement, which implies that in the absence of the contract, they wouldn't do so. That's my big gripe with marriage. It's that we place both people in a situation where they stay in the relationship, in part, because the cost of leaving is high. I don't want my partner to feel like they can't walk away. Because what I find the most flattering of all is that my partner is free to leave, but chooses to stay with my anyway.
Looking to my past, I see what you're saying, but it's a very negative way of looking at it.
But looking to my future, if marriage to me could offer my partner benefits and protections he couldn't get on his own, I would want the contract for his sake, because, you know, I'd love him and want the best for him, and would be willing to take the risk for him.
People can say that one partner can provide benefits for the other without getting married, but that's just the problem. My ex-SO wanted to co-sign on a car loan for me and put me on his health insurance. Nope, I would not even consider any of that. Special case, perhaps, because I had come to see that he was a narcissist (and possibly sociopathic), but I saw what he was trying to do, which was not help me and make my life easier, but make me obligated to him without taking any risks himself--risks he would have to take in marriage because he had a house and pension. In marriage, he couldn't just say, "Oh, you won't play it my way, eh? Zip! You have no more health insurance. Zip! Car is in my name, so I'm selling it out from under you even though you've been paying the loan this whole time."
Now obviously, I was too smart for his game in the end, and here we are. But this is why I'm laughing on another thread that the twit with the baby bump he's about to marry thinks she's snagged herself a good one, but oh, lawdie, that little game is going to backfire on her. They've known each other less than a year. She hasn't had time to see what he is. Have fun lying in that bed you're making, toots!
A lot of people have this perception that anyone who is over 40 and never been married is somehow "not normal". My experience has not totally borne that out yet, but my friends who fit this description DO seem to have a nerological problem or two. male and females I know.
If Im ever in the dating pool agian (God willing) I know I will only date a divorce or a widower. That is just my preference. Even before I met my SO I made it a rule to only date men over 40 who were DIVORCED or widowed,,,,,Your results may vary. But if women like me expect that, it is only fair for the men to right?
I read that Condileeza Rice has never been married and you know she is over 40...but she had a very important position in life., i.e. politics.
What does everyone think of the never marrieds over 40 men or women alike?
I did not realizer this. Honestly I think people in small towns and cities might think this way. But people in bigger cities do not.
Also what about people who are divorced? They are single too, just like someone who has never been married and has no baggage.
I think many people who never been married probably never found anyone they really wanted to spend their time with. Or their standards are just too high.
In major cities most residents are actually single. Not sure why you are biased against people who have never been married but that is your own preference. Just like only dating redheads...it is a preference.
Although I am young I am a bit offended by the topic as it will further your so called stereotype. Because it puts that stigma in peoples heads. This is how many people just "settle" and become miserable.
Well then why stop at marital contracts? Let's have contracts barring parents from walking out on their kids too. The whole point of a contract is to enforce an agreement, which implies that it needs enforcing. I might agree to lend you money. But if all we do is shake hands, what's to stop you from running off and never paying me back? That's what a contract ensures. It gives you an incentive to pay me back. But a contract on a relationship makes no sense to me. It contradicts what it means to love and trust someone. "Honey, I'm unhappy with you and want to end our relationship. But since it'll be too expensive to divorce, I'll just stay here and continue to be miserable."
I don't see it as a contradiction. In fact, signing a marriage license is more about protecting your spouse in the event of death, legalities with healthcare, it even helps to protect you and your spouse, in a way, in the event of divorce (splitting assets, etc...)
To me, refusing to make that legal commitment along with the emotional tells me that my spouse to be would not love me enough to want to provide legal benefits to me that could protect me down the road.
I don't see it as a contradiction. In fact, signing a marriage license is more about protecting your spouse in the event of death, legalities with healthcare, it even helps to protect you and your spouse, in a way, in the event of divorce (splitting assets, etc...)
To me, refusing to make that legal commitment along with the emotional tells me that my spouse to be would not love me enough to want to provide legal benefits to me that could protect me down the road.
You're talking about the legal benefits. But I'm talking about the legal penalties. I don't like the idea that I'll be penalized because I want to end a relationship. It's one thing to have an agreement about how to divide up assets like a house or investments. But when someone stays in a marriage because they're worried about the cost of a divorce, that's not a good sign.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,943,649 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by DennyCrane
You're talking about the legal benefits. But I'm talking about the legal penalties. I don't like the idea that I'll be penalized because I want to end a relationship. It's one thing to have an agreement about how to divide up assets like a house or investments. But when someone stays in a marriage because they're worried about the cost of a divorce, that's not a good sign.
People wanting benefits of partnership without giving something on the other end, aren't being reasonable.
You're talking about the legal benefits. But I'm talking about the legal penalties. I don't like the idea that I'll be penalized because I want to end a relationship. It's one thing to have an agreement about how to divide up assets like a house or investments. But when someone stays in a marriage because they're worried about the cost of a divorce, that's not a good sign.
It costs a couple hundred bucks and you can do it online. Divorce is easy, maybe people could argue much too easy.
This has been my experience too. I consider it kind of backwards to look down on people for that.
This thread is hilarious in the beginning. I'm glad a lot of those idiotic posters are gone now and the level-headed ones have come in. (Note that the thread began in 2012)
Anyway, I totally agree with the above. I grew up in a small town and was completely flabbergasted to see how many of my peers got married right out of high school. I couldn't understand how in the world they "met the person for them" when they'd hardly met anyone at all their entire lives. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't, and some of them clearly settled just to keep the status quo.
My mother provided me with some wise words as I was reading one particular wedding announcement. I asked her if there was something wrong with me that I had no interest in getting married unless I met the right person. She told me that getting married is NO accomplishment. Having a good marriage is. Words to live by.
I think we still see a lot of people--women especially--who just want to check marriage off their list, as if it proves something about their character. "Oh look, I have someone, so I must be something special." Meanwhile I know so many people who ended up miserable by this way of thinking.
Not everyone thinks of marriage as some ultimate finish line. Some people understand that it takes work and commitment, and they want to have their ducks in a row before they make that leap. Good on them for waiting until they are ready to make that decision, instead of jumping into something they don't want for the sake of image and popular opinion. Who the **** is anyone to judge them if they were ready at 25, 30, or not until 50.
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.
