To feel a bit miffed - marriage.

It can benefit men at the "expense" of women too! In the time I've been married I've been the higher earner at times, the lower earner at other times. I've funded my DH through a career change and he's funded me through reduced hours caring for our disabled DC. Neither of us feels the need to hold the threat of leaving over the other, we agreed we're in it all together. Although if I DID feel I needed to keep him on his toes it would probably have been best to not marry.

I disagree with this. As a man who has married once, if I could be reincarnated as a 20-year-old, I cannot imagine any scenario in which I would do it again. This would have absolutely nothing to do with how much I liked the woman.

I believe that people in relationships will behave considerably better if they know the other person can and will walk away the moment they cease to be well-treated. The "security" of marriage, to the extent it exists, undermines that safeguard.

(I do acknowledge that marriage sometimes benefits women, but their gain comes at the expense of an equivalent loss to their partners.)

My children have double barrel names and no one has ever not used the full name. TBF I don’t always use my full name but the kids do I know some people don’t like it but worked really well for us.

Agree. But if one partner doesn't want to share those risks that's a valid position to to take. He might well feel he doesn't want to be a drag on her are some point and vice versa.

It works both ways though. If OP found herself unable to work for some reason he would fund her. Benefits/risks of marriage are often discussed here based on a snapshot in time (equal vs higher/lower incomes). This misses the point. A lot can change in a lifetime and ill health, disability, redundancy can be unpredictable things. Marriage is an agreement to share those risks.

If she lives with him she’d still be funding him to the same degree. And they’re already tied together, they share a child.

or don’t want to be tied to someone. The cost thing is nonsense, getting married can be very cheap

Not wanting to be tied to someone is perfectly reasonable.

And I'd question if marriage is cheap. It's very expensive if the couple split up, and as someone said above, people change their minds - marriages do end. I'm not sure it even cheap if you stay married. What happens if he quits work? Even if you don't divorce you'd be funding him to some degree.

These men who say marriage is meaningless, pointless, just a bit of paper, too expensive etc etc. This is always a lie. If it was pointless or meaningless then why not do it , if it means a lot to your partner ? The reality is that they do know it has meaning and purpose, they just don’t want to marry the person they are with, or don’t want to be tied to someone. The cost thing is nonsense, getting married can be very cheap.
Clearly he thinks marriage is important, with the revealing comment towards your daughter.
In your place I would be having a long look at how I felt about this, and if marriage meant a lot to me, I would make it clear it was a deal breaker.

My friend had this ongoing battle, then they split and she realised it was him holding out for financial reasons ie protecting his assets.

Miffed is the most British word in the world.

Anyway.

Those talking about civil partnerships - forgive my ignorance but what’s the difference between that and marriage? Why would someone who doesn’t want to get married, choose a civil partnership as an acceptable alternative?

YANBU to feel miffed. It is a weird thing to say if you 'don't believe in marriage' You don't mention any other problems with your relationship, been together 7 years etc. So I think you need to ask him again what the deal is with this comment. It makes no sense to say 'she might believe in it' The point is, he said he did not for 7 years, so why would he even suggest it to a 4 yr old? (Let alone how weird it is to say this to a 4 year old) People tend to bring children up as mirror images of themselves, wether intentionally or not, why would he be putting another image in her head that HE doesn't agree with?

Op, women with children need the financial protections of marriage because they lose out in terms of career, savings and pension by being the default parent.

Op, you’re miffed for a reason. Your dp has possibly given you an insight to how he feels about marriage. It seems that he does believe it has value and hopes that for his Dd, but won’t extend that to you.

Agreed. It's always the ones who 'don't believe' in marriage who eventually ditch the first one to immediately marry another.

Some women need to learn to stand their ground instead of simpering around waiting for a proposal that won't happen.

It's interesting, but we've seen it such a lot on here.

I wouldn't have agreed to have a child before getting married anyway to be honest. I don't know why so many women think a man will suddenly change their mind once children come along.

Never mind the name. I hope he has made you the beneficiary of his pension and insurance policies. Also hope your home is worth less than the £325k IHT threshold or that you have a chunk of savings to pay the tax bill that would follow an untimely death. Also hope you have a joint account or that you can pay the mortgage on your own in the event of an untimely death. Marriage gives you financial security if the worse should happen.

Doesn’t believe in marriage but your daughter has his last name? Not on!

Getting married and being walked down the aisle are two separate things. OP hasn’t said anywhere that she wants the latter.

Goodness me, some posters on here really lack in empathy, the same posters who’d never speak like this in real life to someone they cared about. There is just no need to be disrespectful. OP clearly stayed with her partner because she loved him. We all have to compromise on things in relationships and she thought this wasn’t the hill to die on. Having said that, it’s still possible to feel miffed when same partner expresses excitement about walking his daughter down the aisle, because he should think of his audience. Just because you accept something about your partner doesn’t mean your wish entirely goes away, does it? And OP is just venting, what’s the harm in being understanding about it.
OP - maybe say to him that comment upset you because don’t you think my dad would also have loved to walk his daughter down the aisle, and that’s now not going to happen.
Either way, whatever you choose to do from here- I understand and I’m sorry that comment triggered you.

Excellent! We had 2 witnesses and just went back to their house afterwards. We wanted to buy a house and so we were saving for a deposit. Still happy 37 years on! (and have a really nice house 😊)

I think it’s hypocrisy. He doesn’t believe in marriage but is looking forward to the prospect of walking his daughter down the aisle? Of course it’s hypocrisy.
Seriously some right twats on this thread, picking apart the op for absolutely no reason.

I’d be really hurt too OP.

The problem isn’t what he said: it’s the fact that you’ve failed to advocate for yourself and what you want

Yes, I was unexpectedly pregnant and knew exactly how things would turn out had we waited. Marched that fella down the aisle within a month. 20 years on still very happy.

Why would he assume she’d want walking down the asle and giving away like she’s a possession?

Because her mum wants it?

Then you’re not fully committed or you wouldn’t see any risk.