to think a lot of men will not marry if they already get everything?

I know more couples who aren’t married than are. In most cases they both have decent professional jobs so are not really financially reliant on each other.

All that will change next year though as IHT rules regarding pensions change and that makes a huge difference.

We’ll get married or have a civil partnership before April 2027 but doubt we’ll tell anyone else we’ve done it. It is purely for IHT reasons as we’ve been together 20 years and have a 5 year old DS so don’t need a marriage to signify commitment.

Absolutely none of this has anything to do with what the OP is talking about.

I’d honestly start your own thread if you’d like to discuss this.

Oh gosh yes. There are millions of men out there who don't love the mothers of their children.

Why do you view marriage as a reward for a woman, that she'd only get by withholding sex, money or kids from a man?
Weird.

More fool anyone who invests years in a relationship based on words.

Genuinely curious, as Mumsnet seems to love marriage - WWYD in my situation? I am much better off financially than DP (I own our home, which I’d bought before getting together with DP, I have a much better pension and more in savings/ investments. He is in negative equity on a property he owns and has little in the way of a pension/ savings). We have a child together. Why would the ‘legal protection’ of marriage make any sense for me in this scenario?

I think the fact you consider women to be some kind of ticketed show is the more problematic thing here. My husband proposed because he wanted to call me his wife, not to unlock some paywalled bonus features.

If me and DH weren’t married it would change nothing. In almost 20 years I’ve never once used marriage tax allowance or asset transfership.

If someone is refusing to get married to a partner after years and years of being asked, it’s nothing to do with “already getting everything” which is a pathetic way to consider a partner’s contribution to a relationship, and more to do with the fact that they don’t have confidence in the relationship.

I also suspect many of these people insisting on a marriage wouldn’t be satisfied with a £62 quicky at the council.

Yes you’ve explained it very clearly OP.

I’m not sure why some people aren’t getting it.

If a woman ( or a man) wants to get married and settles for someone who doesn't , that's on them.
Move on and find someone who wants the same things you do ( before having children) .
Increasingly though, women do not want to get married either. Especially when they are the higher earners.
Tbh I hate this whole narrative that if a woman is unmarried, it's because a 'man' won't marry her.
It's really not every woman's mission in life, some of us make our own decisions.

There’s a really lovely lady on YouTube, Liana and she has two beautiful children and is doing such a fantastic job raising them her partner is clearly loving and in love with her but is withholding marriage for some reason it’s so utterly bizarre and I can’t watch them without feeling a little sad for her.

It is if course legally financially and socially easier to walk away from a child than it is from a marriage.

That is very sad.

Women need to be very clear on what they want. We’re pushing 60 and PIL would have dragged DH to the altar if i’d been pregnant before marriage and he was not willing to marry me. Times change, but if I was 30 years younger and starting out now it would be no DC before marriage as far as i’m concerned.

Given that most men (and of course Im talking generally before I get loads of waffle about this) probably have kids because their partner/wife wants them, im not sure that makes any difference.

Women tend to be the pushers for having kids, they want them, the man goes along with it, if women said they wouldnt have kids unless they were married the birthrate would be even lower.

Women come off worse in most marriages - poorer and with less savings, worse mental and physical health and live shorter lives. Single women are happiest of all. Why would she buy the pig when she can get the sausage free?

Yes.

She’s carried the children he may (or may not) have set out to have. Maybe he sees her as a good mother and feels that’s important, hence why he has kids with her. But that doesn’t mean he sees the woman as potential wife material.

I wonder what message this sends to the kids - Mummy wants to marry Daddy, but Daddy doesn’t want to get tied down and stuck with Mummy.

I agree with you to a point. I think a lot of men become comfortable, and if getting married wouldn't really change their lives, they often don't feel any urgency to make it happen.

That said, if they know their partner wants marriage and they keep putting it off while stringing her along, I'd question how committed they really are. To me, that suggests they're either unsure or keeping their options open.

If a man genuinely loves his partner and is fully committed to building a future with her, it's hard to see a good reason to avoid marriage indefinitely.

Yes and more so if she already has DC and her own home.

Having a child with her is the best way to cement his feet to her floor.

I would not have children with a man who couldn’t commit to marriage. In my opinion - having children is the biggest commitment of all - I would not agree to kids before the wedding.

I think it depends. In your 20s and 30s couples marry to commit on the basis of a shared life and sharing of workload. This is logical and both bring something to the relationship.

For second and and third relationships where there is inequality in assets, why would you marry?

I would not remarry so a new DH ould walk off with half my cash.

Men have generally not been conditioned since childhood to believe that their worth is defined by whether someone is willing to marry them.

Same here. I dont want to be someones wife in any case

And I would be disadvantaged financially if I was. No thank you.