Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To ask genuinely, why people don't get married?

617 replies

Lookandlearn · 05/04/2011 19:38

if they are in a committed, permanent relationship and have children? It's a genuine question and I am happy to be ignored if it's too mosey, but gives an airing to side issues from another thread on here.

OP posts:
RevoltingPeasant · 06/04/2011 16:12

Have only read to page 9 (!), but wanted to share this.

Yesterday, went to hospital to see (male) consultant about forthcoming op.

Cons.: Sit down, Mrs Peasant.

Oh, are you Mrs or Miss?

RP: Er, Ms is fine, actually.

Cons.: Right do you smoke? No? Any meds? No? Are you married?

RP: I'm ---

Cons.: No, you've already told me, haven't you, you're not, you're a Ms.

RP: Confused

Cons.: But are you, er, g... living with a partner?

RP: !!!

The only reason I didn't anything is 'cos he is shortly going to be messing about in my vital organs with a scalpel.

Wamster · 06/04/2011 16:50

Agreed, RevoltingPeasant, don't know what the heck your marital status has to do with an operation you're going to have! Hope it goes well for you, anyway.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 06/04/2011 16:54

RevoltingPeasant - You should just have asked, "is it relevant?" as it quite likely is for determining next of kin as you are having an operation.

But it's a pretty clumsy way of asking the question.

boredagain · 06/04/2011 17:01

so you dont have the same name as MIL...

comixminx · 06/04/2011 17:04

TCNY - clearly they're not the exact same thing if we're not giving them equally to both sets of people! But I can see this argument is going nowhere.

RevoltingPeasant · 06/04/2011 17:22

Coalition, I know I know, but it kind of takes you by surprise. I think he now thinks I'm a whisper it lesbian and quite embarrassed.

It visibly confused him later when I asked if the op would affect my ability to have children. Grin

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 06/04/2011 17:22

It depends if you think marriage/civil partnership is about legal rights and responsibilities or about the way you assume those rights and responsibilities.

Describing the trivial differences as 'oppression' is clearly ridiculous.

Flowerpotmummy · 06/04/2011 17:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

scottishmummy · 06/04/2011 17:35

im unmarried and dont want or seek an alternative ceremony.i know how i feel i know we are stable and dont need validation or external approbation.i dont want to emuate marriage ceremeny or have state ascribe me assumption of cohabitating rights.our private life is private,and we individually decide how we protect ourselves financially.have done this via a solicitor not via marriage

Wamster · 06/04/2011 17:36

Well, the way I see the commitment issue is like this: I would assume that ALL married couples were committed unless evidence proved otherwise (not that I care as such) because they've held themselves out to be a couple formally via marriage.
Cohabiting couples may be committed to each other but then again it would be a mistake to assume that living together always means commitment because it does not. This causes a lot of problems for couples as one person (usually the woman) sees cohabitation as commitment whereas the other person (usually the man) sees it as a temporary arrangment.
So if there were a room full of 50 married couples and 50 cohabiting, if I had to bet, I would say that the married set would have more couples intact after 5 years then the cohabiting lot.
Obviously, there would be divorce in the married lot and lasting commitment in the cohabiting lot, but if I had to bet: I'd say the married were more likely to have more intact couples than the cohabiting lot.

scottishmummy · 06/04/2011 17:39

you automatically assume cohabitees less committed?that's your individual assumption and prejudice but doesnt make it necessarily so

noddyholder · 06/04/2011 17:43

I wouldn't assume anything you may get a shock! Anyway if it is all about being more committed protected etc what is the reason for the hideous dresses Grin.

FattyAcid · 06/04/2011 17:45

I am unmarried and would be financially disadvantaged by getting married as I owned my house befoer I met dp therefore the substantial assets of our relationship are in my sole name.

Dp is against marriage on principle

That is why we are not married

noddyholder · 06/04/2011 17:49

I think I would be too fattyacid. I don't really know many women who aren't at least on equal footing with their partners or husbands

catinboots · 06/04/2011 17:52

DP was with his ex for 20 years. He didn't marry her because he didn't want to.

We have been together for four years and are getting married this year. He wants to marry me Smile

Me personally, I have many reasons for wanting to get married (most of them listed somewhere above. But one very important reason (which I don't know if it's been mentioned) is that my parents want me to be married. They are catholics and it is very important to them. My parents mean the world to me and I'd do anything to make them happy.

Wamster · 06/04/2011 17:54

I didn't say that all cohabitees were less committed than the married at all. Only that as married people have held themselves out to be committed, you can only take them at their word that they are whereas cohabiting relationship come in all shapes and sizes and that they vary from trivial, transient relationships to lifetime commitment. That's not the same as saying that ALL cohabiting relationships are UNcommitted. I don't think that this is an unreasonable thing to say.

I guess that people like to make a day of getting wed, hence the dresses. There is no need for the dresses, though, nobody has to have them.

Bonsoir · 06/04/2011 17:58

catinboots Shock - please, please think again. Catholicism and pleasing your parents are both terrible reasons for getting married.

ReindeerBollocks · 06/04/2011 18:01

I'm a smug married but we've only been married 8 weeks (so forgive me) and we only got married for health reasons.

I love DH just as much now as I did before the wedding, I have yet to change my name, but I feel just as close to DH as I did before.

I would never judge the strength of a relationship based on whether a couple are married or not, that just seems a bit ridiculous to me.

catinboots · 06/04/2011 18:02

I am a practising catholic too Bonsoir.

And as I said, they are not my only reasons.

noddyholder · 06/04/2011 18:03

Reindeer considering what you have just been through anything is ok How are you both?

ReindeerBollocks · 06/04/2011 18:09

I'm good thanks Noddy - I did do a separate thread on the operation but all has gone well and the kidney is working for DH!!

In lots on pain but have some lovely painkillers which have helped. How are you? Hope you are keeping well - I thought of you and your situation it really helped me stay positive, and knowing we will see the end of dialysis is wonderful.

Apologies for completely hijacking the thread

2catsand1rabbit · 06/04/2011 18:10

Hi, I think it's completely up to people what they do. Some marriages work, some don't, but when I grew up I had a different surname to my mum and I HATED it because people didn't understand why. I am married and it makes me feel like we are a little family unit. But this is just my experience from growing up and when I grew up it was unusual to have divorced parents and different surnames. It isn't these days.

scottishmummy · 06/04/2011 18:12

love is a wonderful thing,however it manifests whether it be cohabitee,married or cp.and i dont think any one of those options is superior or inferior to the others

BuggyBabe · 06/04/2011 18:17

I think I make an assumption that people I meet who are married are committed to each other forever (accepting that any relationship, married or otherwise, can break down) Of course, I know that some marriages aren't great and lack commitment but there is little way of knowing that unless you are close to the couple, so the natural assumption of a marriage is that it is committed.

With a non-married couple its hard to judge how permanent their relationship is or how committed they are. If they have kids together and live together then I generally assume that they are just as committed as I would assume a married couple are ie. some marriages are good, some bad, some non-married relationships are good, some are bad.
Its trickier to work out the situation if they haven't been together all that long say, or they don't have any children together. As an outsider from the relationship, its hard to judge which non-married couples are 'just' boyfriend and girlfriend and which couples consider themselves life partners.

Of course, I realise it doesn't really make any difference at all what is the status of anyone else's relationship, but I think its in human nature to be curious about people we meet/know.

Wamster · 06/04/2011 18:23

It's not about being superior though, is it? It's just that marriage is a legally binding thing and cohabitation is not. I think this is fine as it is as those who wish to have certain legal rights can do it (marry) and those that just wish to cohabit can go their separate ways (once joint finances have been sorted, of course) safe in the knowledge that they don't have to financially compensate the other person just by living with them and working while the other person looks after their children as a sahp. It's a good system.