is she being unreasonable about marriage?

[spillyobeans]

Dont fully know where i stand on this but:

Mutual friends of me and dh have been together for 8 years, they live together, share financial responcability etc and have no kids. She keeps saying she wants a ring/to be asked to be married etc where he is adament he doesnt want to but obviously wants to stay together.

I think she is getting quite down about it, but is she being unreasonable to keep pushing him?

Im married to dh and it was a nice thing we both wanted - didnt need, as personally for us nothing 'changed' but just something we wanted to do.

So whos if any is unreasonable?

I realise I've also forgotten to point out that you've yet to provide any evidence for your view that most women are fit enough to go back in a month or two as well. Prove it or it didn't happen.

Chicken - you're flogging a dead horse really but I admire your persistence. However I am also getting tired of reading Lotus's offensive shit because there are no shades of grey in her bloody awful world, only the black and white's of her opinion. Sadly I think too many people have treated her "like a god" and she's fallen into the trap of believing the hype.

Ah phew Lotus isn't my boss, I'm not a lawyer. Chicken that treatment sounds awful you poor thing.

I still think marriage is an excellent idea to protect women from the fallout from childbirth.

Bit strange to say no shades of grey in what I write when I have repeatedly said some women have illness in pregnancy just as in an average office you will have a man off for depression, bad back, cancer and all the rest.

The bottom line is that most women are fit enough to return to work and indeed it's a rest for plenty of us compared to 24/7 babycare at home.

Now of course many are in marriages and countries where women can afford to take longer off either because they have savings or from work obtain more than 6 weeks at 90% pay or family who will pay so even if they are fit enough to perform the less onerous task of sitting at a desk they choose not to. That fine. Why do people seem to get upset that some women choose to go back to work full time sooner than others? It's not a competition.

I write lal over the place about the routes to happiness being eating good whole foods, plenty of sleep, sunshine, being outside, exercise. Those things have not much to do with whether you work or not except I suppose if you live in poverty which a ruined career can mean it might be difficult but you could argue the opposite too - that our noble savage in a jungle has a better chance of enough sleep and sunlight and movement than a mother at home.

Also some women make more of a meal of pregnancy than they need to and that's fine - they ultimately suffer for it. We all reap what we sow in life. Just like some people are off sick whether pregnant or not at the slightest thing. That is very unfair on those women who are genuinely sick as they all get tarred with the same brush. Anyone suggesting malingers don't exist needs to look around the average office.

Also if you have had a baby and are ill then that's awful for you. no one has said otherwise. i still don't agree that it is harder to sit at a desk than manage a home but if you're at home with someone waiting on you hand and foot (which does not exist in my real world but might for some women) then lucky you. Go for it.

Ah Lotus, you are a bit of a warrior aren't you?

I think marriage is a lovely thing for those couples where both parties want it. I think most weddings are hell on earth, I'd rather run off to an island and get married secretly then have a little party when we returned. That's just my opinion though.

Did I say anything anti-marriage? I was married for nearly 20 years. We both happily worked full time and had 5 children. Lots of couples both work full time and plenty of women earn more than men.

Lotus, are you Xenia?

I don't understand where the implication of having home help came from. I certainly never had any.
Surely the people getting help are the ones going back to work straight away - you must have paid for some form of childcare Lotus if you and husband (at the time) worked full time?

I think Lotus lives and works in a different arena than the majority of people tbh. Most women don't work at desks being 'treated like Gods' Amongst all those women who she thinks should be going back to work 6 weeks after giving birth are postal workers, cleaners, teachers, nurses, etc. etc.

If you can/ want to go back to work then you should and should be supported. In my family we have examples of women earning more than men and men taking on the more of the child care/ also men supporting women financially while they build their career and women who have trained/ changed careers after having children and a career break. All are perfectly valid. I am working for a charity currently, training, getting reintegrated in a flexible way to a work environment. Longer term I will work at least part time. I appreciate the stability offered by dh working ft and earning a decent amount. I would find what he does hard, I need to be around for the children at the moment and as dh works from home as much as he can he spends plenty of time with them as well. Work and self fulfillment are not always synonymous.

A good friend of mine died last week, in his 40's - his youth sstolen by a horrible degenerative illness. He lost the opportunity to build a life and have a family. I doubt his family are mourning his lost career opportunities I know I wish he had had a fuller life. I am not saying that an an amazing challenging rewarding professional life is meaningless I think people should find what they are good at and if they can get paid for it then that is brilliant. But most people are wage slaves for at least part of their working life and that should recognised as well. Marriage provides one way of building a life and a family and support structure to make the most of your life - when it works it can be wonderful. But it is not for everyone. It originated as a contract to secure property rights so I don't view marriage as a romantic thing really.

Lotus, you said that long MLs are a choice we actively make. There is not one single shade of grey in that statement. You have, of course, made others that contradict it since, but that simply means you're aware you were wrong to make it. Incidentally, your attempt to make an equivalence with men having time off for bad backs, depression etc is also flawed, because this is about a type of illness related time off that only affects women. Whereas bad backs and depression affect both sexes. Indeed, bad backs are often a consequence of pregnancy and birth for women.

Once again, you need to provide some evidence for the following vastly generalised, unsupported claims:

• that most women are fit to go back within a few weeks

• that most women find going back to work easier than being at home

• that there is some significant subset of malingering pregnant women, whose condition you apparently are an expert on despite not having any medical background at all. Seriously, how on earth do you think yourself qualified to decide whether a woman is exaggerating over the effect pregnancy is having on her or not?

One assumes you have peer reviewed research to this effect, or something equally robust?

Nobody cares about what you think the routes to happiness are, either. That has nothing to do with the subject at hand. You also need to stop pretending this has something to do with people being upset at you going back to work early. I give no fucks whether you held a board meeting in the birthing pool or took 500 years off after each baby. That's your business, not mine. The problem here is you making wild statements and making things up that you have no evidence for.

Thanks myfirstfire, that's very kind of you.

^ Maybe it would be wise to drop it. I don't see this debate resolving and it's derailing the thread.

No thanks.

1. Yes, most women make a choice to take a long maternity leave. Most are not ill and most could go back in the 3 months most women quite happily used to go back to work in. So yes of course I am correct on that. of course some women have all kinds of health problems and cannot work at all including not cleaning the loos at home and cannot even hold or mind the baby. They are the unusual women and I am very sorry for them.

1. I did not say all women even on low pay should go back to work after 6 weeks. If housewives or women with illnesses on this thread choose to read that into my words is that because they feel awful about things? Do they think women who work sit there thinking what a lazy so and so! We don't. We see the disabled badge or the stoma bag or the fact you've a rich husband keeping you in luxury or know you could only earn £6 an hour so cannot cover childcare or the fact you are married to a sexist pig who wants a woman at home and know there are myriad of reasons for women not to work 9and indeed men for that reason).

most could go back in the 3 months most women quite happily used to go back to work in.
One wonders why women bothered fighting for longer ML rights then? And why the government went along with it and made a years leave a lawful right? Suggests to me that most women were, in fact, not happy about it

Jesus christ. You can be a woman, have a child and stay single and be perfectly happy and live in a world by which you have protected yourself from a whole array of shit. You can also be a woman with a child in a marriage and be protected from an array of shit.

The difference in the level of protection between the two (if you were to read up on everything and put things into place either way to protect yourself) is not enough to make for a valid / strong enough argument either way.

Aside from the legal implications of marriage, what I would say to your friend is that in every single instance I know where a man has said he doesn't want to get married when his partner does, what he has really meant is that he doesn't want to marry THEM. And they have all gone on to marry really quickly when that relationship has ended and they have met someone they actually wanted to marry.
So I guess your friend has to consider whether she is the just do for now girl.

Yes, most women make a choice to take a long maternity leave. Most are not ill and most could go back in the 3 months most women quite happily used to go back to work in. So yes of course I am correct on that. of course some women have all kinds of health problems and cannot work at all including not cleaning the loos at home and cannot even hold or mind the baby. They are the unusual women and I am very sorry for them.

Again Lotus this is not what you are being asked. You said long MLs is a choice we actively make. Not that most of us actively make, or some of us. Just 'we'. You were wrong to make that claim and you will not pretend you didn't. Meanwhile, I'm still waiting to hear what's your evidence for your view that most women are fit to go back after 6 weeks and why you think yourself qualified to decide who's malingering and who isn't. I note that you've changed 6 weeks to 3 months as well...

Not at all. 3 months was the period a lot of women , probably most took off about 20 or 30 years ago. i took 2 weeks but I was unusual in that, but not exceptional and even today plenty of women are back very quickly. Pregnancy and birth for most of us is not an illness. If you loko at the US plenty of woemn continue to return very quickly and that seems to benefit their families and children and bank balance.

The main law has not really changed for 30 years - you still only get 6 weeks at 90% pay. Only the relatively well off or very poor can really afford to take long periods off unless they have a more generous employer.

I think it's vital women know they will often have an active choice to take much shorter leaves and that that can be best for everyone. Don't assume you have to go with some kind of dull herd who has suggested it's wonderful for everyone if you take a full year off - it's not. It can be very damaging to take long leaves.

it is really good for women to see all view points and men too for that matter. The new 6 months woman, 6 months man thing will work very well for couples too given how many women now earn more than their husbands. Things are going very well for women and money and earnings.

I don't really understand what I am being asked. Most women choose longer maternity leaves. Most of them actively choose that. It is not they are bed bound for 12 months so could not return to work. A very very few of them are seriously ill and some may never work again of course never mind care for baby and that's very sad when that is so. Some are also as idle as sin nad need a kick up the bottom either to get on with the housework, mind the baby properly or work. Others are more than happy to be kept by a man with a nanny and housekeeper which means they do very little.

You're being asked:

• to admit that when you said at 11.37 yesterday that long MLs are something we actively choose, with no shades of grey, you were wrong because you left out all those women who don't choose it.

• to tell us on what you're basing your claims that there's a subset of malingering pregnant women and that most women are ready to go back to work at 6 weeks and/or 3 months. Because it's not immediately obvious how someone with your total lack of specialism in the field would know this. It does rather appear that you're making it up as you go along.

Also, your comment that the law hasn't really changed because £140 a week isn't that much absolutely reeks of privilege. It might not be that much to you. I can assure you that to plenty of the population it's a rather significant amount. We are in the middle, but my £140 a week SMP currently covers our housing costs, electricity and water. All quite important things to my family...

I've been with my DP for long enough that marriage is beginning to kind of become expected of us.

We're both clear that we won't get married, as we've seen what marriage does to people.

They give up. Men stop going to the gym, women get fat. They don't go for that new job. They start finding each other less attractive so won't have sex as often. The highlight of the week becomes watching XFactor or something inane.

If only one party does this, the other will end up cheating or leaving. If they both do this, it leads to a horrible home life and will end up in separation (if they haven't given up on life by then and are happy to settle)

Getting married just makes it more difficult to have a clean separation and will inevitably see one party get financially destroyed in the proceedings.

Having an easy escape keeps both sides on their toes and so we strive to remain as attractive as possible.

Well that sounds like a fun relationship to be in. It doesn't sound shallow at all.

OP - it appears that both I and Chicken have been burned quite badly by poor health fallout from having a child.

I have to admit I didn't really have any idea how bad the lasting health issues can be from pregnancy, birth etc. It leaves quite an impact when you never thought it would happen to you and I know if I wasn't married I would feel hideously vulnerable.

It ties in to the wider point made by a pp - that all sorts of shit can happen, redundancy, illness, relationship breakup etc, and that generally you are in a better place to deal with those things if you are married.

It is costly and difficult to replicate the protections of marriage and some - like IHT if your partner dies - cannot be worked around.

I don't see why people who don't like the idea of a big wedding don't just do a small registry office wedding, nip in and out of a lunchtime. It's just so much easier than trying to think of all the potential changes that might hit your life together and drawing up multiple legal documents, surely.

This guy wants to have his cake and eat it

Its a shame the marriage didnt happen before they had DCs..I wonder if he strung her along with the it will definitely happen one day thing

Too often women are seen as weak for wanting the ring. Well, ,why shouldnt we? There is absolutely no way Id have kids with a man who didnt want marriage. My cousin had 4 kids with a man who said he'd never marry, its "just a piece of paper". Well if its just a piece of paper, whats the fear? & what did he do? eventually leave and marry someone else. I bet that woman made it clear, she wanted to be married. She didnt just "go with his flow". Good for her.

Its so silly when women pretend not being married somehow makes them more savvy. No, it doesn't - the common law thing doesn't stand up, live with a man and bear his children and he dumps you then you will be in a financial mess. Im not sentimental about life - relationships are about more than ohhhh I love you oh we don't need a piece of paper.

I couldnt be with a man who knew not being married upset me greatly, but wouldnt marry me anyway. Its an imbalance in relationship. When a man tells you he doesn't want to marry, he means he doesn't want to marry YOU. Easy to just blithely talk about it on here but I bet your friend feels like shit, OP.

I think we are being trained out of asking for what we want of a man, lest we be seen as weak. & its wrong. I hope your friend leaves him. But if she does he will probably marry the next woman that comes along anyway. Its a man's world out there, a man can and does seamlessly move on to create a new family and life. Its harder for a woman especially after she's had several children by him but I don't think many people want to admit that

If you want to have strength then be strong from the beginning, don't talk a big talk AFTER you've shacked up with and had kids for a man, with the "I want to be married and if not...." thing. Theres no point. & there's nothing wrong with a woman wanting to be married either, I just hope she was given a choice and not somehow co-erced into going along with what a man with his vague promises wanted.

Every relationship is shallow on some level, Starling.