To think that some married women on here think they are better than unmarried women?

[malificent7]

After reading the thread about legal rights, marriage and birth certificates I was struck by the patronising way in which some married women spoke to those who are cohabiting or not married.
True married women have better rights but it was the way in which the relationships of unmarried women were dismissed as lesser and these women were being sneered at.

Someone told a woman who had been cohabiting that her relationship meant nothing and that if you are not married you are single.
REALLY? I am not married but I am not single. I don't even live with the guy but why is my relationship seen as less valid? Some married people hate each other and don't have the guts to leave. Some of the best love affairs involve people who live miles apart.
I don't like the fact that I have to put single on a form . Why can I not be in a relationship?

Ok, If you are married you have some legal rights and security that the unmarried have but shouldn't we question this? Why should we make vows especially if you don't believe in the laws of marriage? Also, it was originally a religious ceremony..I don't believe in God and I am not a commodity to be given away by my dad to another male.

Does it lead to stability? My dp is divorced. The marriage vows didn't stop things from falling apart.

Marriage can be a great thing but the tone in the last thread was old fashioned and practically berated women for not managing to get a man to marry them. Surely there has to be other options if you don't believe in marriage ? It is a patriarchal tradition after all to do with male prperty rights. Also, many men want pre nuptuals as they are now wise to gold digging wives.

I think you can have some marriages which have less love than some cohabiting relationships. Why is one type of relationship more valid? I find it all very old fashioned.

Judging by the number of men who don't leave their wives a dime on divorce, I am not convinced by the stability argument.

I have a husband not a partner. That sound like you run a business together

We do.

Yes p3ony, not everybody, but enough people do that your view about it being blindingly obvious is an optimistic one. It's been shown so many times that people think marriage is a piece of paper, common law is a thing etc. Even just on here, a demographic skewing well educated, it seems like every week someone says something unbelievably badly informed. I'm reminded of a poster a few months back who said they didn't see the need for marriage, but her partner was happy for her to take his name, along with the baby she was carrying, so they had all the trappings of a married couple. Aaargh!!!!

Some married women in here certainly do come across as afflicted with a superiority complex, but usually that's hand in hand with a general lack of social skills. Pay 'em no mind

So,why can't it be. It's an inaccurate use of language. Times have changed,paperwork can and should do too.

For all those smug marrieds.

Dd left school last year.

That seemed to be the signal for getting a divorce. Out of her class of 26 the only couples who are still together are those that never married in the first place.

Smug married couples, maybe just happy? Could argue there is a feeling of insecurity from the the co habiting couples, who feel the need to raise it and put a divide?

I'm convinced that the ones who are the most sanctimonious about these issues are the same ones who name change when they post they suspect their husbands are having affairs.

I’m in a relationship of 2 years, we don’t live together and I consider myself legally single. Emotionally of course I’m in a relationship but the law isn’t concerned with emotions and I think that’s right

It's an inaccurate use of language. Times have changed,paperwork can and should do too.

It's not about paperwork. Times have changed. People no longer feel that HAVE to get married. Which is great. There's a choice. You can be together but not live together, or live together or be married .

You can choose to involve the law or not. If you don't, the law doesn't recognise it. Asking if you share a house with anyone else doesn't mean anything legally.

You can get married without a wedding. By all means celebrate if you want and enjoy all the dress, flowers, cake stuff but there needs to be more awareness of what marriage is really about.
Because of the fuss we make of weddings people have become distracted by the boring reasons behind it.
It needs treating like a standard aspect of ‘adulting’ and considered in the same way ‘grown ups’ make a will or have home insurance.

For all those smug marrieds.

Dd left school last year.

That seemed to be the signal for getting a divorce. Out of her class of 26 the only couples who are still together are those that never married in the first place.

Your anecdote is unrepresentative.

Not that I think this should factor into anyone's decision making anyway, but if you do want to hedge your bets, marriage is more likely to last than cohabitation (although it's a bit of a chicken and egg one). Marriage is also more likely to end with the death of one of the parties than with divorce.

Silvercuckoo if your ex is a frivolous litigant, he'd have been able to use the fact that you have DC together to pursue you through the courts whether married or not. The examples people are giving of massive court costs are things that unfortunately a vexatious ex can do as long as you had a child or property. I did enough family law to know you don't need to be married for that! Fair point about the 25% of pre-marital property though. A good example of just why it's so important that people are more educated on the issue. Marriage makes a big difference: that piece of paper has evidently had a significant impact on your finances.

Not asking it to.

Would just like to add that being ignorant re being financial savvy cuts both ways. Plenty of unmarried mothers are savvy and may well be financially better off than many married mothers. Fat lot of good half a house,crappy pension and debt is to you when split in half and your income isn't enough to support you.

All families need educating and married couples really shouldn't be complacent.

Ah so glad for your kids that you’ll pack them off for sleep overs at whoever’s house they like without gaining any background info about the partners...etc. They sound ....safe guarded.

What do you do then, ask your kids' friends' parents to produce an up-to-date DBS report before you let your kids sleep over ?

Last time I looked, a marriage certificate could be issued to anyone who found someone to marry them, paedophiles included.

I think the get married and you'll be ok stance can be just as damaging.

It’s ironic that the only benefits to marriage surface when the relationship ends

It’s an insurance policy against a bad break up. But if a couple stay together there is no material difference between the 2.

I find that the post divorce provisions for the lower assets partner are over estimated on MN. Once D.C. are 18 they almost vanish.

The best protection from future poverty is continuous full time employment and having your own pension and own home/legal stake in a joint home.

That’s what I’m saying to my dd not ‘get a man to marry you so you can lol at home then get his house when he trades you in for a younger model’.

It wasn’t until all these threads on MN I realised how many marriages came about by the women emotionally blackmailing their dps into it.

That is nothing to be smug about.

There does need to be a legal status of married. Many people have more than one romantic relationship in their lives. At what point do we declare that this partner is the one I would like to be the beneficiary of my will, responsible for my children, making decisions regarding my health if i am incapacitated etc?

Marriage or civil partnership is what sets a relationship apart from 'we're seeing how things go' to 'we've decided we want to stay together forever'.

I wouldn't have wanted to have a child with someone who was not prepared to sign a piece of paper to confirm that he was committed to me and our future family. Of course marriage does not transform people but I would struggle to jnderstand the reasoning behind having a child with someone who wasn't sure enough about me to marry me.

I wouldn't have wanted to have a child with someone who was not prepared to sign a piece of paper to confirm that he was committed to me and our future family. Of course marriage does not transform people but I would struggle to jnderstand the reasoning behind having a child with someone who wasn't sure enough about me to marry me

Exactly.

I see the Op hooked you all in, he/she never came back to the thread, just created a bun fight. Magnificent piece of trolling kite flying

It's really surprising that these basic legal facts aren't on the school curriculum.

(this seems to be my axe to grind at the moment! On another thread I said girls need to be made aware of the incredibly low rate of maintenance from non-resident fathers)

Would just like to add that being ignorant re being financial savvy cuts both ways. Plenty of unmarried mothers are savvy and may well be financially better off than many married mothers

That's true. I am better off now I am a single parent and divorced. I live separately to dp.

My relationship with Dp is so important to me. But legally it means nothing. That doesn't matter at the moment.

But a box on a form isn't going to magically educate people. It will do the opposite. It will make people believe that, it gives them legal status.

Married or unmarried. Know you rights. Make your choices. A box on a form doesn't help that.

NewYear - just think how many people will have learned something important from this thread

Exactly postino. This is why they're worth doing over and over. Although yes this is a TAAT so HQ probably won't have it.

Notasunnybunny : wholeheartedly agree with your post.

I don't wish for my children to have weddings but I would like for them to be married.

Also if they do wish to cohabit or have a non cohabitational relationship I'd want it to be clear cut that they were NOT entering into the responsibilities of marriage.

I'm not married, we've lived together 23+ years and have 2 DC (both 16). I have only rarely felt that people sneer because we're unmarried, it's personal choice. On the occassions it has happened it's never bothered me.

We recently bought a new house and ask our NDN to witness signatures. When she saw the different names (she's older) she said "Oh! you're not married and you have lived there all these years! And you have 2 boys?!" Like somehow we'd pulled the wool over her eyes - she was genuinely shocked. We just laughed (light hearted way) because obviously it's no one's business apart from our own. She did apologise afterwards as she explained she was so surprised.

Not asking it to educate just to be accurate. So you want relationship status banned from all forms?