To think that marriage is an outdated concept?

[YourAgileUmberPoet]

In today’s world, marriage just seems like a piece of paper that doesn’t mean anything anymore. AIBU to think that marriage is outdated and unnecessary?

you haven't outlined why you think it's outdated as a concept though.

So plopping in your OP does look like goady bollocks tbh. No point to debate, no idea outside "meh, marriage"

So why is it outdated?

For some cultures marriage is extremely important and finding a partner for their off spring is a family effort.

I know in America 70% of divorces are initiated by women, so I do think marriage is generally a better deal for men. So many people in such unsatisfactory marriages because economics don't allow them to split.

Indeed. But by and large those are cultures where it’s frowned upon or difficult (or actually illegal) for women to work?

There’s a lot of logic in arranging a marriage for your daughter if it’s her only shot at having sufficient money for a comfortable life.

Finding a compatible spouse is a good idea for most people if you want one but if you have your own money marriage is either moot or negative.

Ask the thousands and thousands of men who end up less than 50% of the martial assets after divorce 🤷🏼‍♂️.
the theory is that the higher earner will continue to be the higher earner after divorce ( gender irrelevant) can more easily make up any losses

I would say it’s a bad idea financially for any higher earner ( gender irrelevant) to marry someone who earns significantly less than them

First recorded marriage was in Mesopotamia 5000 years ago . Admittedly it’s changed a bit since then [ grin] and it’s only recently it’s been more equal not less , but that surely makes it even more in women’s interests not less ?

@Fs365

I would say it’s a bad idea financially for any higher earner ( gender irrelevant) to marry someone who earns significantly less than them

Yes but if a high earning man marries a low earning woman there is at least the logic that she is likely to do more childcare and domestic work so there s an exchange of value. And thus a moral imperative for the woman to be compensated for the time she is financially inactive.

When a high earning woman marries a low earning man that is vanishingly unlikely to happen. And a man who earns less is unlikely to be excluded for the workforce due to childcare obligations.

So it’s not like for like.

So what you are saying is that men lose out no matter what?
prehaphs this is why many men are seemly reluctant to marry these days 🤷🏼‍♂️

@Fs365

So what you are saying is that men lose out no matter what?

Men lose money in a divorce (usually). But that’s designed to compensate the woman for the loss of income due to child-raising.

That may or may not be fair on the man depending on the circumstances. But it’s likely that the woman, not the man, will have lost income as a result of the time she has been economically inactive due to bearing, nursing, raising children. So there’s a moral logic in her being compensated for this.

Almost no men suffer the same loss of earnings as a result of having children. So if a high earning woman is forced to compensate a low earning man (unless he’s been out of the workforce for nearly a decade - which almost never happens) this is almost certainly not fair. Because she will continue to be stuck with the domestic work and childcare and be having to shell out to her ex husband.

To he honest I don’t blame men for being reluctant to get married. The only people to benefit financially from marriage are long term SAHMs or people (usually women) who earn very little over the lifetime of the marriage. If you work and earn decent income marriage is a mugs game for people of either sex, if you look at it in financial terms.

So you will be happy if you marry a higher earning man and then divorce him if you get a small settlement, because you earned less? The point is to divide the assets of the marriage equally so that no-one is better off than the other and a woman with children, who may have sacrificed her career, is not left with little because she only put in a little bit financially - though she put in the whole of her life in actuality. The divorce laws make clear that there are more contributions to a marriage than just the financial ones - so if she earns more, he gets more, and vice versa.

The divorce laws make clear that there are more contributions to a marriage than just the financial ones - so if she earns more, he gets more, and vice versa.

In theory they do but they don’t take account of the fact that it’s nearly always the woman who is doing most childcare and domestic work post the split, even if in theory parents share responsibility.

So when a wealthy man is forced to give up half his assets to support a SAHM wife who has not worked for a decade and is thus not hugely employable that seems eminently fair.

Its less fair when the law requires a high earning woman to hand over half her assets to a bone idle bloke who earns less than her, does almost no childcare and doesn’t pay any maintenance. She is effectively paying him for the privilege of having been sponged off while she continues to do both the breadwinner work and the “homemaker” work after the divorce.

The law doesn’t currently distinguish between these scenarios.

Exactly. Men don’t usually make any sacrifices career wise for their children. My ex-husband didn’t and he hasn’t seen his children at all since we split. He hasn’t made an effort at all and tried to dodge paying maintenance. The courts rewarded him handsomely. That’s not equality, it’s theft. And not just theft from me - from the children too!

Really need advise here.

partner and I got married 4 months ago (together 13 years). Have been on cloud 9 since that day, so much so we have had deep discussions about the future, past and present.

During these discussions after I asked, he admitted that 2 years ago when we went through a rocky patch he cheated.

On one hand I’m glad it’s no longer hidden and he’s finally been honest. On the other I am gutted, hurt and it’s just burst our newlywed wedding bubble.

I wish he would have told me prior to marriage. I feel so low. do I move on and try to forget it? Will I ever trust him and just be going through the motions?

You can't just move on as if it never happened @Mumma331 because it will eat at you forever, no matter how much it would suit him for that to happen.

You would be better off starting your own thread, so your post is more likely to be noticed.

I think it should be replaced with negotiable fixed term contracts with a mandatory review with the birth of each child or purchase of property.

Start a thread, I will out for it and comment.