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

[Pinkshocks]

If he is already getting everything on a plate, a committed partner, a sexual relationship, children, someone to split the bills with, emotional support and a family life, all without making any legal or lifelong commitment, why would he change anything?

I know this does NOT apply to every couple or to ALL men. Some people genuinely do not want to marry and both are happy with that. But if one person wants marriage and the other keeps putting it off year after year, are they really going to change when they are already getting everything they want?

Why would someone buy the ticket when they are already getting the whole show for free?

But why would you 'endure' if you're a woman? I'd be well gone. It's 2026 - Women can be Prime Minister, academics, artists, entrepreneurs, make millions, be a footballer or rugby player, go to space, have children, not have children, live alone. With all that choice, you'd have to be pretty stupid to choose "I endure". Who does that?

Blimey, your version of the world is a bundle of joy. I guess you missed the love boat completely.

I do think it’s silly for a woman who wants to be married when having kids…to have kids before marrying.

Not because I think there is anything wrong being born out of wedlock. I call myself a “bastard” and am fine with it. But the women who insist they want to be married if they have kids, have kids without being married and then constantly whine about the fact the man feels no obligation to marry them are really weird to me.

Rubbish! My husband values our marriage because of the commitment it represents. He is an atheist.

I've never said it was? It would seem sensible across the board.

This thread, from the start, has been about women desperately and silently pining for a proposal/ wedding/ marriage while men heartlessly ignore their plight because they've been careless enough to give away their valuable assets (children, sex, domestic labour) without the man ever having to pay in kind.

But the women who insist they want to be married if they have kids, have kids without being married and then constantly whine about the fact the man feels no obligation to marry them are really weird to me.

Totally agree @JHound if you want marriage first, then don’t have children till you have tied the knot! By the time you have bought a house together and spent 10 years having three of his children, you’ve rather cashed in all your bargaining chips!

This is such a sexist post.
What do you mean he's getting it for free?
Men don't buy women for marriage. It 2026, we're equals now and most marriages have partners with equal earnings, some women have more than the man they're with.
You've basically used the 'why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free' but with a twist to try and hide how sexist it is.

Is a shared asset and children not a serious commitment in your eyes?
Divorce without shared assets or children would usually be pretty straightforward and there would be a clean break. Co-parenting is for life. Not even just 18 years, they will always be a part of your life in some way.

Of course they won't marry! To change status, be it about marriage, work, etc. you need to have an incentive - i.e. what will change for the better, if I change my status? If they already have everything handed to them on a platter, what is the incentive?
Cohabitation without marriage is the worst sort of arrangement for women, I am afraid. In most cases this is usually 'stringing a woman along', like we see on MN threads - until she is in her late 30s and then 'maybe we should postpone having children a bit' - and then they fuck off when they find a new partner and they are OK, have children, etc. and angry women on MN ask 'is it OK to fall pregnant without telling him, I am about to leave my reproductive years' and right-on idiotic MNers say 'no, it is evil to stop contraception, just leave him and use a sperm bank'. Aye, right, after he was stringing you along for 10 years.

That assumes women are fairly stupid doesn't it?

Bravo x 100

Again, bravo x 100

But can't you see that any marriage is a bargain and every party to the bargain is trying to get something out of it for him/herself? It sounds crass, but it is true. Nobody sets out saying 'Oh, I would really like to marry a poor person, in poor health, preferably ill-educated and with a nasty character'? Everybody is searchign, subconsciously or not, for the best deal for themselves, and unfortunately, preferably, for free? Or at least, at the lowest price?

Your guess is wrong. I married the love of my life and then we had our daughter. Twenty-five years later we are still together and still married.

A truer word was never spoken. V.v. harsh, but even more true, alas.

Yes, you are so right. Hence the lack of marriage opportunity for disabled people, unemployed people, low earners, those who aren't conventionally attractive...

I've not read anything so shallow and so sad in quite a while.

I'd be ashamed if my children said they wouldn't consider a disabled partner. It wouldn't tell me they were "lovely, kind, decent" people. It would tell me I'd been an abject failure as a parent.

We all have our values I suppose, and some people value the material and outward appearances above all else. It's very sad, but true. At least it makes for a really pretty wedding photo eh?

@ClarkeandNewman is calling your post "shallow" despite acknowledging the truth of it

"Hence the lack of marriage opportunity for disabled people, unemployed people, low earners, those who aren't conventionally attractive...".

It's unfortunate, but there are good evolutional reasons why women want a partner who can look after his family and why both sexes want healthy and attractive partners who are more likely to produce healthy and independent children.

It's not being shallow, it's being human.

I agree,
Women are always encouraged to "marry up".
So you have Dr + nurse, manager + secretary, factory manager + production line operative, MP + SPAD, solicitor + legal secretary, pilot + stewardess

What you don't see is female surgeon + hospital porter, female librarian + university professor, female council manager + dustbinman,

Some version of humanity I suppose. Not one I recognise, and thankfully not one everyone subscribes to.

Never thought of it that way, but you are right! The only famous exception I seem to remember, now come to think of it, is that posh actress Duckface, who is I think related to Asquith, who married a migrant mini-cab driver. And it somehow stuck in my memory as so improbable, but those aristos and their quirks is a different thing altogether.

Yup. Go look at half the relationships board. Men usually do what’s most convenient and suits them.

...but you do recognise it.

"Hence the lack of marriage opportunity for disabled people, unemployed people, low earners, those who aren't conventionally attractive...".

Your words.

It's not "some version of humanity" it's the only version of humanity. Not liking it doesn't make it untrue. We all know attractive, well-educated and financially secure people make the most attractive prospective marriage partners. It's a simple fact and always has been.

Calling someone who acknowledges that truth "shallow", or pretending you don't recognise this truth doesn't make it not true.