Marriage is not for everyone

[GabbyLoggon]

Yet everyone seems to give marriage a try. (Including Jim Davidson.) Any comments.

i only tried it because i had to.....knew i'd hate it,and i did! lasted 2 years (but were together 10 before marrying) and i hated that feeling of being tied!

yuk!

My uncle was with my aunt for 25yrs +, had grown up children, she pushed and pushed him to marry her, he eventually gave in to the pressure.

The divorced last year after a couple of years of being married.

Works for me and Dh .

I'll never marry, or live with a man.
That type of couple, sharing everything relationship is not for me.

I agree it's not for everyone. But maybe the only way some people find out it doesn't suit them is by trying it?

I think a lot of people try it because it's expected. If you're not married, married people feel sorry for you, and want you to meet somebody, and if you meet somebody, they want you to marry that person, so many people end up rail roaded into it I think..

Depends what you mean by marriage- do you mean actual marriage or a long-term relationship with all the bits of marriage without the actual legal tie of marriage?
Both are wearisome imo.

Don't knock it till you've tried it I say. Then again I've not tried it and I'm still going to knock it. More of a do as I say not do as I do person me you see.

Personally I'm never getting married, I'm just not ready to be that miserable.

"My uncle was with my aunt for 25yrs +, had grown up children, she pushed and pushed him to marry her, he eventually gave in to the pressure.

The divorced last year after a couple of years of being married."

Just goes to show she was right.

Much better to be married when you break up with someone after quarter of a century and several children.

Riven
What protection do you actually get?

For me, I really can't see any had I married DD's Dad, and I did want to.

He left me, and I can't even get maintenance out of him, even though he's been ordered to pay it, I can't see how marriage would have made a difference.

I've often read on here that you should marry to protect yourself financially, but I'm not quite sure what that actually means, or why.

Anything Jim Davidson can do

I can do better.

Honestly, it wouldn't be hard to do most things better than a racist, misogynist arsehole

marriage is a legal commitment to stay together and provide for the other partner and any offspring.
now, in the uk, there are many other laws, which imo are just reinventing the wheel, whereby people in longterm relationships have new legislation that simply mimics what marriage was all about.

Not everyone wants to marry, not everyone does marry. Some people (rather too many, sadly) do marry because they feel they ought to, because they are desperate not to be single, or because a partner wants it very much and they think, oh well why not - and then find it doesn't suit them at all.
I'm one of the lucky ones, I worked out early enough that it wasn't for me, not to actually do it and make myself and someone else miserable.

muggle, you got a court order for maintenance for a start. Not all men are arses like your ex.

Also, financial protection if a spouse dies (laws on intestacy, inheritance tax, access to pension).

If however, you earn more than your spouse and particularly if you are the sole/main wage earner, it might be better from a financial perspective not to marry him. hth.

ladysybil I understand what you mean by "reinventing the wheel" but the fact remains that cohabitees are- as things stand- strangers in terms of the law (other than any explicit financial agreements made between them i.e. joint mortgage- but then this would have nothing to do with their relationship as such, it would just be a business arrangement).
Long may this be the case- nobody should be married by default.

I think it's probably sensible for two cohabitees who are in it for the long-term to marry- but I guess long-term cohabitation becames as dreary and stressful as actual marriage after a while, so neither marriage or defacto marriage would suit me.

No, I don't suppose it is for everyone. I can certainly see why some people prefer to stay single, or to be in a relationship but stay living separately.

However, I don't really understand couples who live together as if married for years and years, including having children, but don't marry. All they are doing is depriving themselves (usually the ^woman) of a slew of legal rights.

ReasonableDoubt I don't understand it, either. Marriage is a public statement of private intent that makes it clear to the outside world that a couple wish to be together for life. The fancy dresses, romance and everything else is just window-dressing.

Cohabitation does not do this- for all the authorities know, a couple are just good friends under the same roof.
The point is, it would be highly illiberal for the state to decide for a couple when they've made that lifelong commitment.
It is therefore up to couple themselves to declare any commitment between them.

some of the posts sound terrible.
i got married becasue i wanted to. not that a bit of paper makes any difference. i like the idea of marriage. the idea of sticking through a relationship through good times and bad. not that our bads have been very bad. but i think most people give up to easily. e.g. even though i knew dh hated his job, i was a bit cross when one day he quit.but we got over him being out of work for 4 months.
theres no 'working at it', 'stickability' anymore.

tiffany "being tied"
muggle "sharing everything"
never come across any of valiums views.
see you "miserable"

i can not relate to any of those posts.

Oblomov would actually being married make any difference, though?
I mean if two people are privately committed to each other and their relationship, how does signing a piece of paper and saying any vows make any difference? Surely that piece of paper won't magically make a couple committed to one another?

What I'm trying to say is that you and your dh are sticking together- but you didn't need a certificate to stay together, it would have happened without it?

Surely marriage is about making the intention explicit to the outside world- so there's no doubt?

For example, I know a lot has been talked about marriage makes a difference to monies, but it's not just financial.
For example, next-of-kin issues in a hospital.
Marriage makes things simple(r) for people.
If you're married, you have an automatic ticket to being considered someone else's 'next-in-line'. I think that's why it's still extremely relevant.
Not for me, though. You can keep it!

I agree it's not for everyone. I like it though. Apart from the legal side, it just felt right for us to get married. Probably social conditioning or whatever. After we married it did feel a bit different, in a good way.

Each to their own.

marantha, you are right. i don't need to be married. i am not sure why i am really. our commitment and our views are the same.
i never wanted the big white wedding dream thta some girls have. i wanted a loving relationship. i got one. have one.
i have everything i ever wanted.

wedding day changed nothing for me. i do love my rings though. every time i look at them they give me great pleasure.