Are marriage and commitment still relevant in the modern age?

[MattGuy23]

Hi.

With marriage rates in decline in the Western World, as well as the rise of feminism and secularism, is marriage (or any form of legal commitment) still relevant in the 21st century? Women can now have careers, sex and children without men (at least directly) in their lives. Even men in the 21st century can now adopt or opt for surrogacy etc... Many now do. Therefore, do women and men still really need each other in the modern age? Or, if they do, are much looser, more informal types of relationship now the way to go?

I wouldn't personally say they are totally irrelevant, but I think us under 45s in particular see commitment with more caution these days (particularly men, I have to say!) I've read so many cases on here where people have been married or lived together for 10/20/30 years even and have fallen out of love or their partner has had an affair. For me, adultery is unforgivable in a relationship, but sadly I think 70%+% of both men and women do it as some point in their lives.

My parents and both sets of grandparents were both extremely happily married for 50+ years. In theory, as I grew up in an extremely loving and stable home, I shouldn't be a commitment-phobe. Unusually (especially for a young guy!) at the age of 18-20 I really wanted to get married and I was very naïve about how good relationships are, or could be (probably due to my own experiences growing up). The strange thing is that as I have got older (I am now 36) I am now much more cynical and realise that good relationships, especially nowadays (perhaps ever!), are not the norm. To commit yourself emotionally and financially to another human being seems completely nuts when the mathematical odds of you still being BOTH happy and together in 30-50 years time is vanishingly small. If/when you do split, even regardless of whether there has been an affair or not, both partners often try to take the other to the cleaners and leave them financially diminished or destitute in old age. Let's face it; whether it's your fault or not, you are effectively forced into fighting for your own future financial well-being.

That's not to say that I wouldn't ever commit or marry. It goes without saying that everyone - whether female or male - needs to think very carefully about the financial consequences of marriage and divorce before tying the knot (or signing their house/assets to their partner etc.). It's very important to always make sure you would get a good deal in the likely event that you do end up splitting. There are so many stories on here of people being left financially screwed by their partner, it's heartbreaking. Beyond helping provide for your children (obvs) you owe it to yourself to look after your financial position, particularly as you hit middle/old age.

For that reason, my parents always advised my sister and I that we should only seriously consider commitment when a prospective partner is wealthier than we are. I don't think this is snobbery at all, but simply a way of protecting financial interests in case things start to go haywire (as they mostly do). I'd hate to think of myself as poor in middle or old-aged and I am determined that this will not happen. Apart from that, I have always been quite content up until now to opt for less formalised relationships. Whether that changes, I seriously doubt (unless a wealthier woman comes along and proposes to me!)

Anyway, what do others think? Is commitment now less relevant? Do men and women still need each other for security, or is it best to 'go it alone'? Will we continue to see a gradual decline in people wanting to commit formally to each other in the coming years?

Do you have anyone in particular lined up to carry a foetus to term and deliver this child into this world only to sever their bond at birth, op ? Or will any commodified womb do in this great leap forward where men get by without the inconvenience of women?

FourTea

Bit harsh. He hasn't said anything about ripping a baby away from a mother that wants a child, do you oppose all surrogacy so strongly? What about adoption, which he has said he is most drawn to?

He is suggesting a scenario where someone that isn't interested in a romantic relationship but has love to give as a parent might do so, there must be a lot of asexual people in that position, why is that a problem?

Yes, I do oppose all surrogacy with the same strength of feeling. No, I don't have any qualms about adoption, I think it's a humbling act of kindness.

I did commit the MN sin of taking the above posters word for it though and skipping chunks of the thread. So, if the words adoption and surrogacy were not conflated as simply alternative methods of delivery, then I apologise.

@Number3or4,

I plan to home school as I am educated to a pretty high level myself (despite my relatively low salary), but I would strongly encourage after school clubs/activities/hobbies to help with the social part. You are right in that you do have to adapt to each child's needs/personality.

@category12,

"Men generally get more out of marriage or having a live-in partner than women do - studies show married men are happier and live longer, while it doesn't have those benefits at all for women."

Yes, it is always a source of some interest to me that those who some studies say benefit the most (i.e. men) are also the most commitment-phobic. My theory is that it's because men generally benefit the most emotionally (and in practical terms) from marriage whilst women benefit the most financially (on average). Perhaps the media etc. also help to spread certain myths etc.?

@FourTeaFallOut,

I have researched it a bit, yes. Many gay couples now do it (male and female). But I am leaning towards adoption at the moment. I guess I'll see.

"where men get by without the inconvenience of women?"

Women - an inconvenience - no! Not sure how you drew that conclusion, but the world clearly needs women every bit as much as men. How you have children or what type of relationship you have (if any) is merely a personal choice.

As for an apology, there really is no need. I'm not offended very easily and am certainly no snowflake, and this thread is intended as a debate where opinions are expressed and challenged. I hate the modern tendency to shout down anyone's view if it doesn't subscribe to the utmost degree of political correctness, particularly as it merely stifles debate.

I don't think men are generally more commitment-phobic. In my experience they're pretty eager to nail down having a woman in their lives, eager to move in, tend to be faster to move onto the next relationship after break-ups.

@Category12,

Guess it's just all the young/youngish males I know then! Plus, mumsnet is full of stories of commitment-phobic men! I guess commitment-phobia is maybe on the increase with both genders? My sister is also commitment-phobic and proud of it.

Oh look, a man who doesn't believe in commitment, has never heard of the gender pay gap, and thinks that women are incubators.

What a catch!

Don't worry love, women won't be queuing up to marry you.

Perhaps widen your circle of acquaintance.

@AnotherEmma,

Thanks. You sound lovely yourself. But you did forget to mention that I'm also a Nazi (naturally). And a serial killer. And a mass murderer.

I mean, how dare I think that men and women don't need to get married in the 21st century! And that single and gay people should still be able to have children. How archaic, huh?

Well, if you are both still very happy and you have been married for 20 years then it would obviously seem like madness not to keep going.

Not quite the point I was making. My point is that we are happy enough, and that (contrary to modern fashions) is good enough.

Same with my parents etc. I guess I'm just never going to be like my parents.

Well, seeing that you have chosen not to burden yourself by sharing your life with a grown woman, why on earth would you choose a child instead? It makes no sense to me. I think it is irresponsible.

By the way, here is a refutation of the argument that marriage makes women unhappy. According to the article, married women are on average happier, separated/divorced women unhappier, and single women inbetween.
greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/is_marriage_really_bad_for_womens_happiness

"single and gay people should still be able to have children."

Sure, single and gay people can have children in one of the following ways:
Single women and lesbians can have children by getting pregnant with a sperm donor
Any single person or gay couple (women and men) can have children by adopting

I don't believe in a man's right to use a woman's body as an incubator.

However, I don't think there's any point engaging with you, because if you can't see the point of marriage, you are either unable or unwilling to see the very obvious benefits of marriage to the spouse who sacrifices or reduces their financial independence in order to raise children (most often the woman).

@MattGuy23 I think the problem you are describing is that now at 36 any relationship is going to be about compromise and that compromise is going to chafe and feel like you are constantly giving way to the other person when in fact they are also compromising and giving way.

Now at 53 I have been married for the better part of my adult life. Considering what my DH's opinion would be on any given topic is second nature and I am sure the same can be said for him.

At 36 you are probably getting a bit set in your ways. From your posts you are used to going about your life in a particular way. Any change to that will feel awkward. You might want to think twice about getting a goldfish much less adopting a child.

Men generally get more out of marriage or having a live-in partner than women do - studies show married men are happier and live longer, while it doesn't have those benefits at all for women.

Correlation is not causation. I could pull a lot of plausible-sounding reasons for that trend out of my bum, that have nothing to do with marriage being inherently good for men but don't have the same agenda backing.

For example, in regards to happiness, you could argue that societal pressure makes women who haven't married feel as if they've "failed" in some way which is a pressure that is not as strong for men. You could then posit that a significant portion of married men are there because they were eager to be married (no outside pressures are enforcing it for them) and a significant portion of married women are there because they felt that it was something they "had to do".

For example, in regards to happiness, you could argue that societal pressure makes women who haven't married feel as if they've "failed" in some way which is a pressure that is not as strong for men. You could then posit that a significant portion of married men are there because they were eager to be married (no outside pressures are enforcing it for them) and a significant portion of married women are there because they felt that it was something they "had to do".
I agree. I think this leads to a significant level of dissatisfaction amongst women when they get out of the newlywed/babies phase. They are told that marriage and babies is what they need to do to live happily ever after so even if it's ok, the disappointment when it's just dull life is greater because they were sold a lie than it would be for men, told that they need to avoid commitment as much as possible then finding out it's not as bad as they were told and they actually have quite a nice life. Especially as women are generally the ones who make the biggest sacrifices in terms of childbearing and rearing and career prospects. Kind of explains why most divorce is instigated by women. Who then stay single for longer than the men do.

My Mother divorced three times in the 1960/1970 period. It was unusual but she never cared what anyone thought of her. You have no real idea at how happy your parents and grandparents marriages were, only the people within that marriage know and even then one may not know what the other is feeling or they simply don’t want to know. As you write yourself societal pressure at that time was different.

.