Why do posters stress the importance of marriage

[shesyourlobster]

I'd like to understand this more as I read it on posts here all the time and still don't get it. There will often be a post where the OP will happen to mention that they have a child but aren't married and then there will be tons of responses about how venerable they are. This is even if they don't mention anything about their financial situation. I have even seen posters assume that they are young and naive.

Financials aside, I do not believe that marriage means more emotional commitment. Divorce happens far too often for that to be the case.

So why do posters stress the importance of marriage in these cases?

The reason I am asking is because I have a child with my partner and we aren't married. So I really want to know if I am missing something! We have both said that we aren't really interested in marriage for the reason I said above. We both have our own houses (we live together in one and one of our houses is rented out). I have more equity in mine, and earn slightly more than he does. Child related costs are split equally. We have a joint life insurance policy.

So what am I missing? Do we really need that bit of paper?

But people need to be allowed to move in without marrying if that's what they want

Why? When they can protect their assets before they do? If they want to that is. And they're then being completely honest about their intentions.

Anyway...a Defacto relationship is NOT marriage. There's no marriage involved.

BeenBusy has no idea about working class women or women who have no skills or education.

Gnome Well good for you but it's not because "Some women have decided that it's a male job"

The fucking PATRIARCHY decided that!

It's like this.

Marriage - embroiled in religion and the old way..traditions etc. The man USUALLY does the asking. While MOST women wait with baited breath to see if they pass muster...will THEY be the chosen one?

And Defacto is like this.

A couple meet, fall in love...decide they want to live together. If they do, then they enter into that KNOWING that it's a legal commitment.

The law here in Australia recognises that sometimes things don't work out and that's why if things go wrong after a few months, there's no problem...but if you're living with someone for 5, 10, 30 years then there's a mutual commitment and that gets recognised!

UNLESS you've made an active choice to protect your assets for your children first! How hard is that to understand?

Without Defacto, women...usually low skilled women...get the shitty end of the stick. You see it on here ALL the time.

"It's not worth me working...all my wages would go on childcare because I only work in a shop"

And meanwhile, the male is working away, climbing the ladder.

If they're not married...well.

Also a lot of inaccurate stuff gets posted. Like the ‘Next of Kin’ status.
@RainingBatsAndFrogs

A friend was hospitalised in a coma. Her DP of several years and father of her DC was not her next of kin, her parents were.

Mike and that's happened to someone I know. Her partner and the Father of her kids was terribly sick with sepsis and his family causes merry hell at the hospital because my friend was the one the staff were talking to. They kept saying "SHE"S not even family! We should be the ones to discuss his care!"

As it happened, she was allowed to be there but so was his awful Dad. His Dad kept shouting at the staff...and bullying. If she'd been married, she could have had more say.

FortunesFave decisions are made in the present not in the past.

If one part of a couple want to put the relationship on a legal footing then one person asks the other. It doesnt matter who does the asking.

@FortunesFave, I hope your friend's partner recovered. My friend didn't.

@WelliesWithHeels

Actually no my profession is hugely male dominated - I'm the only woman in my team - some might say my industry is one of the last bastions of male domination and largely stuck in the dark ages when it comes to things like equality, sexism and political correctness

But then again I don't go about bemoaning my lot simply because I'm a woman. I've worked hard to get where I am and I don't believe i should be "carried" financially by a man. You make your own way in life

The man USUALLY does the asking. While MOST women wait with baited breath to see if they pass muster...will THEY be the chosen one?

This is absolutely not how my engagement came about and if it had been I would have ended the relationship. You cannot try to trap people into legal commitments by stealth on this kind of reasoning.

My marriage had a religious element but that was by choice. Not only does it not have to be religious, in the UK, a civil ceremony cannot have any religious element. Everything about this country started with religion, because religion used to be the state. That is no longer the case in any meaningful sense and certainly does not have to affect your wedding or marriage if you do not wish it. Your version of marriage would have the same religious roots; you're just less clear to people in how they enter it, and have much less proof that they did it willingly.

A couple meet, fall in love...decide they want to live together. If they do, then they enter into that KNOWING that it's a legal commitment.

How on earth do they not know it's a legal commitment when they literally have to sign a contract? How on earth is this a clearer and more honest process?

Read back what you've written. You're literally claiming that marriage is religious and leaves women panting to be chosen while men make all the decisions, but the exact same arrangement by stealth, with far fewer safeguards to ensure informed consent, comes about because both people knew exactly what they were doing.

The law here in Australia recognises that sometimes things don't work out

The entire purpose of marriage is protection in case things don't work out, by death or something else. It's only once things go south that you actually need the protection. You could live your life with no problems, but legalising your relationship and asset sharing is what protects you if it goes wrong.

The more you post, the more it's looking like, far from mutual informed willingness, you want people not to know what they're doing.

BeenBusy then you must realise you're an unusual case...your very position indicates that much!

You do make your own way in life..we all do. But not every woman has the ability or the push to make it in highly competitive industries. Some work in nurseries, shops and as carers. They earn what they earn because they don't usually have degrees or training.

Then they can't afford childcare unless their partner is a high earner. And high earners don't usually marry cleaners do they?

This is absolutely not how my engagement came about

Subjective therefore not relevant.

People here in Australia DO know what moving in with someone means.

I do want people knowing what they're entering into. Do you imagine that were the laws to change in the UK that it would not become a hot topic? Of course it would! It would be debated on every breakfast show and at every school gate for weeks!

Everyone would know.

In a nutshell: if you want people to be able to marry each other if they both so choose, why on earth wouldn't you want a clear legal contract for both of them to sign?

It's always based on the assumption that the woman is either a SAHM or working part time. I've said in a previous thread on the same subject, I think it sometimes stems from feeling the need to justify their decisions (which are their business and do not need justifying) to get married and be dependent on their husband financially - perhaps they feel it's at odds with their feminist principles or that other people will look down on them.

If you’re independently wealthy with your own property and your name on everything then fine. In my friends case, she ended up with lions share of childcare including all school holidays because he didn’t want to and how do you MAKE somebody take care of babies. So because they weren’t married she had no rights to any financial savings/assets/the house and her earning potential was crap because she had to find school hours and term time only work. That’s why you need to be married.

@ivfbeenbusy Again, very impressive! My experience is in a very male-dominated and traditional industry. While I have managed personal success, watching the various and female specific hurdles mothers have to navigate has opened my eyes. Particularly now when one parent gets saddled with homeschooling on top of a career.

NutRoast I DON'T want people to marry one another if they so choose...I don't care if they do or don't want that.

What I want is for women to have some protection. There are many women who have moved in with their partner...with an engagement ring...only to find their partner stalls and stalls.

The ignorance which keeps them waiting is only part of the problem.

Cam what about women who have children with special needs? It's usually them who stays at home isn't it? There's no way around that.

@FortunesFave

This is absolutely not how my engagement came about

Subjective therefore not relevant.

People here in Australia DO know what moving in with someone means.

I do want people knowing what they're entering into. Do you imagine that were the laws to change in the UK that it would not become a hot topic? Of course it would! It would be debated on every breakfast show and at every school gate for weeks!

Everyone would know.

Not at all subjective or irrelevant. An actual fact - my engagement did not come about this way - that disproves your claim that men make the choices. Women can choose to leave a relationship that isn't committed, and they can choose to propose.

Everyone would know? Everyone once knew what marriage was and don't you think it's been around for long enough, with enough stories of unmarried people getting shafted? A few weeks of headlines, maybe, but what about in 20, 30, 50, 100 years? Also, you place more faith in a few weeks of news reports to educate people than an actual contract to read and sign? Really?

If you want people to know what they're getting into, there is no more transparent way than an actual contract that does not bind you until you sign it. You have an agenda, and while I'm sure it is well meant, it is an absolutely terrible system for establishing life changing legal commitments.

Too many women use having children and a couple of years out of the workplace out of what 45 years spent at work as an excuse quite frankly not to realise their full potential and then it follows that they then blame the father and feel some kind of entitlement for financial restitution.

Too many employers seeing 2 years out of the workplace as a reason that someone will never reach their full potential. I know so many women written off because they took time out, or wanted to do 4 days a week for a brief period (even if those 4 days were massively more effective than many peoples' 5).

You're not necessarily safe either. Until last month I was in a job that I suspect was similar to yours. Blokes everywhere, mostly with stay at home wives and nannies and no idea how much harder I was working to show up and keep pace with multiple kids but I thought fine, this is my choice. I supported and mentored other women in my workplace but didn't join any diversity groups because that, sadly, does zero good for your career and I needed to be ruthlessly pragmatic with my time. Come the pandemic, 'D'H moved out, I was alone with multiple children and a nanny who was unable to cone due to shielding. Temporary nanny was sorted but homeschooling etc took its toll, and despite working/caring/schooling/cleaning for 18 hours a day I went from one of the top performers to stuck in the middle, for 6 months of my entire career. Covid redundancies happened and my job was cut with the other non-top performers - a very disproportionate number of whom were women with young children or other caring responsibilities. The boys' club are all fine. Thanks in part to raising this point during consultation, I have a generous settlement and am in a much better position than most people made redundant due to covid. But it still sucks, and it's so unfair, and being senior or a good performer doesn't save you either, you might get a shock one day.

"It's not worth me working...all my wages would go on childcare because I only work in a shop"

But if they continue working, they could become a manager or have other employment opportunities etc.

What about low, or even medium income families who divorce? Marriage might well protect the wives of high earners, but for the majority, the man cannot afford to maintain two homes on his wages - the wife ends up on benefits or trying to find a job (or both).

What I want is for women to have some protection. There are many women who have moved in with their partner...with an engagement ring...only to find their partner stalls and stalls.

Then they need to leave if they're not willing to accept that! An engagement is not a marriage and with better education, women will be better equipped to know where they stand if they continue to have kids or lose earning power without this protection.

You claim that you want people to be informed and willing, but comments like this show that you actually want men to be passively entered into legal commitments. I understand the reasoning, because it is shitty of a man to act this way, but stalling on a legal commitment is not a reason to somehow trick a person into it!

If you really do want people to know what they're doing, there's simply not clearer and more honest process than signing a contract. Commitments must be opt in, and moving in isn't a sign that you want to do anything other than move in.

Absolutely no way should de facto rights be rolled out in this country. Why should anyone have enduring rights to my assets based on who lives in my house unless I make a full consenting choice? Having a child means that you have responsibilities to them - not the other parent. Of course if people chose to enter into this agreement then it’s fully up to them but imposing it by default is not fair. Arguably there should be more education to young girls that having kids then giving up work to rely solely on your partner is a stupid thing to do which makes you vulnerable but tbh that also applies to married women too unless the husband is incredibly wealthy.