I don't want to get married!

[lemonJ]

I have been told that I am stupid not to get married to my long term partner of 20 years. We are very happy and have three lovely kids.

I have never wanted to get married, I think the whole institution of marriage is archaic and fills me with misery. Giving women away, giving up our name not to mention the ridiculous ceremonies and the cost and stress people feel the need to put themselves through for his day. When is it going to become a thing of the past? It makes me think of wives serving their husbands in the 50s.

Our house is worth more money than when we bought it and I understand that if we get bloody married we will be exempt from paying inheritance tax if one of us dies. I suppose we should then but I do not want to as a political point. Bloody load of old shit. What should I do ?

OP I totally understand where you are coming from.

@Sodding I didn't patronise you, there's nothing wrong with my tone, I'm not insulting anyone, and you are being extremely oversensitive and needlessly rude.

I obviously don't know you from Eve and it is of no interest to me what you personally choose to do in your life. I've no idea why you are ranting about free will. I thought we were having a discussion.

If you are going to take it all so personally for no reason you're probably better off leaving it for someone else who wants to have the debate rather than interpret it all as an individual insult.

I just meant you don't have to have an actual ceremony.

OK, as explained above, schools, universities, workplaces, the voting system, are all rooted in misogynist traditions. But like marriage, have changed

Patronising. I can read and I’m not stupid.

All the points you made are to try and make sure I know you’re right and that your way is the best way. So aye, I got pissed off. Because it was high handed, dismissive and patronising.

And your point about the flowers implied I was an idiot when in actual fact I was right.

So you live your life how you choose and I’ll do the same.

Oh and it’s not a debate if you’re just telling everyone your way is the only way and demanding justification for anyone else’s choices. Which you did.

In fact if you read my posts they’re based on MY opinions, not demanding justification for anyone else’s choices, so it’s fairly ironic that you think I’m incapable of debate.

@crunchymint aye that’s fair enough, I get your point. It’s just that in my case it’s the words that are the issue, although obviously that’s not the case for everyone.

It’s the words which matter.

These are the words that are required for a civil marriage ceremony in England.

Declatory Words:
I do solemnly declare – that I know not – of any lawful impediment – why I………….may not be joined in marriage to…………….

Contracting Words:
I call upon – these persons here present – to witness that I…………….do take you……………to be my lawful wedded wife/husband.

That's it. Anything else is optional.

I would prefer not to say the words either and haven't so far. But if I die first I do want my partner to get a survivor pension.

And it’s the words wife and joined I have an issue with!!!

So in those words I will be a wife and I will be joined. No thanks

Aye crunchy it’s the legal protection without the marriage I want too. Hopefully it happens soon where it’s an option.

SNAP

And I would never have a wedding either or a civil partnership ceremony.

Isn’t it ironic that in feminism chat of all places women are busy attacking other women for not choosing the same thing as them.

Honestly civil partnership ceremonies simply ape marriage weddings. Because they were meant to be the same as weddings, but with minor changes to appease the religious lobby who did not want lesbian and gay people to be able to marry.
Only benefit of civil partnership's, is that to do the bare legal all you need to do is sign. No words are needed, and you don't even have to both be there at the same time.

@Sodding No, I wasn't being 'high handed', 'dismissive' or 'patronising', I didn't say or imply that you are an 'idiot', nor was I 'telling everyone your way is the only way and demanding justification for anyone else’s choices'.

I didn't do that anywhere on this thread. As above, there is literally no way in which the decisions that you or anyone else make could affect me in any way, and I've made my own decisions already.

I was asking those who say that marriage is objectively and inherently patriarchal to explain what is patriarchal about a legal agreement that eschews every single one of the sexist aspects of marriage. And in fact gives many women advantages compared to not being married. No one has been able to answer that.

I was not asking you to justify your reasons for not wanting to get married - why would I??

You can read whatever you want into my posts, but I have no interest in attacking you personally or in what choices you make as an individual. Those attacks that you claim to read in my posts are simply not there.

Ok whatever you say.

Actually, you can’t take an inherently sexist institution and pretend it isn’t.

Do it by all means, but don’t pretend it isn’t sexist. Because it is.

Why is it 'inherently sexist' , Sodding ? That's the question I have asked over and over again and literally no one has answered, except for by repeating that it is.

None of my posts (including this one) have been about asking people to justify their personal choices. It is nothing to do with me what other people do.

What am I asking people to justify is their claim that the legal institution of marriage, as it currently stands, without all the optional trappings (flowers, giving away, changing names etc.), is 'inherently sexist'. It's not enough to say that it is. Why is it? In what way is a barebones legal partnership solemnized as a marriage, like I had, sexist? Seriously?

I’ve explained why. I’ve also explained why for me personally it will never be the right thing.

It’s an institution which benefits women, which means we have to do it to be financially protected. That’s what makes it sexist. If society wasn’t inherently sexist women wouldn’t need the protection.

I like the CP idea because there’s no joining, no labels, no nothing. Just legal stuff for when the other inevitably dies. But it’s not designed to keep women down. Marriage is.

Like I’ve said repeatedly, if it works for you, great. It doesn’t for me.

Oh I forgot about the white dress, that’s sexist too.

Just remember that he can change his will any time he wants.

Sodding You've explained your reasons for not wanting to do it again personally, but you haven't (until this post) given any reasons that you think marriage is inherently sexist.

Now you're saying that it's sexist because it benefits women - that doesn't make sense surely.

If society wasn’t inherently sexist women wouldn’t need the protection.

That doesn't make marriage itself sexist. You could equally say if society wasn't inherently racist, we wouldn't need the protection of laws against race discrimination and inciting racial hatred. We unfortunately do need those laws because we live in a racist society. THat doesn't mean that the laws themselves are racist.

The legal and financial protections that it gives me and my husband are exactly the same protections that people want from a civil partnership. there's nothing magical about it being called marriage vs being called a civil partnership that makes it more inherently sexist.

I didn't wear a white dress either. Nor a wedding ring. Nor a veil. Nor walk down an aisle. Nor literally any other of the sexist trappings of marriage anyone could think of.

I have always been 100% opposed to every one of them and would never have got married if I had had to perform any one of those.

SoddingUnicorns

I'm NOT twisting what you say. In the previous post I said

That's absolutely fine, you get what you want just like we did.

I have no brief to prefer either arrangement. Do whatever you prefer. My question was simply to ask what the difference would be between the two civil arrangements in a registry office.

But a marriage in a registry office is NOT sexist, whatever you may choose to believe. As others have said, many things were sexist once but that doesn't mean we don't accept them now.

Given that many people in this forum are opposed to the use of the word "lady" because of it's historical roots, I'm surprised people are opposed to the use of the word "wife" which literally meant "woman" originally.
It only has the same negative connotations as woman has.

As lk said earlier in the thread I'd strongly object to being effectively married to someone just because we'd lived together for n number of years and had DC together. That leaves no choice.

If I want the commitment of marriage I can actively choose it, not have the ties foisted upon me.

I chose to marry my now DH. I wouldn't have wanted to be stuck with my DP that I lived with previously.

Call it marriage, civil partnership or whatever, the commitment needs to be an active choice.