So marriage is just a piece of paper.

[Whodatdog]

Women. Next time the man you want to marry says, I dont need to get married, its only a piece of paper....ask them, is your paycheck just a piece of paper? Why not burn it up. Is that mortgage you signed just a piece of paper? Why not tear it up?

 

Its not just a piece of paper. Its a legal binding contract to protect both of you, and your kids. Its a financial contract. It protects the children, not only for each parent, but should something happen to either one, it gives them Social Security protection. If you are a stay at home Mom (a very valuable job) with kids and not married, you have no retirement Social Security. You deserve that.

 

Women, dont devalue yourself. Dont let him call you his fiance, or even worse, his wife, if you arent married. He has to EARN the right to be able to do that. You are worth it.

 

Women, dont move in, set up house, clean and cook, and even worse, have his kids, and then expect him to marry you. In doing that you have devalued yourself with no bargaining power at all. He wont marry you then, why should he? You've given him all that marriage gives him, with him not giving you anything. Why would you do that???

 

Women. Value yourselves!

[Woggle]

What about women who are okay without that piece of paper? Does Goldie Hawn devalue herself?

[Phoenician]

100%.

 

You might be shocked my dear that regarding this legal agreement ; some religions have even better emphasized some rights for the women that you might not be aware of.

 

But the problem is in application of those agreements.

 

In Islam for example their is an amount money that he has to pay if he opts for a divorce -( other than liability of the father to pay custody)-

 

The problem is in the application of religions that makes it unfair .

 

I am a father 2 daughters ,and I raise them always to beleieve that marriage is a very sacred partnership that should be bound by Legal terms .

[Whodatdog]

What about women who are okay without that piece of paper? Does Goldie Hawn devalue herself?

 

You didnt read what I wrote. I said if you want to get married. If you are okay not being married, thats perfectly fine. My post wasnt about that.

[mercy]

Women. Value yourselves!

 

I get what you're saying.

 

However, I don't find my value or worth in a man and whether he wants to marry me or not.

 

Don't get me wrong, it's an honor to be h's wife, he adores me and I him. Nowhere else I want to be.

 

But my value and worth comes from within.

 

What got you so riled up this early in the morning?

[mercy]

You didnt read what I wrote. I said if you want to get married. If you are okay not being married, thats perfectly fine. My post wasnt about that.

 

Okay, ignore my post.

[basil67]

I've known women who refused to move in without marriage or engagement. So the guy proposes earlier than he might have done otherwise and they end up busting up because they rushed it.

 

Marriage has no guarantees.

[central]

I have direct deposit - I don't even get a paper confirmation to burn. But there is a contract behind that paycheck, as there is a contract behind marriage. You can make a relationship contract without marriage - but the legal process does provide some protections and obligations, some of which you may not agree with. Better to define your own relationship and draw up your own contract rather than use the default contract provided by the state.

[Arieswoman]

Phonecian,

 

some religions have even better emphasized some rights for the women that you might not be aware of.

 

But the problem is in application of those agreements.

 

In Islam for example their is an amount money that he has to pay if he opts for a divorce -( other than liability of the father to pay custody)-

 

The problem is in the application of religions that makes it unfair .

 

I think you are confusing a Sharia marriage with a secular marriage.

 

If people don't want a religious ceremony then there is no compulsion to have one.

[Thegameoflife]

Women. Next time the man you want to marry says, "I dont need to get married, its only a piece of paper", ask yourself why you want to marry someone who obviously doesn't share your values. In fact, question why you have even stayed with a person long enough to want to marry them, if you didn't feel comfortable having these conversations in the first months of dating; that period when you ask each other deep meaningful questions about values, goals, and aspirations.

 

In my opinion, if you have reached this stage where marriage is wanted on only one side, somebody is either extremely naive in hoping someone would change, or you really don't know each other well enough to be thinking about marriage. This isn't some romcom starring Matthew McConaughey.

 

My wife and I discussed these things in the first week of knowing each other.

Edited June 14, 2017 by Thegameoflife

[RecentChange]

Wow….

 

This strikes me as a bit…. Old fashioned? Or I suppose its because we are childless by choice, and I am the bread winner? Maybe I devalued my husband by cohabitating with him for 14 years before I married him?

 

Its interesting that you think marriage is something women have to bargain for.

 

Did it ever occur to you that both parties may be bringing equal things to the table? That the woman isn’t giving / doing things in exchange for a contract that says she is entitled to half of his worth?

 

He proposed to me after 3 years together. And honestly, I always felt that being married, was yes, “just a piece of paper”. I accepted his proposal but never pushed for a marriage.

 

I earn twice what he does. We have contracts that have allowed for joint bank accounts, P of A in case of medical issues etc. He came into the relationship with bad credit and tax issues… I didn’t.

 

I certainly didn’t “devalue” myself by not getting that piece of paper right away. Over the years we cleaned up his financial issues. We remained on each other’s insurance, bank accounts and other matters.

 

It wasn’t until we hit some bumps in our relationship, and after which I wanted to show HIM how committed I was…. That we got married. So now he will have the benefit of my SS, retirement etc. I suppose I will also have access to his, but it was very very far from the reason why we got married.

[Whodatdog]

The only reason I posted this was because if Ive read 1 thread, Ive read 8 million threads started by women who have said Why Wont My Boyfriend Marry Me? We live together, I have his 14 babies, why wont he ask me to marry him?

 

Those are the situations Im addressing. Not if you're happy with your situation, if you discussed beforehand, as you should have, not if it has worked out for you. Obviously if you're happy with your situation, this doesnt pertain to you.

 

Apparently I wasnt clear about this.

[Thegameoflife]

The only reason I posted this was because if Ive read 1 thread, Ive read 8 million threads started by women who have said Why Wont My Boyfriend Marry Me? We live together, I have his 14 babies, why wont he ask me to marry him?

 

Those are the situations Im addressing. Not if you're happy with your situation, if you discussed beforehand, as you should have, not if it has worked out for you. Obviously if you're happy with your situation, this doesnt pertain to you.

 

Apparently I wasnt clear about this.

 

People have an issue with your, "Why would they buy the cow when the milk is free?", analogy. The reality is that many men hold negative feelings about marriage. They were never interested in buying the cow, so to speak. If you ask any saleperson, they'll confirm it's always harder to sell to people who don't want what you have to offer. It often has nothing to do with the man not thinking the woman is worth marriage. It has more to do with the man harbouring negative feelings of marriage, and not seeing the benefits being worth the cost.

 

One of the things I find with many men, is that they are concerned about the psychological impact of marriage. Sometimes people change after. The endless stories of men in sexless marriages, nasty divorces, abuse, and other issues, is more than enough to discourage. Combine these realities with the fact that we simply live in a society where the general value of marriage is being erroded, as it's symbolic of the patriarch, which is constantly under attack by feminist idiologies. Marriage has become a nightmarish prison scenario in the minds of many men. You could be a perfectly rounded individual, meeting every single criteria of a perfect woman, but value can never override the perception of marriage that some men have.

 

If you want marriage, screen for people who also want marriage.

[Arieswoman]

TGofL nails it here;

 

If you want marriage, screen for people who also want marriage.

 

and don't waste time with those who don't.

[Thegameoflife]

TGofL nails it here;

 

 

 

and don't waste time with those who don't.

 

Exactly. We find the ocean by following rivers, not wondering the desert.

[Whodatdog]

People have an issue with your, "Why would they buy the cow when the milk is free?", analogy. The reality is that many men hold negative feelings about marriage. They were never interested in buying the cow, so to speak. If you ask any saleperson, they'll confirm it's always harder to sell to people who don't want what you have to offer. It often has nothing to do with the man not thinking the woman is worth marriage. It has more to do with the man harbouring negative feelings of marriage, and not seeing the benefits being worth the cost.

 

One of the things I find with many men, is that they are concerned about the psychological impact of marriage. Sometimes people change after. The endless stories of men in sexless marriages, nasty divorces, abuse, and other issues, is more than enough to discourage. Combine these realities with the fact that we simply live in a society where the general value of marriage is being erroded, as it's symbolic of the patriarch, which is constantly under attack by feminist idiologies. Marriage has become a nightmarish prison scenario in the minds of many men. You could be a perfectly rounded individual, meeting every single criteria of a perfect woman, but value can never override the perception of marriage that some men have.

 

If you want marriage, screen for people who also want marriage.

 

I dont think we are on different pages about this. In essence, that is what I am saying. If you want to be married, date people who also want to be married. Dont move in, have kids, with someone who hasnt indicated that they want marriage, and wonder why they dont marry you. These threads all say, Why wont he marry me? I have his kids, I clean his house, why wont he marry me? Why indeed. Because he doesnt have to. If he had wanted to, he likely already would have.

[Overtaxed]

Its not just a piece of paper. Its a legal binding contract to protect both of you, and your kids. Its a financial contract. It protects the children, not only for each parent, but should something happen to either one, it gives them Social Security protection. If you are a stay at home Mom (a very valuable job) with kids and not married, you have no retirement Social Security. You deserve that.

 

Women. Value yourselves!

 

While I agree with your premise here, let's be honest with ourselves about what marriage really is today. It's not "to protect both of you", it's really to protect the woman. Most states today are no-fault, and, end of the day, it's about who earns more, which, statistically speaking, is usually going to be the man. Because of the lack of fault basis in D, the protection of a M is very one sided, it's protecting the woman from ANY actions, not just her husband's bad actions.

 

Let me give you my personal situation. I make several multiples of my W's income. She's also a very high income earner and works very hard, so let me make sure not to take anything away here, but I just happen to be in a high paying field and make a lot more. She cheated on me last year. How did being married "protect me" in any way? She can still walk with 1/2, even though she was the "at fault" party. If I had cheated, that would be "fair", but, reverse situation, it's not fair at all, IMHO.

 

Marriage today, for men, is a real dangerous game to play. You cheat, she leaves with 1/2, she cheats, she leaves with 1/2. And, in practice, 1/2 is typically a lot more than 1/2 for a lot of settlements. There's almost no advantage granted to men by marriage anymore and still a lot of advantages granted to women. It's not at all surprising that men aren't keen to marry given these "new rules", if you value yourself as a man, it's very difficult to enter into such a one sided contract. I didn't/couldn't and my W and I have a pre-nup to make things a bit more reasonable should we D. Because, let me tell you, the thought of her cheating and then filing for D and, through no fault of my own, me having to pay alimony to her so that she might maintain the lifestyle my income allowed us to live is simply not fair. I can't see how anyone would think that is fair. And yet, it's the law of the land, and many men today (and a few women, yes) are standing in court right now having a big settlement handed down to the woman who broke their heart by cheating on them.

 

If the situation were reversed, we'd call it gender discrimination and it would be illegal.

[aileD]

Woah overtaxed. That's a lot .

 

I don't think it's a sexist system. In your case I would argue that if she makes a good enough income to live, then she shouldn't receive alimony if she cheated on you.

 

However. Your case isnt usually how it happens. Usually, the wife gives up a good chunk of her life, career and earning power to physically raise the children and when a divorce happens, she is left to struggle because her income isn't as much, she hasn't had as many years of work history to build her salary, and she's usually got a good deal of custody of the kids meaning that makes it even more difficult for her manage work/home life.

 

I don't think there should be "maintaining lifestyle to which accustomed" pay (other than for the children). You divorce, you lose that life.

 

I do think strongly that there should be penalties for proven infidelity. Whatever they may be.

 

But marriage is a contract....and yes it does protect the more disadvantaged. Becsuse when I married, we made a plan....he would work his career and I would stay home with the kids for as long as we could before going back into the workforce. That was our life plan "til death do us part"...and now 20 something yesrs later when the kids are almost grown and our plan is for me to start a career and work my way up to a good salary and enjoy our lives---he gets to have an affair and want to leave and not pay me alimony? Screw thst. I upheld my part of the marriage contract for 24 years and I took the hit for all that time but I did it because we were a team with a plan. Eff yeah, he OWES me if he ever leaves me. I can't survive on the salary I get now. He gets to ride off into the sunset with 20+ years of earning power behind him? Nope. That's not right

 

Wow. Rant sorry!!!

 

I eouls never stsrt a life with someone without being married. No house, no kids, no ownership of anything.

[aileD]

I'm typing in the sunlight and I know there are typos, too lazy to correct them

[basil67]

Women. Next time the man you want to marry says, "I dont need to get married, its only a piece of paper", ask yourself why you want to marry someone who obviously doesn't share your values. In fact, question why you have even stayed with a person long enough to want to marry them, if you didn't feel comfortable having these conversations in the first months of dating; that period when you ask each other deep meaningful questions about values, goals, and aspirations.

 

In my opinion, if you have reached this stage where marriage is wanted on only one side, somebody is either extremely naive in hoping someone would change, or you really don't know each other well enough to be thinking about marriage. This isn't some romcom starring Matthew McConaughey.

 

My wife and I discussed these things in the first week of knowing each other.

 

I am 25 years defacto and say the same thing. My partner and I are fine without marriage. Sure, if he'd wanted marriage, I could have gone through with it - but what is the point of the ceremony if one is only doing it to keep the other happy?

 

I think marriage needs to be between two people who truly value marriage. Not between one person who wants it and the other who just gives it lip service.

[basil67]

If the situation were reversed, we'd call it gender discrimination and it would be illegal.

 

I know women who support their husbands. If they were to be divorced, she would have to part with her cash. The scenario does get reversed and it's not called discrimination.

[Overtaxed]

Woah overtaxed. That's a lot .

 

I don't think it's a sexist system. In your case I would argue that if she makes a good enough income to live, then she shouldn't receive alimony if she cheated on you.

 

However. Your case isnt usually how it happens. Usually, the wife gives up a good chunk of her life, career and earning power to physically raise the children and when a divorce happens, she is left to struggle because her income isn't as much, she hasn't had as many years of work history to build her salary, and she's usually got a good deal of custody of the kids meaning that makes it even more difficult for her manage work/home life.

 

I don't think there should be "maintaining lifestyle to which accustomed" pay (other than for the children). You divorce, you lose that life.

 

I do think strongly that there should be penalties for proven infidelity. Whatever they may be.

 

But marriage is a contract....and yes it does protect the more disadvantaged. Becsuse when I married, we made a plan....he would work his career and I would stay home with the kids for as long as we could before going back into the workforce. That was our life plan "til death do us part"...and now 20 something yesrs later when the kids are almost grown and our plan is for me to start a career and work my way up to a good salary and enjoy our lives---he gets to have an affair and want to leave and not pay me alimony? Screw thst. I upheld my part of the marriage contract for 24 years and I took the hit for all that time but I did it because we were a team with a plan. Eff yeah, he OWES me if he ever leaves me. I can't survive on the salary I get now. He gets to ride off into the sunset with 20+ years of earning power behind him? Nope. That's not right

 

Wow. Rant sorry!!!

 

I eouls never stsrt a life with someone without being married. No house, no kids, no ownership of anything.

 

I think we'll agree to disagree, but a few points I'd make.

 

In your case I would argue that if she makes a good enough income to live, then she shouldn't receive alimony if she cheated on you.

 

But that's not the way it is. If your W makes "good income" but you make a lot more, you will be paying alimony and giving up a lot more than her in a D. I agree with you, but that's not how the system works today.

 

I don't think there should be "maintaining lifestyle to which accustomed" pay (other than for the children). You divorce, you lose that life.

 

I agree with you. But, that's not the way it is. If you're a housewife married to a man making 5M/yr and you D, guess what, you're going to get a tremendous amount more than a wife married to a man making 50K/yr. Why? To help you maintain that lifestyle. It's actually a scale in some states, you make X, spouse makes Y, you get Z. Same thing for child support, the CS payments for very high income men can get to the point of ridiculous. Sure, children are expensive. 10K a month doesn't cover it?

 

I do think strongly that there should be penalties for proven infidelity. Whatever they may be.

 

But there aren't, at least not in most states today (no fault). Maybe all, I'm not sure, but I know that almost all are no fault now. Again, I agree with you, there should be strong disincentives to do all kinds of crappy things in a marriage, affairs, hitting, verbal abuse, alienation of affection. But there aren't. What there is, for the lower income earner, is a huge incentive to D at the drop of a hat, they are going to get a great settlement in most cases and be able to start a new life easily. Look at all the men (and high income women, but far fewer) who are crippled financially by D.

 

I upheld my part of the marriage contract for 24 years and I took the hit for all that time but I did it because we were a team with a plan. Eff yeah, he OWES me if he ever leaves me.

 

Yes, you did. But so did he. He shared his income with you while you were married which made it possible for you to stay home with the children. Does he owe you if he leaves? Maybe, I don't know what your situation is, but, let me provide the counterpoint to that. You stayed home with the kids for the majority of your possible working years while he spent his days in some office somewhere dreaming of the life you had. You got to do what you wanted to do; be with your children, while he got to pay for all the time that you took off work to be with them. Those years he spent at the office he'll never get back. He'll never get the same amount of time you had with the kids. There's no going back, it's over, and yes, he did what was expected of him, but, is that what he wanted to do? Don't you think he would have wanted to stay home too?

 

Listen, I get it, I do. It's one of the reasons I don't have children, the risks are so high and the balance is so unfair (in both directions). And I kind of think we're saying the same thing here with the exception of my last paragraph. But the system is how it is today. And men are regularly destroyed in court during a D, we all know it to be true and we can argue that "they deserve it" or "they owe me", but, end of the day, we all react to incentives. And the incentives now make it extremely risky to marry for a man; hence, the endless parade of "The Death of Marriage" articles. And, IMHO, it won't stop until some "fairness" (whatever that means to each person) is restored to the system. Make it too dangerous and with not enough "upside" and people won't do it. And I think that's exactly where we are today.

 

I was a good man to my W. I never interfered with her career, in fact, I did whatever I could to help her advance it. I helped pay off her college loans and debts she brought into the marriage. I work in a high income field and make many multiples of her income. She cheated on me. It seems right to you that I should be paying her "never work again" kind of money on the way out the door in this situation? Because, end of the day, without a prenup, that's what I'd be looking at, because, that's what the system is today.

[aileD]

I would argue that me and my husband made an agreement and and a decision on what was best for us as a family. We chose for me to be the lesser breadwinner. As a team. We decided. It was a choice. Why should I have to suffer financially if he leaves? If I did not stay home with the children, he may not have been able to advance in his career and schooling. in the case of a SAHM who's husband makes 5 mil, of course she will get a substantial amount especially if he earned thst during their marriage and she can't afford to sustain herself.

 

I don't see why that's hard to understand for some people. We aren't just greedy.

[aileD]

I think we are a little off topic so I won't go further...but se sre all shapes by our own experiences I guess

 

Also it differs by state. My state has recently changed the alimony laws.

[basil67]

I think we are a little off topic so I won't go further...but se sre all shapes by our own experiences I guess

 

Also it differs by state. My state has recently changed the alimony laws.

 

And even with reference to the OPs post - her argument doesn't stand up over all the different laws of the various states and countries of people reading this.