Co-Habitation

[unimoko]

Okay,

 

maybe this is the wrong place to post this question. But I got to ask it anyway. Why women co-habitate with men?

Usually I hear cases like well, I do not want to loose my financial assets--okay then, why not get a prenup? Because I have not meant anyone who has no lived with someone who has not accumulated mutual assests together while living as a couple.

And then I hear another reason--"We just want to see how this works out" And then I am thinking so you want to do this thing as a trial. Okay, put it in another way you want to see how long this thing rides out. Would you want yourself being put on a trial. That this is a conditional thing and we will stay together as long as we are happy?

And thing the classic excuse most women thing--well this is just one step before marriage--WRONG!!! I think that when men get themselves comfortable in a situation that they do no want to rock the boat.

I just don't get it. I am not saying that marriage is perfect, heck, these days more people are getting out of marriages than to stay in them.

All I am saying is why do women settle for less by co-habitating....

[Lishy]

Cos some women do not want to get married! It isnt rocket science..... I would not feel like I was settling for less by living with someone before getting married - I persoanlly consider it ridiculous to marry someone when you do not kow if you could live together!

 

Marriage, to me, is just a piece of paper and a good party!

[a4a]

All I am saying is why do women settle for less by co-habitating....

 

 

Not all women consider marriage to be the ultimate goal in a relationship. I certainly lived with my H for 6 months before finally saying I DO. I would not just expect to get married and move in with a man or into our own home. It gives you a chance to see how they are day to day before being stuck with a mismatch for the rest of your life. A prenup will not expose their daily habits to you. I think more women are actually demanding a trial run of the man rather than the other way around.

[unimoko]

Yes, I agree. When you live with someone you get to see their quarks or habits. But what I am saying is that is a trial run? I mean crap is going to come up with or with out that piece of paper. And women who lived with their spouse have said that the dynamics do change when you get married.

So putting aside the women who have no sentiment about the institution of marriage I am just begging the answer why go through the trial run?

[Lishy]

Its called 'Try before you buy'

[unimoko]

And that's the point. Would you want someone to try you out?

[a4a]

Yes, I agree. When you live with someone you get to see their quarks or habits. But what I am saying is that is a trial run? I mean crap is going to come up with or with out that piece of paper. And women who lived with their spouse have said that the dynamics do change when you get married.

So putting aside the women who have no sentiment about the institution of marriage I am just begging the answer why go through the trial run?

 

I do not think all that much changes once married. You file your taxes a bit differently, and mail comes as Mr. and Mrs. (but not at my house )

That is about it. Unless of course you are dealing with a closeted marriage monster. One who either thinks that the ring shows ownership or believes that the ring on the finger entitles them to be cruel.

 

There is no magical thing that happens when you say I do, you are still the same people. Granted all people change and grow (I hope) through their lives. But it does not happen just because you got married. If a person changes that much right after the I DO is said........well there is a problem.

 

Living with a potential mates can uncover many things besides if there is just toothpaste left in the sink. Bad habits, drinking too much, use of porn, how they treat you when you are with them 7 days a week. ect ect ect.

 

What would be the positive to not doing a trial run?

[littlekitty]

With divorce rates as high as they are, surely trying to live together first can save yet another divorce, when the couple realise they aren't suited?

[Lishy]

And that's the point. Would you want someone to try you out?

 

Yes, I would!

 

When you get married you are promising to be with that person through think and thin until death do you part! Is it not hypocritical to promise that when you do not even know if you could live with that person? I owuld rather a failed relationship than a failed marriage!

[a4a]

Yes, I would!

 

When you get married you are promising to be with that person through think and thin until death do you part! Is it not hypocritical to promise that when you do not even know if you could live with that person? I owuld rather a failed relationship than a failed marriage!

 

I agree I would not want someone to think they are going to change who I am just because we got married. I would also want my future spouse to be confident that the right decision was being made.

 

What are the negatives or positives for not doing the trial run?

[Lishy]

"Marry in haste, repent at leisure"

[unimoko]

I just think it teaches not to trust. You are always on some level on the look out for what is wrong with the partner or situation.

Don't get me wrong some people can go on with it for years. I just think people should be more honest with themselves and their expectations when they decide to co-habitat. And to discuss it with their partner BEFORE they move in with each other.

[blind_otter]

HAH! Some of us don't want to get married. I think that paying the government $90 to register a piece of paper in their databanks is just dumb. I'm not knocking other people who value the tradition, etc. I did it once and won't ever do it again.

 

I feel that, for me, I might live with someone for the rest of my life. But the whole marriage thing is redundant for me. I've done it once, it didn't work out, and the only thing it did was cost me money. So I refuse to take part in it ever again. I can make a lifelong committment in my heart. I don't need to file my taxes jointly.

[EnigmaXOXO]

All I am saying is why do women settle for less by co-habitating....

 

Never considered it "settling for less", myself.

 

I can understand how some folks (especially women) who have never been married consider it to be the ultimate relationship goal. For some, there is a desire to conform to family and societal expectations regarding what is considered proper and the norm. I think being legally married is a good idea if you plan to have children and raise a family together. I think it's great if you believe marriage is a religious sacrament and that making vows before G-d and legalizing your union with the state somehow helps to validate your relationship, prove your commitment to each other and seal the deal (so to speak). But having been there, I can tell you first hand that marital promises made before church and family, state licenses and pre-nups do not come with a life-time warranty or insure that two people will remain committed to each other for the rest of their lives. And any kind of 'security' one may naively glean from going through these motions is superficial, at best. Although I can certainly relate to nostalgic romantic idealism.

 

Weddings are expensive. So are pre-nups, attorneys and messy long-drawn-out divorces.

 

While I'm not for or against marriage in particular, I don't see what difference it makes in the grand scheme of things. Having co-habitated with my partner for going on six years, I see more positives than negatives in our arrangement. We don't pay the 'marriage penalty tax'. We still own joint property together and have all the same financial benefits that married couples have… and then some! For instance, neither one of us are legally obligated for the other one's depts. We are also each other's beneficiaries should something happen to one of us. We are already individually covered by health insurance through our employment, so that has never been an issue for us. And it already works out better for us to file separately at tax time than it would be if we were married and filing jointly.

 

As far as the intangible aspects of our relationship, I am every bit as committed and devoted to my partner as I would be if we were legally married. I wouldn't feel any differently towards him flaunting a diamond on my ring finger or being called "Mrs.". What's more, unlike a lot of married couples…we're actually HAPPY. And I find more comfort and security knowing that my partner is at home every day because he wants to be and not because he's obligated to.

 

True, not being shackled at the ankles by legal entanglements, familial obligations and promises made before family and G-d… it would be an easy thing for either of us to just walk away should we change our minds one day. But the beauty of it (for us), is that having given each other that freedom we still choose to remain together and committed to this relationship because we want to be and not because we have to be. And to me, loyalty and commitment just seems more genuine when you know it's coming from the heart.

 

So my question is … what is to be gained by fixing what obviously isn't broke? So that everyone else can feel more comfortable with our relationship (???) :confused:

 

It would be interesting to see what possible benefits someone could think of to convince a couple (like us) how getting married could possibly improve our relationship. You never know… Perhaps there's something we're missing and just don't know it yet?

[Guest]

Never considered it "settling for less", myself.

 

I can understand how some folks (especially women) who have never been married consider it to be the ultimate relationship goal. For some, there is a desire to conform to family and societal expectations regarding what is considered proper and the norm. I think being legally married is a good idea if you plan to have children and raise a family together. I think it's great if you believe marriage is a religious sacrament and that making vows before G-d and legalizing your union with the state somehow helps to validate your relationship, prove your commitment to each other and seal the deal (so to speak). But having been there, I can tell you first hand that marital promises made before church and family, state licenses and pre-nups do not come with a life-time warranty or insure that two people will remain committed to each other for the rest of their lives. And any kind of 'security' one may naively glean from going through these motions is superficial, at best. Although I can certainly relate to nostalgic romantic idealism.

 

Weddings are expensive. So are pre-nups, attorneys and messy long-drawn-out divorces.

 

While I'm not for or against marriage in particular, I don't see what difference it makes in the grand scheme of things. Having co-habitated with my partner for going on six years, I see more positives than negatives in our arrangement. We don't pay the 'marriage penalty tax'. We still own joint property together and have all the same financial benefits that married couples have… and then some! For instance, neither one of us are legally obligated for the other one's depts. We are also each other's beneficiaries should something happen to one of us. We are already individually covered by health insurance through our employment, so that has never been an issue for us. And it already works out better for us to file separately at tax time than it would be if we were married and filing jointly.

 

As far as the intangible aspects of our relationship, I am every bit as committed and devoted to my partner as I would be if we were legally married. I wouldn't feel any differently towards him flaunting a diamond on my ring finger or being called "Mrs.". What's more, unlike a lot of married couples…we're actually HAPPY. And I find more comfort and security knowing that my partner is at home every day because he wants to be and not because he's obligated to.

 

True, not being shackled at the ankles by legal entanglements, familial obligations and promises made before family and G-d… it would be an easy thing for either of us to just walk away should we change our minds one day. But the beauty of it (for us), is that having given each other that freedom we still choose to remain together and committed to this relationship because we want to be and not because we have to be. And to me, loyalty and commitment just seems more genuine when you know it's coming from the heart.

 

So my question is … what is to be gained by fixing what obviously isn't broke? So that everyone else can feel more comfortable with our relationship (???) :confused:

 

It would be interesting to see what possible benefits someone could think of to convince a couple (like us) how getting married could possibly improve our relationship. You never know… Perhaps there's something we're missing and just don't know it yet?

 

The best part: If one of parties has sex with someone else, it isn't adultery!