BiAxident Posted May 26, 2008 Posted May 26, 2008 My ex-gf and I lived together for 8 months before she decided to end the LTR several weeks ago. Prior to living together, she had stated that she wanted to spend the rest of her life with me. In addition, after the breakup, she noted that prior to moving in together she was ready to marry me, but after we moved in together, she would have had to think long and hard had I proposed to her. This got me thinking, so I did some research on the inter-web-a-net and found that, according to "professionals", couples who cohabitate prior to marriage are more likely to end up in divorce. From my perspective, it made perfect sense to live with my partner before getting married. This way, you can be sure ahead of time you can stand being around one another day-in/day-out. Also, you gain the experience of seeing how you handle the routine chores of life as a couple. What say you, ladies and gentlemen? Did cohabitation help/hurt your relationships? Would you make different choices regarding this topic in the future?
Enema Posted May 26, 2008 Posted May 26, 2008 I cohabited for 4 years before getting married. Wouldn't do it any other way. I think there's more going on in those studies than can be easily investigated. For example: - Many people that don't cohabitate do so based on religious belief. A lot of religious people do not believe in divorce. So even if their marriage was horrible, they may have stayed together and skewed the numbers. - Conversely, the type of people that will cohabitate may be more liberal in their beliefs and more willing to exit a failed relationship than a conservative couple. So, I don't think "divorce rates" are a good indicator of whether or not cohabiting is a beneficial practice.
melanie03 Posted May 26, 2008 Posted May 26, 2008 I think that living together before marriage is a good idea. It gives you a chance to get to know the other person's habits and get to know them getter. It lets you see if you are going to be able to live with the other person. I lived with my husband before we got married and it just confirmed that I wanted to be with him as much as possible.
Tomcat33 Posted May 26, 2008 Posted May 26, 2008 This got me thinking, so I did some research on the inter-web-a-net and found that, according to "professionals", couples who cohabitate prior to marriage are more likely to end up in divorce You know I am not sure where or how they get these stats from but living together before marriage happens to be a trend that started probably only in the last 30 yrs or so and it just so happens that a big number of divorces are probably in marriages that happen to be formed during the last 30 yrs, d is not as prevalent in people who were married in the 50's 60's and before so yeah of course they are going to conclude that people who live together tend to D more. These are North American statistics too I suppose or at least Western world stats because in a lot of other parts of the world they don't believe in D just as they do not believe in as much as a kiss before marriage. Anyway sorry that is my rant on those stats, as to your question: It depends on whether you believe in marriage or not... I have two theories in terms of living together, I think people should live together when they are sure they want to spend the rest of their lives together, ideally when they are engaged that way it gives you a chance to sort of seal the deal in terms of compatibility before you take that plunge. Of course if you are not into marriage then it doesn't matter, do it when you feel it's right. My second theory is if you are with someone for two years or a long time and then move in together and it turns into living together for another 2 or more years and there is really nothing stopping you from marrying then what's the point? What are you stalling? Couples become complacent once they move in together and it takes some of that excitement out of the relationship so if you have goals of spending the rest of your lives together then fine but if you don't and are just testing waters to see how the rel goes next then I think it is a dumb move, what's the point? You just kill the relationship really.
Lookingforward Posted May 26, 2008 Posted May 26, 2008 You know I am not sure where or how they get these stats from but living together before marriage happens to be a trend that started probably only in the last 30 yrs or so and it just so happens that a big number of divorces are probably in marriages that happen to be formed during the last 30 yrs, d is not as prevalent in people who were married in the 50's 60's and before so yeah of course they are going to conclude that people who live together tend to D more. These are North American statistics too I suppose or at least Western world stats because in a lot of other parts of the world they don't believe in D just as they do not believe in as much as a kiss before marriage. Anyway sorry that is my rant on those stats, as to your question: It depends on whether you believe in marriage or not... I have two theories in terms of living together, I think people should live together when they are sure they want to spend the rest of their lives together, ideally when they are engaged that way it gives you a chance to sort of seal the deal in terms of compatibility before you take that plunge. Of course if you are not into marriage then it doesn't matter, do it when you feel it's right. My second theory is if you are with someone for two years or a long time and then move in together and it turns into living together for another 2 or more years and there is really nothing stopping you from marrying then what's the point? What are you stalling? Couples become complacent once they move in together and it takes some of that excitement out of the relationship so if you have goals of spending the rest of your lives together then fine but if you don't and are just testing waters to see how the rel goes next then I think it is a dumb move, what's the point? You just kill the relationship really. sometimes "living together before M' becomes No M
Tomcat33 Posted May 26, 2008 Posted May 26, 2008 sometimes "living together before M' becomes No M I agree which is more reason why you should leave it to the tail end, because if you do it in the early stages and then ither the rel drags on in cohabitation mode and you won't get married anyway so why waste your time it is such a huge hassle to move and split stuff why bother living with someone you are just trying to see what's next? OR you moved in way too soon only find out you really weren't compatible at all or worse yet in love at all. But if you have been with someone for a while and you are thinking of spending the rest of your life together then why not take it to the next level and see what you are really like together day to day. I find it really hard to believe you would NOT be compatible if you made it long term dating.
lovestruck818 Posted May 26, 2008 Posted May 26, 2008 I agree which is more reason why you should leave it to the tail end, because if you do it in the early stages and then ither the rel drags on in cohabitation mode and you won't get married anyway so why waste your time it is such a huge hassle to move and split stuff why bother living with someone you are just trying to see what's next? OR you moved in way too soon only find out you really weren't compatible at all or worse yet in love at all. But if you have been with someone for a while and you are thinking of spending the rest of your life together then why not take it to the next level and see what you are really like together day to day. I find it really hard to believe you would NOT be compatible if you made it long term dating. Well, it gives someone more of an incentive to want to marry you if you are not lviing together prior...why buy the milk when you can get it free?
Lookingforward Posted May 26, 2008 Posted May 26, 2008 Well, it gives someone more of an incentive to want to marry you if you are not lviing together prior...why buy the milk when you can get it free? not necessarily, some seem to buy the milk then still get it free on the side from some other dairy (please note I didn't say cow)
OpenBook Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 not necessarily, some seem to buy the milk then still get it free on the side from some other dairy (please note I didn't say cow) :D:D Deftly handled, LF!
Trialbyfire Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 My ex-gf and I lived together for 8 months before she decided to end the LTR several weeks ago. Prior to living together, she had stated that she wanted to spend the rest of her life with me. In addition, after the breakup, she noted that prior to moving in together she was ready to marry me, but after we moved in together, she would have had to think long and hard had I proposed to her. This got me thinking, so I did some research on the inter-web-a-net and found that, according to "professionals", couples who cohabitate prior to marriage are more likely to end up in divorce. From my perspective, it made perfect sense to live with my partner before getting married. This way, you can be sure ahead of time you can stand being around one another day-in/day-out. Also, you gain the experience of seeing how you handle the routine chores of life as a couple. What say you, ladies and gentlemen? Did cohabitation help/hurt your relationships? Would you make different choices regarding this topic in the future? It sounds like you and your ex had an understanding of where your lives were headed, which was eventually, marriage. With this in mind, I see no reason not to cohabitate. If you don't have a strong understanding and want to get married, don't live together. If both of you don't care if you get married, live together. Basically, both of you have to know where the other person stands on life goals.
Tomcat33 Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 Well, it gives someone more of an incentive to want to marry you if you are not lviing together prior...why buy the milk when you can get it free? Yeah but marriage should not be about "incentives" or traps to get people to do what they are not sure about doing, it should be about having a clear picture of wanting to be with a person for the rest of your life. What is the point of having someone marry you because they are dying to know what it's like to be with you, only to find out AFTER you both marry you made a mistake, what if you don't even like living with them? Sure you will be bound to the relationship because of a paper but where is your heart in all that? It's for the rest of your life! who needs that crap? Life's too short to spend it miserably next to someone you don't feel is right for you.
Lookingforward Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 I did some research on this a few months ago for a paper. Some of the studies were conducted many years ago. But the more current ones showed a trend toward people who tend to live together in a trial marriages not truly committed to the partners. Most kept in the back of their minds that this isn't real and I can leave anytime I want. There is nothing holding them there. It also gave them more of a sense of entitlement to step outside of the R. I would like to see some longitudinal studies. Based on personal observation, it is about half and half. Half live together for years(15+) and others marry and divorce. I'm actually with Yoda on this one - same as there IS no 'try' there's no such thing as a 'trial marriage' - you either are or you're not
Lovelybird Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 'trial marriage' just justify 'you can walk whenever you want', and mold people into that habbit, and take the easy way out, which is already very popular these days. It hints people that "you are controlled by flaky emotions, not your own decisions and dedications" couples who have happy marriage are couples who overcomed their own selfishness and self centreness, sometimes even sacrifice. but cohabitation is like to nuture the opposite, if you are not suit me one day, I am going to walk, even the other heavily invest themselves in the relationship. it is kinda cruel
HYS Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 I think it really depends on your maturity. My previous relationship: young and immature. BF didn't have a job, I supported him, he partied alot and spent the little money he had, I paid all the bills. There was absolutely no "us" and we basically led seperate lives. Obviously this relationship ended! My current relationship: older and wiser! he is everything my ex wasn't so I think cohabiting would definitely lead to marriage. I will admit, the last relationship did leave a bad taste in my mouth regarding cohabiting so I'm definitely not jumping head first!
Lovelybird Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 I agree with you that there is no such thing as a trial marriage. This is a modern term used to clean up the term SHACKING. Lovely Bird O agree with you. There is no such thing as a trial marriage and this is just a sign of the times. The fact that it is no longer the exception, but the rule. But I have to be honest, I did it and well.... I am one of the numbers. true, sign of the times, maybe people would learn from frustration, and return to right track
Trialbyfire Posted May 27, 2008 Posted May 27, 2008 I'm also a stat but I've never lived with anyone beforehand. I wish I had lived with my ex previous to marriage. It was never a consideration since he was in a hurry to get married and at the time, I wasn't a big believer in living together. I'm not convinced it's such a bad thing for people to walk away when living together. I wonder how high the divorce stats would be if so many people didn't live together first, realize they weren't suited and didn't go through with marriage.
moonlight fragments Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 I have tried the living together a few times. I have to admit I have never wanted to get married before, and have been vocal about this in past relationships. I do not think that living together and marriage should be seen as two very different things. People jump into marriage as fast as they jump into living together these days. Times are changing. Perhaps the divorce rate is more of a sideeffect of the adjustment we are trying to make. We just haven't got all the kinks worked out yet. I do not think the question should be between co-habitation and marriage. Marriage these days is expensive, and so is divorce. And there are alot of people making a very decent living on these two things happening. It wouldn't be good for the economy if either were to slow down, there is alot of outside pressure for this to continue. Think about that. The question should be more about whether or not we are ready to be in a relationship. Are you a whole person? If you do not even know what I really mean by that question, then I would say the answer is no. I suggest we need a new way of looking at this problem all together, because the debate of the chicken or the egg is never going to end.
D-D Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 I have seen much of the same research that you speak of. I personally would not live with someone I was seeing if I was not married to them. I think when you live with someone like that when you are not married, you are more likely to break up because it is not the same as a marriage. In a marriage there is a serious committment. If you tell someone you want a "trail marriage" it seems to me like you are dooming yourself to failure in a way. There is no committment to stay together. You are two individuals living together. In my personal opinion, if you feel like you need to "test drive" your marriage, you probably aren't ready to marry or you shouldn't marry. This is just my opinion though, so I am not trying to offend anyone or stating that I am 100% correct in my belief. On the other hand maybe it is not surprising that people who practice cohabition break up or eventually divorce. I would consider myself fairly conservative and expect to marry someone and live the rest of my life with them, realizing it will never be perfect and won't always be great (raised as a Catholic believing divorce to be serious sin). I think other people expect to get divorced if they marry and thus don't see divorce as something that isn't an option in the future. In turn, they may also have less hang-ups living with someone prior to marriage (for example something that most Christian churchs frown upon). In a way I think that people who cohabit may be in a way "less committed" to the relationship in some way (I don't mean any offence to anyone). My point is in 1900, most people would have married in the church and likely would not have divorced for religious/social reasons in the time (divorce was frowned upon). Now divorce is a common thing and isn't frowned upon. From my own experienc in the last 10 years, at least 5 of my cousins practiced cohabition. 1 of the cousins broke up prior to marrying. 3 of the other cousins married and later divorced. The remaining one married and is still married. I also have some close friends who lived togther for about 8 years before marrying and have now been very happily married for about 6 years. So cohabitation can work out, because they would both tell you they have a fantastic marriage and that they truly love eachother (they also had two fantastic kids together).
GPFan Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 What say you, ladies and gentlemen? Did cohabitation help/hurt your relationships? Would you make different choices regarding this topic in the future? What better way to get to know the person you intend to marry? Your initial instinct is right on, I believe, of course you don't like the way it turned out this time. If co-habitation was required prior to marriage, perhaps there would be fewer divorces??
lovestruck818 Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 http://www.newsday.com/news/local/ny-limurd0602,0,1884265.story read this- this is why it's ALWAYS a bad idea to live with someone before marriage.
lovestruck818 Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 What better way to get to know the person you intend to marry? Your initial instinct is right on, I believe, of course you don't like the way it turned out this time. If co-habitation was required prior to marriage, perhaps there would be fewer divorces?? If you are not married to someone, why in the world would you give them complete access to everything? No man is moving into my place until I have a wedding ring on my finger. Just can't trust 'em otherwise.
carhill Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 People change. Personality characteristics can be hidden if one has an agenda. I personally think it's a non-issue. That said, I didn't live with my wife prior to becoming married and, if single again in the future, I would do exactly the same thing (only live together if married). Nothing about "living together" behavior from her was a surprise to me or a deal breaker in our marriage. Other changes made the difference in our M. Maybe she found out I was too meticulous for her taste, so her perspective on this topic might be different
blind_otter Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 http://www.newsday.com/news/local/ny-limurd0602,0,1884265.story read this- this is why it's ALWAYS a bad idea to live with someone before marriage. Because the guy might go crazy and kill you and then kill himself? What if they hadn't lived together and had gotten married? Would he have NOT slit her throat and jumped off the building? This was a tragic incident. It has nothing to do with people living together. I DIDN'T live with my psycho ex 4 years ago, but he still broke down the door to my house and tried to kill someone in my living room.
EnigmaXOXO Posted June 2, 2008 Posted June 2, 2008 If you are not married to someone, why in the world would you give them complete access to everything? No man is moving into my place until I have a wedding ring on my finger. Just can't trust 'em otherwise. If your speaking in terms of material/financial assets (house), then being married could very well grant them part ownership of everything you have. So if somewhere down the line your prince charming becomes an abusive, philandering, unemployed nightmare ... there’s a good chance that putting him out might cost you half of everything you had. Not to mention the added expense, time and hassle of getting your marriage legally dissolved. Of course, protocol dictates that you get to keep that ring on your finger. Just make sure it’s worth at least half of your net worth in the event you have to pawn it. Otherwise, you won’t find it much of a fair trade. Hey ... I’d much rather share the milk for free than risk losing the whole damn farm!!
GPFan Posted June 3, 2008 Posted June 3, 2008 What better way to get to know the person you intend to marry? Your initial instinct is right on, I believe, of course you don't like the way it turned out this time. If co-habitation was required prior to marriage, perhaps there would be fewer divorces?? If you are not married to someone, why in the world would you give them complete access to everything? No man is moving into my place until I have a wedding ring on my finger. Just can't trust 'em otherwise. Marriage is easy to get into, divorce is hell; that's it, the bottom line for me. If your speaking in terms of material/financial assets (house), then being married could very well grant them part ownership of everything you have. So if somewhere down the line your prince charming becomes an abusive, philandering, unemployed nightmare ... there’s a good chance that putting him out might cost you half of everything you had. Not to mention the added expense, time and hassle of getting your marriage legally dissolved. Of course, protocol dictates that you get to keep that ring on your finger. Just make sure it’s worth at least half of your net worth in the event you have to pawn it. Otherwise, you won’t find it much of a fair trade. Hey ... I’d much rather share the milk for free than risk losing the whole damn farm!! Yep, case in point.
Recommended Posts