I think marriage is a thing of the past.

[Vlad]

Shake hands.. great minds think alike..

I like walks in the beach and you?

[Sam Spade]

I agree with this & I think you can even timeline the decline of traditional homes to parallel that of our beloved tax burden increases over the years.

 

If a man earned $100 & it only cost $100 to live a happy life, then only the man has to work. If the gov't taxes that $100 50%, it now takes two earners of $100 @ 50% in order to continue to live a happy life at the cost of $100. Thank you government.

 

Rrrright, blame it on the taxes . The US has one of the lowest tax rates in the world AND one of the highest divorce rates.

[donnamaria]

What you have to understand about marriage is that marriage doesn't fail but people fail the marriage. Marriage can't do anything by it self but people fail their marriages. I have been married for 25 yrs now. As you know there is no such thing as a perfect marriage right, but marriage needs in my opinion these 5 ingredients which is: God, Love, Forgiveness, Endurance, Communication. This is what my marriage is build on, without these 5 I would not be able to make it. I will agree that younger people that are getting married today seem alot weaker in the ability to handle marital problems in todays society. I also notice that people who have been married less than 10 yrs no matter their age wind up divorced. And yes, I read these forum problems and I wish I could give everyone advice on how to solve their issue but not everyone wants to hear a very religious person like myself tell them that prayer works, so I don't respond. Take care

[Trojan John]

What you have to understand about marriage is that marriage doesn't fail but people fail the marriage. Marriage can't do anything by it self but people fail their marriages. I have been married for 25 yrs now. As you know there is no such thing as a perfect marriage right, but marriage needs in my opinion these 5 ingredients which is: God, Love, Forgiveness, Endurance, Communication. This is what my marriage is build on, without these 5 I would not be able to make it. I will agree that younger people that are getting married today seem alot weaker in the ability to handle marital problems in todays society. I also notice that people who have been married less than 10 yrs no matter their age wind up divorced. And yes, I read these forum problems and I wish I could give everyone advice on how to solve their issue but not everyone wants to hear a very religious person like myself tell them that prayer works, so I don't respond. Take care

 

I agree, but sub "God" with "spirituality". Marriages (unions, etc.) are like business arrangements: one has to put in work in order for them to survive. Marriages fail because one partner is unhappy for reason X, or one party is not doing enough, or is selfish, etc. Marriages work because both parties put forth the effort, and have enough love and strength to make it work despite the prob.

 

-TJ, happily married for 3 years and 13 days.

[EnigmaXOXO]

What you have to understand about marriage is that marriage doesn't fail but people fail the marriage.

 

I agree with Donnamarie.

 

Just had this discussion with a gal pal of mine who decided to marry after living with her partner for eight years. Because they were both married and divorced once before, they wanted to take their time before making that plunge again. Three months into the nuptials, her husband begins an affair with a fellow professor. She blames the marriage, and since my partner and I have been together for as many years... she warns me not to ruin what we have by getting married like they did.

 

Now, J and I aren’t the religious or traditional sort of folks, so we’ve never been big fans of the institute for ourselves. Even so, we don’t view marriage as the nemesis or great destroyer of life, love and the happily-ever-after dream that so many people go into it with. I told my friend that the ‘marriage’ wasn’t their downfall, rather it was more likely their unrealistic ‘expectations’ of what marriage would bring to the relationship table.

 

Of course, she was upset, angry and feeling defensive. Assured me she knew exactly what she was getting into at the time having been there before, and didn’t really have any ‘unrealistic exceptions’ regarding what marriage was all about. She even pointed out (again) that they lived together for eight years and everything was going well up until that point. Then, thirty minutes into our conversation she relaxes and begins to admit she thought that becoming his wife instead of a live-in girlfriend would inspire him to become more attentive to her needs and more dedicated to her children. “They’d become a real family.”

 

Well... there ya go.

 

I think marriage gets too much of the blame when relationships go wrong because people often give it way too much credit. While marriage (as well as the fear of divorce) can serve as an incentive to keep two people working together through the most difficult of times, it can’t “fix” all the things that can potentially go wrong between the relationship of two individuals. Even more curious (to me) as I read these forums, is how ‘divorce’ is often viewed by many as the greater indicator of personal failure rather than the actual quality of the relationships they’re in. Even to the point where they will endure or dish out all sorts of indignant treatment, commit adultery, and further abuse that partnership just to avoid ending it.

 

What I’ve learned (the hard way ) is that any solid or long-term relationship, be it marriage or otherwise, takes dogged teamwork. You have to be of the mindset that you actually can think in terms of “us” or “we” rather than “me, me, me”. It’s certainly not for the faint of heart or the staunch individualistic, and can be darn near impossible to maintain if either one of you starts taking the other for granted and forgets how to be a team player.

 

But “marriage” certainly isn’t to blame.

[riley707]

I really love Thorton's post. I've been thinking a lot about these issues and it really does come down to the fact that our life is by default set on different paths. Two careers, daycare expense, and long hours. The chances of maintaining a bond through this are stacked against us.

 

My friends who married women NOT from the US are doing well. I do not have one example of any of them talking about leaving or issues. I'm sure some are out there, but to me it seems that upfront, foreign women still have very traditional views on motherhood and marriage.

 

Marriage should be set up as a 7 year renewable contract. Not forever. At the near end of each term, both partners should re-sign saying they are committed to another 7 years.

[RedDevil66]

Marriages used to work a lot better in the past. People usually didn't date seriously or live together before marriage, so there were no exes or step-children or blended families to cause problems. It was possible for a family to survive on one salary; houses were reasonably priced, and because most women didn't work there was much more employment available for the men who needed to support a family, plus there was no need to find huge amounts of money for childcare because mothers stayed at home, so in general there were less financial pressures. The men valued their wives for creating a stable home and cooking/cleaning etc, while the women valued their husbands for supporting them financially and providing for the family, so both parties had more respect for one another.

 

In modern society everything is too expensive, so young couples end up working long hours in separate jobs and struggling with childcare. They have too much work and not enough time together, so not enough time for love or romance to be sustained. As each person is a self-sustained unit who works and shares all responsibilities there's less feeling of being a family and working as a team, and it's very easy to walk away from such a relationship. No to mention all the issues caused by exes, step-kids, etc.

 

No wonder marriages don't work any more... they seemed to be much more successful when married people worked as a team and took on traditional gender roles. In my personal experience, those marriages with traditional gender roles seem to work best - it often seems that men who married women from other cultures have the most stable marriages, because often these women have more traditional family values and take on more traditional roles in the marriage.

 

this is a fantastic post and great explaination of the topic.

 

I'm in my mid 40's and personally do not know anyone who's not divorced, cheating, been cheated on or is happy.

And believe me, I have a wide range of friends.

[OldEurope]

I believe very strongly in marriage. It is grown up. It is idealistic. It is human civilization that wishes to bond, to celebrate the bond and carry it into the next generation.

 

I do not for a minute believe the problem is a lack of "traditional gender roles". No woman, or man for that matter, should simply waste his or her brains away in routine chores for a household. This makes for misery and a loss of one's own "Self". Following this, domestic problems of another sort come along. Many walk-out mothers, for instance, feel this loss of identity and they leave after so many years of "traditional service".

 

In no way am I knocking full time moms, and I believe that children absolutely need the male and female roles in their lives and they need them into adulthood, very carefully so. I am saying, however, that this does not necessarily mean the role of a woman giving up her own personal identity, professional, creative, however. I think this can be dangerous later.

 

An unhapy full time mother is no better for a child or a marriage than a gal working long hours, but who at least has a sense of doing something for herself.

 

What I think the problem is, is an ungainly thread of ugly outside influences killing off the intimacy of marriage. That we have become far too public, too media-crazed, too cheap in our values, too juvenile, too lacking in maturity.

 

People today live weird lives that are consumed with the consumption of media. There is little personal life, conviction, privacy, a sense of what is important , sacred and hence little veneration for the idea of a couple with a romantic view of life.

 

People spend hours on the Internet, they come home and watch idiots on Fox News or MSNBC screaming about this that or the other, then they watch idiotic television shows which tell them that life is better when it is ugly, stupid and unserious. No one or nothing is classy. There are few shows or movies which show a happy marriage or some kind of dynamic, fun and committed relationship between a man and a woman. It is all ugly all the time and I just believe that all this outside influence is causing couples so much personal self doubt that each partner in turn carries this into the marriage.

 

This sounds vague, but it isn't meant to be.

 

Treat him like a King and treat her like a Queen --and each should expect no less from the other--and you will see a very nice turn around to things. Also, turn off the damn computer and TV.

 

We need to make privacy private again. Couples live too much for and are too influenced by the outside, and it drains the marriage of its special privacy.

 

Also---never marry until you have a firm sense of what you want out of life, what you want to do, and what you know to be your strong side and weak sides. The problem in the end is not "marriage", it is that the wrong people are getting married over and over again for the wrong reasons

 

OE

[mem11363]

I remember reading Thornton's post way back about how she totally lost desire for her partner. And I vividly remember a statement along the lines of "we were making the same money - each paying our own bills - and I didn't want to have sex with him - so I didn't."

 

At risk of incurring the wrath of the masses. I think that might have been the outcome in our marriage. My wife would have felt the same way as Thornton did if the situations had been the same.

 

They weren't though. Because under extreme duress I agreed to be the sole wage earner and she could be the SAHM. I absolutely believe that my wife felt that in exchange for me being the sole bread winner, and working hard enough that we had no real financial stress, that she owed me a good sex life. That simple. That basic. And I am sure I reinforced that notion in many subtle and not so subtle ways.

 

And there is no doubt in my mind as well - that if my wife had done what Thornton did and shut down the sexual part of our marriage, I would have very quickly called foul and ended the marriage. And the thing is, she would then have had to try to find another guy to support her the way that I did. And that was a scary thought to her because what if the "new" guy didn't treat "her" daughter as well since she wasn't his blood.

 

And this was never about jewelry, high fashion or other "stuff". It was all about being able to raise her own children in a safe (read nice neighborhood) environment. And in exchange for that she absolutely gave her body way more often then she would have otherwise to a man who in some ways just wasn't like the guy she had expected to marry.

 

And looking back almost 20 years, she remembers falling in love with me and feeling more desire for me when she realized how hard I was willing to work to take care of her and our daughter. Not saying that is the only thing she liked about me. Saying that women are wired to respond to provider behavior and that was absolutely the tipping point for us. I am certain that if I had forced her to work full time, one way or another we would have ended up divorced.

 

I wondered then, still wonder now what would have happened to Thornton if her guy had doubled his income during the 24 months prior to her deciding to stop having sex with him.

 

 

I believe very strongly in marriage. It is grown up. It is idealistic. It is human civilization that wishes to bond, to celebrate the bond and carry it into the next generation.

 

I do not for a minute believe the problem is a lack of "traditional gender roles". No woman, or man for that matter, should simply waste his or her brains away in routine chores for a household. This makes for misery and a loss of one's own "Self". Following this, domestic problems of another sort come along. Many walk-out mothers, for instance, feel this loss of identity and they leave after so many years of "traditional service".

 

In no way am I knocking full time moms, and I believe that children absolutely need the male and female roles in their lives and they need them into adulthood, very carefully so. I am saying, however, that this does not necessarily mean the role of a woman giving up her own personal identity, professional, creative, however. I think this can be dangerous later.

 

An unhapy full time mother is no better for a child or a marriage than a gal working long hours, but who at least has a sense of doing something for herself.

 

What I think the problem is, is an ungainly thread of ugly outside influences killing off the intimacy of marriage. That we have become far too public, too media-crazed, too cheap in our values, too juvenile, too lacking in maturity.

 

People today live weird lives that are consumed with the consumption of media. There is little personal life, conviction, privacy, a sense of what is important , sacred and hence little veneration for the idea of a couple with a romantic view of life.

 

People spend hours on the Internet, they come home and watch idiots on Fox News or MSNBC screaming about this that or the other, then they watch idiotic television shows which tell them that life is better when it is ugly, stupid and unserious. No one or nothing is classy. There are few shows or movies which show a happy marriage or some kind of dynamic, fun and committed relationship between a man and a woman. It is all ugly all the time and I just believe that all this outside influence is causing couples so much personal self doubt that each partner in turn carries this into the marriage.

 

This sounds vague, but it isn't meant to be.

 

Treat him like a King and treat her like a Queen --and each should expect no less from the other--and you will see a very nice turn around to things. Also, turn off the damn computer and TV.

 

We need to make privacy private again. Couples live too much for and are too influenced by the outside, and it drains the marriage of its special privacy.

 

Also---never marry until you have a firm sense of what you want out of life, what you want to do, and what you know to be your strong side and weak sides. The problem in the end is not "marriage", it is that the wrong people are getting married over and over again for the wrong reasons

 

OE

[alexxx]

There are more and more failed marriages every year, is not working anymore.

Not true. Statistics holds steady and below 50%, for years now.

 

Every single young couple I know is struggling in every single way possible, kids, money, ex’s, too much work, not enough time, not enough romance, not enough sex, too much sex, too much time with friends, too much time in the house, he/she is too soft I want a stronger person by my side, he/she is not nice he is too strong in character I need someone that is calmed and relaxed, etc etc……

Not true. Married people I know do have problems, but these problems have nothing to do with their marriage.

 

Why even bother? Stay single and be happy about it.

 

Hope nobody will take your advise seriously. Marriage, kids,... its a lot of joy. Besides, what would happen with humans if we stayed single (and happy)?

 

Cause at the end it all comes to Infidelity.

 

Not true. Statistically, infidelity occurs in about 20-30% of cases. This percentage doesn't justify using the word "all" above.

 

A good example of this is, oh well; this forum!

 

So wrong! This board is biased because most people come here AFTER they experience problems in their relationship/marriage.

[samspade]

No one is going to love you any more because the state has sanctioned your relationship. Marriage is a raw deal.

 

Outside of raising children in a stable environment, which I believe is a sound reason to get married, there is NOTHING you can enjoy within a marriage that you cannot enjoy outside of one.

 

On the other hand, walking away from a broken relationship is much easier when you don't have to hire lawyers to fight for your own hard earned money.

 

Think about it.

[Thornton]

I remember reading Thornton's post way back about how she totally lost desire for her partner. And I vividly remember a statement along the lines of "we were making the same money - each paying our own bills - and I didn't want to have sex with him - so I didn't."

 

That's pretty much it in a nutshell. I didn't owe him anything, so why should I do something I didn't want to do? If he had been supporting me financially I might have felt rather more inclined (obliged?) to provide sex. In fact, if he had been supporting me financially I might have found him to be a rather more attractive prospect, and might have actually desired sex with him, because I would have seen him as a "real man", a "provider", etc.

 

I wondered then, still wonder now what would have happened to Thornton if her guy had doubled his income during the 24 months prior to her deciding to stop having sex with him.

 

He didn't earn a particularly high salary, and he had pretty much reached the maximum salary he was ever going to get in his profession. I won't deny that it crossed my mind that "this guy will never be able to support a family with me", and that was a factor in my choice to end the relationship. If he had doubled his salary he would have been a vastly more attractive prospect for marriage and having a family. Perhaps our sex life would have improved, because me seeing him in that "provider" type way would have made him seem more manly and protective and generally more attractive.

[Nikki Sahagin]

I know that there is obviously a distinction between marriage and a long-term relationship but I think they are essentially the same. Therefore to me, someone saying marriage is redundant, is akin to saying long-term relationships are redundant.

 

Some people have had experiences not work out and become bitter or perhaps simply decided this path was not for them. Others have a different view to matters of the heart and are more casual and light-hearted in its persuit, enjoying multiple partners.

 

I think that bond with another person is a beautiful thing and though at the moment I don't want it...I know I will one day. I think it is hard to make a bond last because our life's are so fast, we can go anywhere, meet 1000 new people in a day if we choose. Its out with the old and in with the new. But I think in the haze of a fast life, its so beautiful to have that one face thats seen you through it all.

 

Its true that marriage can't fail anyone. People can fail at it. And what marriage or relationships mean to people differs from person to person. I sometimes think people just haven't met someone they have felt the urge to fight for. I am only 20 I cannot speak from the perspective of someone thats been married for 5, 10, 15, 20 + years, but I think that the alternative to marriage, that is, living completely alone forever or meaningless superficial relationships, is not for me. At this age yes, but when i'm older, I would like to think I can keep that bond with a person. It does take work, but what good thing doesn't?

[alexxx]

Outside of raising children in a stable environment, which I believe is a sound reason to get married, there is NOTHING you can enjoy within a marriage that you cannot enjoy outside of one.

 

Your argument is of the type: "Why do we need cars when we can ride bikes?"

 

Also, you should never say: "Outside of raising children..."

 

since that implies that "raising children" is as important as "flying kites together" or "listening music together"... (All are not equal, there are priorities).

 

All in all, your argument might sound solid, but that's only because you are oversimplifying things.

[mem11363]

Thornton,

Your post made sense and was educational.

 

One thing I think is missing from this thread is an acknowledgement by the men that marriage/women/money is not a zero sum game. It is true that if I divorce we do a divide by two. I don't think we will divorce but if we do it is an even split. The question is an even split of what.

- On the expense side of the equation my wife is just more disciplined then I am. So there are lots of stupid things I would have wasted money on without her in the picture as an equal partner.

- On the revenue side of the equation we have more money because of her emotional support and presence. There was one moment at work in particular where I needed to project total confidence to a group for a couple minutes while our technicians worked frantically behind the scenes to get a demo to work. And at that moment I simply thought about how much my wife and children loved me, and I them. And I seemed perfectly calm to the prospective customer. Everything worked out fine - just in the nick of time. However, had that single situation gone badly, that would have been a divide by two for us as a family.

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's pretty much it in a nutshell. I didn't owe him anything, so why should I do something I didn't want to do? If he had been supporting me financially I might have felt rather more inclined (obliged?) to provide sex. In fact, if he had been supporting me financially I might have found him to be a rather more attractive prospect, and might have actually desired sex with him, because I would have seen him as a "real man", a "provider", etc.

 

 

 

He didn't earn a particularly high salary, and he had pretty much reached the maximum salary he was ever going to get in his profession. I won't deny that it crossed my mind that "this guy will never be able to support a family with me", and that was a factor in my choice to end the relationship. If he had doubled his salary he would have been a vastly more attractive prospect for marriage and having a family. Perhaps our sex life would have improved, because me seeing him in that "provider" type way would have made him seem more manly and protective and generally more attractive.

[sweetjasmine]

Also---never marry until you have a firm sense of what you want out of life, what you want to do, and what you know to be your strong side and weak sides. The problem in the end is not "marriage", it is that the wrong people are getting married over and over again for the wrong reasons

 

^ I totally agree with this.

 

And where I'm from, marriage is about bringing two families together and connecting everyone, not just creating a bond between two people.

[aerogurl87]

I know that there is obviously a distinction between marriage and a long-term relationship but I think they are essentially the same. Therefore to me, someone saying marriage is redundant, is akin to saying long-term relationships are redundant.

 

I agree Nikki. I personally am young (about to be 20 in less than a month) and I know for me personally that going my whole life through a list of superficial short term relationships would not be enjoyable in the least bit. I like long term and meaningful relationships and to me marriage is the ultimate long term relationship you can strive for.

 

With that said, I know I don't want children ever, yet I want to get married. Why? Well I figure if a man is going to commit to me, then I want some proof other than his word. I mean actions speak louder than words and to me proposing marriage is the biggest way you can show a lifetime commitment to someone. It shows that you want the world to know that your committed to one person and it shows that you trust that other person. I don't think a simple verbal agreement such as "I love you and want to commit to you" can do that much.

[samspade]

Your argument is of the type: "Why do we need cars when we can ride bikes?"

 

Also, you should never say: "Outside of raising children..."

 

since that implies that "raising children" is as important as "flying kites together" or "listening music together"... (All are not equal, there are priorities).

 

All in all, your argument might sound solid, but that's only because you are oversimplifying things.

 

Marriage:unmarried commitment is not equal to Cars:Bikes. A car offers far more benefits than a bicycle, for the price. Marriage does not. A car can be sold with no further commitment to the owner; a marriage might take a team of lawyers and thousands of dollars to undo, and it will STILL cost you (possibly for life) once the ink is dry.

 

And this may surprise you, but not everyone who gets married does it because they want children at that moment. They do it for a host of unsound reasons: Pressure from family, because it's the "right thing to do," societal convention, fear of being alone, lack of options, money, because all their friends are married, etc., etc. Very few people actually think through that they a) would like to have children, b) would like to spend the rest of their life with their S.O., and c) believe their S.O. to be the best candidate for raising a family. If marriage and child-rearing were always that well thought-out, the divorce rate would not be nearly as high as it is.

 

So while my child-raising factor may sound oversimplified, it is in reality the most important (and often overlooked) factor when it comes to deciding to commit to one human being for the rest of your life.

 

Other than that, I challenge you to give me ONE thing that can be enjoyed in marriage that cannot be had as an unmarried couple. (Tax status doesn't count - if you're marrying for tax shelter, your priorities are really screwed up, and you are in for a shock when the divorce comes.)

[2sure]

Marriage isnt any different than life itself. It has ups and downs, crisis, joy, tragedy, pain, and happiness. All present in every life whether you decide to commit to a partner or not. You can decide to marry or not to commit to any one partner of course. But you are still going to get the rest anyway. The commitment is both an increased risk and a sharing of that risk.

 

To say marriage itself is out of date, commitment is out of date. Why? Because of the risk? Might as well stop making decisions all together.

 

And to use this particular relationship forum as an example to back up stats....people come here with problems. Soooo...thats what you see.

[soserious1]

Marriage:unmarried commitment is not equal to Cars:Bikes. A car offers far more benefits than a bicycle, for the price. Marriage does not. A car can be sold with no further commitment to the owner; a marriage might take a team of lawyers and thousands of dollars to undo, and it will STILL cost you (possibly for life) once the ink is dry.

 

And this may surprise you, but not everyone who gets married does it because they want children at that moment. They do it for a host of unsound reasons: Pressure from family, because it's the "right thing to do," societal convention, fear of being alone, lack of options, money, because all their friends are married, etc., etc. Very few people actually think through that they a) would like to have children, b) would like to spend the rest of their life with their S.O., and c) believe their S.O. to be the best candidate for raising a family. If marriage and child-rearing were always that well thought-out, the divorce rate would not be nearly as high as it is.

 

So while my child-raising factor may sound oversimplified, it is in reality the most important (and often overlooked) factor when it comes to deciding to commit to one human being for the rest of your life.

 

Other than that, I challenge you to give me ONE thing that can be enjoyed in marriage that cannot be had as an unmarried couple. (Tax status doesn't count - if you're marrying for tax shelter, your priorities are really screwed up, and you are in for a shock when the divorce comes.)

 

 

I'm not so sure that there are any benefits to being in a relationship with a person who views me as car or bike

that he can trade away or sell the moment I'm no longer

pleasing him.

 

Marriage isn't for everyone but being with somebody who's had to reduce my value to that of an object in order to help him decide his level of commitment to me doesn't sound appealing either.

[hey_beautiful]

Personally, I believe a lot of people enter marriage for the wrong reasons. My mother married out of desperation (the title made her more confident). I know people who got married just for the sake of getting a tax credit (they are happily married now for many years, BTW), or people get married because "it's the right thing to do" if you got your GF pregnant. I think people put a lot of pressure on marriage to be the epitome of love and commitment, when it's just your name on a contract. Marriage is not the be all and end all, and marriage is NOT the way to solidify your relationship. My relationship is solid, and marriage will not make it any more solid. We want to get married because we feel like it is the natural progression of things. We could choose to be together forever without marriage, but we decided against it. Marriage should be a recognition of your life together, not the tie that binds. You should be in a solid, steady, good relationship and then see what marriage truly means. People get divorced for many reasons. People grow apart, people give up, and hey, people marry people they hardly know. When you see divorce rates, you rarely think about the people behind those divorces. You don't think about the 18 year old who got married on a whim and then at 29 came out of the closet and announced she was a lesbian and getting a divorce. You don't think about the family's who suffer a loss of a child and end their marriage because they view the other person as a constant reminder of their loss. You hear about infidelity and people marrying young and realizing they made a mistake...but very rarely do you hear about the other issues that can drive people to get a divorce.

 

I believe in relationships. I think marriage is just another form of a relationship, but on par with long term relationships. I believe marriage is more for the two people, and not because it holds some profound meaning. You will not love the person you are with more because you married them. He will not put the toilet seat down because you married him. You will not start making better dinners because he married you. Marriage to some is just a next step they can or cannot take. It is not mandatory, nor should it be expected.

 

There is always a chance for divorce. It has nothing to do with "marriage", but people and their relationships in general. People break up all the time, a divorce is just an elaborate break up (gone through the legal system).

[alexxx]

Other than that, I challenge you to give me ONE thing that can be enjoyed in marriage that cannot be had as an unmarried couple. (Tax status doesn't count - if you're marrying for tax shelter, your priorities are really screwed up, and you are in for a shock when the divorce comes.)

 

I think we don't understand each other. Let me try a different example. To me, your argument is conceptually very similar to the following argument:

 

"Except for cutting the grass, you cannot give me ONE thing lawn mover can do that a chain saw cannot. Therefore, we do not need lawn mowers."

 

Do you really want to make such an argument?

 

The purpose of marriage has always been to raise a family. The institution of marriage plays a critical role in the survival of the human race. On the other hand, your post implies that since the marriage doesn't go beyond building the family (to address some other trivial tasks), we should simply get rid of it.

 

I am not saying that your reasoning is wrong. I object to you asking the question in the first place.

[mem11363]

Alexxx,

I agree with you totally. And the exact reasons the guys are complaining about marriage are the same reasons marriage is so good for children. Marriage is designed to make it painful/expensive to end the relationship. The strong bonds of social convention combined with financial penalties keep people together while they raise the nex generation. This is overall good for the kids. Even a mediocre marriage is typically better for the kids then a single parent.

 

If my wife and I had not married we might - along the way - have parted during one of our difficult periods. So for child rearing marriage is the best solution. A woman who chooses to give several children to a man without the financial bindings of a marriage is taking more risk then I would want my daughters to take on. And on the flip side - yes I want my son to marry the woman he proceates with.

 

If however, the marriage ends and the kids are grown, then I think it is not smart for the financially wealthier/more stable person to marry without a tight pre-nup. The bonds are great for kids, but a marriage without children might just end up being a very, very expensive proposition per day/night of companionship.

 

 

 

I think we don't understand each other. Let me try a different example. To me, your argument is conceptually very similar to the following argument:

 

"Except for cutting the grass, you cannot give me ONE thing lawn mover can do that a chain saw cannot. Therefore, we do not need lawn mowers."

 

Do you really want to make such an argument?

 

The purpose of marriage has always been to raise a family. The institution of marriage plays a critical role in the survival of the human race. On the other hand, your post implies that since the marriage doesn't go beyond building the family (to address some other trivial tasks), we should simply get rid of it.

 

I am not saying that your reasoning is wrong. I object to you asking the question in the first place.

[Impudent Oyster]

There are more and more failed marriages every year, is not working anymore.

 

Every single young couple I know is struggling in every single way possible, kids, money, ex’s, too much work, not enough time, not enough romance, not enough sex, too much sex, too much time with friends, too much time in the house, he/she is too soft I want a stronger person by my side, he/she is not nice he is too strong in character I need someone that is calmed and relaxed, etc etc……

 

Why even bother? Stay single and be happy about it.

 

Cause at the end it all comes to Infidelity.

 

A good example of this is, oh well; this forum!

 

I disagree...Infidelity is but a bump in the road of a long marriage. Granted it's a huge, painful bump but it passes, trust me.

 

I've been married 25 years, 23 of them very happily. When I hear friends tell dating stories I cringe and thank my lucky stars. Plus, I honestly think it's great for children to have parents who are married, albeit they should be happily married.

 

No marriage is perfect because no person is perfect, but IMHO, it sure beats the alternative. Every middle-aged couple I know would consider themselves happily married. Maybe the young couples you know just expect too much?