Fiancé owes me money, need some perspective

[Els]

To make such a statement about another poster here, you must either be happily married or have a degree in "spotting marriage material based on anonymous internet posts." What an interesting degree that is, what school offers it?

 

I think it is called 'agreeing with what someone actually says about herself'. You may need a degree to be able to do that, but most people tend to learn that ability at the age of 5.

[Els]

all I'd expect a male partner to "share" generously with me is the 5-8 inches of yummy meat stick he's gotten tucked away beneath the zipper of his pants.

 

Because you've clearly stated multiple times that you're only interested in FWB/casual sex arrangements and not marriage. Of course the major aspect being 'shared' between the two of you will be '5-8 inches of yummy meat stick', unless you both have a preference for double-edged dildos or something of the sort.

 

I am curious why you continually apply your FWB/casual sex advice to people in committed LTRs though. Surely you must understand that they aren't the same thing and FWB advice would be not applicable here?

[Els]

I don't get it either!

 

It seems to me that everyone thinks in terms of tit for tat these days: you can't expect something from a partner if you don't have it yourself - whether that's good looks, a six pack, good job, a house, money etc

 

Whatever happened to teamwork? Pooling resources and making the most of each individual's strengths? Give and take? Accepting someone for who they are and forgiving imperfections because they have great things to offer that make up for what they don't have? Supporting one another - whether that's physically, emotionally or financially?

 

In my view, when two people are committed to one another they become a team.

 

Two individuals living together but keeping everything separate are flatmates and nothing more - flatmates who have sex perhaps but still flatmates. It is impossible in a committed long term relationship to define what belongs to whom when you are sharing lives - that's why there are laws that govern splitting of assets when a marriage or long term cohabitation comes to an end.

 

Yup, I second this.

 

IMO both the OP and his partner have some issues to work on and resolve prior to taking any further steps, and they should take their time to do so and not rush into marriage. It is worrisome that the OP's partner would agree up front to pay halves, and then just avoid the entire issue for a year. That isn't so much about the money as the broken word. If she could not afford to pay, she should have said it straight up, and the OP could have decided to either front the whole cost or just not buy such an expensive TV/bed, but rather one that they can both afford. Frankly speaking, I've no idea why two people whose finances are so tight that they need to take 'loans' from each other are buying $800 beds.

 

OTOH, I personally think the OP displays a very non-LTR-oriented mindset with regards to money. As I've said before, I find it ridiculous to insist on keeping two SEPARATE debts towards each other simultaneously - that is a fairly extreme sort of nickle-and-diming right there. And splitting groceries hairline down the middle - I don't know any couples who do that, frankly. Even couples who share expenses 50/50 do it roughly - you buy it this time and I buy it the next, and it equates out to about the same. Some flatmates split groceries down the middle, but most flatmates I know aren't even THAT nickle-and-dimey. That says a lot.

[Emilia]

 

Let me just say that I love my fiancé very very much, she is the love of my life. But I feel that if these issues aren't resolved, we will have some significant trust issues...I already don't feel like I can trust her word or trust her with money, and it breaks my heart to admit these things. I make slightly less than she does ($30k vs $32k), yet somehow she never seems to have money.

 

Any advice? Thank you!

 

She doesn't care. It's like flatmates in a houseshare who always 'forget' to pay you the utility bill share or 'forget' to buy bread or milk.

 

Other posters here probably suggested that you should open a shared bank account, pay equal amounts into it a month and buy everything shared from it. Problem solved. If she stops paying into it, you will know you have bigger problems on your hands.

[LittleTiger]

OTOH, I personally think the OP displays a very non-LTR-oriented mindset with regards to money. As I've said before, I find it ridiculous to insist on keeping two SEPARATE debts towards each other simultaneously - that is a fairly extreme sort of nickle-and-diming right there. And splitting groceries hairline down the middle - I don't know any couples who do that, frankly. Even couples who share expenses 50/50 do it roughly - you buy it this time and I buy it the next, and it equates out to about the same. Some flatmates split groceries down the middle, but most flatmates I know aren't even THAT nickle-and-dimey. That says a lot.

 

I was talking to my fiance about this - he pointed out that splitting groceries 50/50 between a man and a woman, if people insist on doing such things, is ridiculous. Most men eat considerably more than their partner (unless he is slim and the woman is very fat or obese) so how can 50/50 be fair?

 

The separate debts thing is just incomprehensible! One 'debt' cancels out part of the other 'debt' whether the OP likes it or not. What's he going to do, draw $300 cash when he can afford it and hand it over so she can hand it back as part of her debt repayment? That's just nuts!

[Emilia]

I was talking to my fiance about this - he pointed out that splitting groceries 50/50 between a man and a woman, if people insist on doing such things, is ridiculous. Most men eat considerably more than their partner (unless he is slim and the woman is very fat or obese) so how can 50/50 be fair?

 

Well no, I eat as much as the average man because I do a lot of sport for example and not all guys eat a lot.

 

Even if it's the man eating more, in a shopping trip you can buy expensive stuff for your hair etc in a supermarket while he buys a big piece of steak. Your shopping habits won't match exactly with quality and quantity. I'd say over time it evens out. I'm happy to pay 50% as a woman.

 

I think 50-50 is the cleanest arrangement and a shared bank account is the most fair. It works very well for my sister and her live-in bf and it's what I would do if someone moved in with me.

[Els]

I was talking to my fiance about this - he pointed out that splitting groceries 50/50 between a man and a woman, if people insist on doing such things, is ridiculous. Most men eat considerably more than their partner (unless he is slim and the woman is very fat or obese) so how can 50/50 be fair?

 

The separate debts thing is just incomprehensible! One 'debt' cancels out part of the other 'debt' whether the OP likes it or not. What's he going to do, draw $300 cash when he can afford it and hand it over so she can hand it back as part of her debt repayment? That's just nuts!

 

I know! That's like him giving her $300 and her giving him back $500 in return.

 

Well, I'm not certain about the men necessarily being the ones to eat more, although that is most DEFINITELY the case with the bf and I . But I do think your example illustrates a very pragmatic point = that nothing can ever be 50.0000000000000000000000000000000% fair in a relationship and we should not be striving for that. Even IF she eats the same amount as him... What's going to happen to that TV that they buy? What if one person watches it more? How about who gets to control the remote? Are they going to log hours? And we could go on ad infinitum.

[Pierre]

I think 50-50 is the cleanest arrangement and a shared bank account is the most fair. It works very well for my sister and her live-in bf and it's what I would do if someone moved in with me.

 

Key word here is BF. This is not a committed relationship.

[soserious1]

Because you've clearly stated multiple times that you're only interested in FWB/casual sex arrangements and not marriage. Of course the major aspect being 'shared' between the two of you will be '5-8 inches of yummy meat stick', unless you both have a preference for double-edged dildos or something of the sort.

 

I am curious why you continually apply your FWB/casual sex advice to people in committed LTRs though. Surely you must understand that they aren't the same thing and FWB advice would be not applicable here?

 

In case you haven't noticed, increasing numbers of people are conducting their relationships & marriages a lot more fairly on the fiscal front. Men are growing increasingly weary of being expected to use their earnings to support an entire household while the wife gets to use her earnings as play money.

 

More and more perfectly devoted couples have 3 bank accounts, an individual account for each spouse and a joint account. The couple decides together which household expenses they feel are important and each partner puts their half of the blls into the joint account. Then each partner gets to keep what's left over of their individual earnings.

 

So no Elswyth, even if i decided I wanted a LTR relationship, there would be no need to "share" all my money with anyone & I would cheerfully dump any man who felt he had the right to lay claim to my assets. I am not the public welfare office.

[Emilia]

Key word here is BF. This is not a committed relationship.

 

Don't be ridiculous. I do like reading your posts but sometimes you are a bit inflexible.

 

My sister and her partner/boyfriend are as committed as. They will probably get married though since they won't have kids, in my eyes it's just money down the drain. With today's divorce rates, it's about attitude, not a piece of paper. As a divorced man yourself you should know this.

 

They do everything very slowly, it's the way they are.

[LittleTiger]

That breeds financial irresponsibility long term in that person. They spend more money than they earn/have. You really shouldn't do that.

 

Provided she doesn't spend more than their joint disposable income, or whatever he chooses to give her, then she is in no way financially irresponsible. The money he gives her belongs to her and she can spend it as she chooses. Whether you agree that this is fair or right, or whatever, doesn't matter, as long the couple themselves are happy with the arrangement.

 

If a man goes out to work and makes a good enough salary to support his family, and his partner is taking care of their children and running a house etc (not everyone's cup of tea of course but nevertheless a valid occupation and a contribution to the partnership), how does that make her financially irresponsible?

 

This, obviously, also applies if the woman is the main breadwinner and the man stays at home.

 

Lots of people have to adjust their spending at different times in their lives based on changes in income for whatever reason. Provided they live within whatever means are at their disposal at any given time I would consider them to be financially responsible.

[zengirl]

Keeping one's word to one's partner and simple fairness trumps some touchy feely notion of "love conquers all" where finances are concerned. Characterizing OP as anal or petty is beyond ridiculous here.

 

Not, really. He can be petty and still correct that he deserves repayment. I don't really think it's about men paying. Nor do I really understand the dynamics of the relationship. Serial muse had some good insight that makes sense. The fact that he wouldn't let her just pay him with the $300 --- and that she wanted to --- continues to stand out and look, well, a bit petty. That's why the OP has to separate the "money" from the "principle."

 

Carhill asked a good question long ago, which still hasn't been answered. Really, I'm interested to know where the OP's passivity is -- to assume she just expects him to pay for everything is as much a leap as anything else in this thread, particularly since she has also lent him money and said not to bother paying her back, just to take it from her debt. How involved was she really in the discussion of the acquisition of these purchases? How happy is she with the grocery buying arrangement? These are things people often don't want to deal with, so neither party discusses, and resentment builds on both sides.

 

I don't get it either!

 

It seems to me that everyone thinks in terms of tit for tat these days: you can't expect something from a partner if you don't have it yourself - whether that's good looks, a six pack, good job, a house, money etc

 

Whatever happened to teamwork? Pooling resources and making the most of each individual's strengths? Give and take? Accepting someone for who they are and forgiving imperfections because they have great things to offer that make up for what they don't have? Supporting one another - whether that's physically, emotionally or financially?

 

In my view, when two people are committed to one another they become a team.

 

Two individuals living together but keeping everything separate are flatmates and nothing more - flatmates who have sex perhaps but still flatmates. It is impossible in a committed long term relationship to define what belongs to whom when you are sharing lives - that's why there are laws that govern splitting of assets when a marriage or long term cohabitation comes to an end.

 

Yes, I agree with this, in general. That's how I want to live, at least. If the OP and his fiancee really want to keep things 50/50 for the whole of their marriage, I think they have a bumpy ride ahead of them, but anyone can do what they wish. I just don't think that really works out. None of the successful marriages I've seen have any kind of fixation on "mine" and "yours." The words become kind of meaningless over the first few years of marriage, if they weren't before.

[serial muse]

Not, really. He can be petty and still correct that he deserves repayment. I don't really think it's about men paying. Nor do I really understand the dynamics of the relationship. Serial muse had some good insight that makes sense. The fact that he wouldn't let her just pay him with the $300 --- and that she wanted to --- continues to stand out and look, well, a bit petty. That's why the OP has to separate the "money" from the "principle."

 

Carhill asked a good question long ago, which still hasn't been answered. Really, I'm interested to know where the OP's passivity is -- to assume she just expects him to pay for everything is as much a leap as anything else in this thread, particularly since she has also lent him money and said not to bother paying her back, just to take it from her debt. How involved was she really in the discussion of the acquisition of these purchases? How happy is she with the grocery buying arrangement? These are things people often don't want to deal with, so neither party discusses, and resentment builds on both sides.

 

Yes.

 

I understand that some of the people who are clamoring for him to watch out, that she's using him, are speaking their own anxieties and experience. But this is not their relationship, and the OP wants advice on going forward with the relationship, not on breaking up. So I'm taking that at face value.

 

Perhaps, if they were at the beginning of a relationship, this kind of money issue wouldn't be worth dealing with, for the OP. But I don't have this sense that he's fed up with his fiancee in general or that he sees her as a user in general. This is about a strange avoidance that she has with paying back debt. I think it's worth - considering that they're now engaged and have a lot invested in each other emotionally - trying to figure this out on a deeper level than "she's using you dude."

 

That is not the same as condoning her actions. But why not try to help the OP understand them?

 

I also think carhill raised some interesting points, and I hope the OP will come back and ponder them. OP, would your fiancee pay for the groceries? Would she, for some reason, find it easier to manage her share of the responsibility by paying for things outright, rather than having to pay you back for them?

 

As I said before, some people have weird psychological relationships to money and debt. Since you're on the brink of marriage, this is a very important thing for you guys to figure out together. I do think, as zengirl pointed out, that it's significant that she wanted to erase the debt in some way - because it indicates that she's not opposed to paying it back in theory, just that for some reason she won't sit down and write the check.

 

Seems like there's a lot we don't know, and that's really for the OP and his fiancee to talk about too.

[Highness]

Sorry to point out the obvious, but this is why people should not get married "young". Whatever that may mean - still in school, just out of school, too immature... If you need to ask this question on a forum, it doesnt mean the r'ship is bad, but for f#cks sake just slow down and wait until you can discuss it honestly with your future wife.

[LittleTiger]

Key word here is BF. This is not a committed relationship.

 

Exactly! A label shouldn't really make a difference but it does suggest a different level of togetherness. A different stage somehow.

 

Commitment to another person is a whole change of mindset that results in an equal partnership - at least that's how I see it.

 

A committed relationship is one where there is no 'yours' and 'mine' because the boundaries become too blurred to define things that way - and it happens almost automatically.

 

If two people are forever dividing their expenses and assets, it suggests a mindset of being two separate individuals - either of whom can pick up their own belongings and walk out at any point.

 

No sense of security - no commitment.

[soserious1]

Exactly! A label shouldn't really make a difference but it does suggest a different level of togetherness. A different stage somehow.

 

Commitment to another person is a whole change of mindset that results in an equal partnership - at least that's how I see it.

 

A committed relationship is one where there is no 'yours' and 'mine' because the boundaries become too blurred to define things that way - and it happens almost automatically.

 

If two people are forever dividing their expenses and assets, it suggests a mindset of being two separate individuals - either of whom can pick up their own belongings and walk out at any point.

 

No sense of security - no commitment.

 

The reality is that either party can pick up & walk away at any time, smart people take steps to ensure that their partner will only be picking up their own stuff & taking it with them when they leave.

 

OP is wise to be concerned here & would be well advised to have the money talk now & to delay any wedding till he see's real change in this woman's attitudes & actions.

[Pierre]

Don't be ridiculous. I do like reading your posts but sometimes you are a bit inflexible.

 

My sister and her partner/boyfriend are as committed as. They will probably get married though since they won't have kids, in my eyes it's just money down the drain. With today's divorce rates, it's about attitude, not a piece of paper. As a divorced man yourself you should know this.

 

They do everything very slowly, it's the way they are.

 

Marriage is much more than a piece of paper. Marriage means the partners are committed. If someone is afraid of marriage then they want to keep their options open.

[Pierre]

Pierre, I don't expect any man to pay my expenses, in fact all I'd expect a male partner to "share" generously with me is the 5-8 inches of yummy meat stick he's gotten tucked away beneath the zipper of his pants.

 

This is 2012, I have a great job, expecting a guy to pay any of my expenses is totally out of the question.

 

OK, I have no issues with women that insist on paying their way. However, I tend to offer my support and they don't have to accept it.

 

What is really important about a penis is the man that is attached to the penis. I disagree with your comment.

[zengirl]

Seconded. This.

 

When you make an agreement with someone, anyone, then you expect them to stick to it. It isn't weird to expect that. I can't believe that so many people in this thread seem to want to overlook that.

 

I agree with this ftr, and despite not having the same view as you or TBF on the relationship did not ignore it. What we don't know is HOW this agreement was made or what the agreement really is. It's murky. We don't know how his GF views the agreement or her responsibilities in it. I don't see, when looking at the whole story, a GF who never intended to pay for anything or seems to be trying to break agreements. I see a complicated situation where communication seems poor all around.

 

And, as serial muse said, the OP didn't ask if he should break up with her --- he asked for help on resolving this. The way to resolve a problem is pretty much never, "Blame first, ask questions later."

[soserious1]

Marriage is much more than a piece of paper. Marriage means the partners are committed. If someone is afraid of marriage then they want to keep their options open.

 

As millions of supposedly "committed" people have come to find out, a quick trip to divorce court is all it takes to "keep options open" once again.

 

There's an entire forum here of divorced people, many of them living in dire circumstances because they failed to protect their assets & their supposedly "committed" partner walked away with them & all it took was an appearance in front of the judge to utter the words "I just don't want to be married anymore"

 

Contemplating marriage without a firm agreement on how finances will be handled? Considering foregoing a prenuptial agreement to prove your love? Better click the link & do some reading.

 

Separation and Divorce - LoveShack.org Community Forums

[Pierre]

As millions of supposedly "committed" people have come to find out, a quick trip to divorce court is all it takes to "keep options open" once again.

 

There's an entire forum here of divorced people, many of them living in dire circumstances because they failed to protect their assets & their supposedly "committed" partner walked away with them & all it took was an appearance in front of the judge to utter the words "I just don't want to be married anymore"

 

Contemplating marriage without a firm agreement on how finances will be handled? Considering foregoing a prenuptial agreement to prove your love? Better click the link & do some reading.

 

Separation and Divorce - LoveShack.org Community Forums

 

Yup, getting married is a huge risk. Is more risky than simply living together, keeping your assets stashed away, and keeping one foot on the door.

 

However, the price you pay is less commitment and the inability to reach the "ours" stage of a relationship. The "Mine" and "yours" stage has a built-in wall.

[soserious1]

OK, I have no issues with women that insist on paying their way. However, I tend to offer my support and they don't have to accept it.

 

What is really important about a penis is the man that is attached to the penis. I disagree with your comment.

 

Sorry Pierre but I don't go into relationships expecting men to pay my way, I got a grad school education, probably taking a seat that an equally qualified man could have taken, the least I can do is to pay my own way in all aspects of my life.

 

I don't value men for their wallets & follow a strict "hands off" policy when it comes to a man's assets, I am entitled to zero.

[Pierre]

Sorry Pierre but I don't go into relationships expecting men to pay my way, I got a grad school education, probably taking a seat that an equally qualified man could have taken, the least I can do is to pay my own way in all aspects of my life.

 

I don't value men for their wallets & follow a strict "hands off" policy when it comes to a man's assets, I am entitled to zero.

 

I make more than enough money and I never sweat the economic details of dating. IN that regard we are similar. I never accept money from a woman, in that regard we are similar.

 

However, my views on sex a re drastically different and that is OK, we are not clones.

[soserious1]

Yup, getting married is a huge risk. Is more risky than simply living together, keeping your assets stashed away, and keeping one foot on the door.

 

However, the price you pay is less commitment and the inability to reach the "ours" stage of a relationship. The "Mine" and "yours" stage has a built-in wall.

 

 

Sorry but I'm not interested in reaching an "ours" stage of fiscal sharing in any relationship, from my experiences what that means is that I get to "share" all of my money while all he "shares" is his unpaid bills.

 

Been there, done that & have the monthly alimony bill to prove it, this welfare office is closed down forever.

[Pierre]

Sorry but I'm not interested in reaching an "ours" stage of fiscal sharing in any relationship, from my experiences what that means is that I get to "share" all of my money while all he "shares" is his unpaid bills.

 

Been there, done that & have the monthly alimony bill to prove it, this welfare office is closed down forever.

 

You pay alimony to a man???????

 

I sit here wandering what kind of MAN accepts alimony from a woman?