Couples who don't want to ever get married but are in LTRs

[Turtles]

Can you possibly elaborate? Tbisb has raised some interesting points but you have not said anything but "You're wrong!" - this thread is getting pretty boring.

[Tbisb74]

I also neglected to mention the fact that if your partner dies, his/her assets will go to next of kin...which won't be you if you're not married. It will go to the parents, siblings or kids they may have. Same goes if one of you is terminally ill...you won't have the authority to make their health decisions. (Unless you are a legal domestic partner, but benefits aren't 100% as if you are married) A will would need to be in place, but sometimes they aren't always carried out and hence the need for court battles. In the eyes of the law, you aren't family.

If you die intestate, that may be the case, although such legislation can be contested - has been - and successfully too.

If people had the presence of mind to write a Will, all the post-burial mess could easily be avoided. Countless thousands of people have died with only a partner, and that partner has inherited thanks to a well-written Will. Hell, my uncle and aunt are a total case in point. They divorced, he found a new partner (with whom he lived for 13 more years), and included her as the main beneficiary in his will. My aunt and cousins contested it, and although a Judgement adjusted the terms, the partner didn't entirely get excluded, but inherited a sizeable portion of his Worth.

[Col1]

Can you possibly elaborate? Tbisb has raised some interesting points but you have not said anything but "You're wrong!" - this thread is getting pretty boring.

I wrote that this user’s conclusion about my view was incorrect:

The OP seems to think it would be a topic for embarrassment.[/Quote]

I do not think there is embarrassment for LTR couples who choose to not ever marry.

[Tbisb74]

You're being evasive and obtuse. You actually know fully well that that wasn't the basis of my main enquiry. Let me see if i can repeat the main gist of my enquiry for you so that in fact you will get a better handle on what is being asked of you, giving you the clear opportunity to actually provide an answer:

 

here, for the sake of endless clicking, scrolling and re-reading, is your original post, yet again:

Some people have married and divorced, and say they won't get married again. Yet, they are in wonderful LTRs. Will they just live together for the rest of their lives if they are both happy? 15 years go by and they are still in bliss. 20 years go by and still the same. 30 years!

 

"This is my girlfriend/boyfriend of 30 years" will sound odd!

 

How do they explain their relationship to little grandchildren: "We love each other so much that we decided not to get married!" ?

It has been indicated - by many more people than just me - that this specific state should really not be a problem to explain, because it is a common status of many people nowadays. many contributors gave examples.

 

You then made several references to young inquiring minds displaying curiosity, and hinted on more than one occasion, that you would find questioning by young children, difficult to contend with.

 

Kids ask lots of questions. Probably not age appropriate to explain it this way to a young grandchild.

 

The kids in my life certainly ask!

 

Kids I know are are perceptive. And they don't have a 'filter.' They ask the questions adults are privately wondering!

 

Not some 7 year old; A grandchild.

 

So I and others have asked you what would be the difficulty actually talking to a grandchild and explaining that you are not married?

 

The above quotes absolutely convey a sense of embarrassment, reticence, and even, perhaps, an amount of shame (though of course you will deny that too) but you have avoided answering the question by stating our assumptions are incorrect.

 

So, how can we construe they are incorrect when everything you have responded with so far indicates that we aren't?

[Col1]

Feel free to think what you want. Just know that I have stated my view:

I do not think there is embarrassment for LTR couples who choose to not ever marry.

btw, my quoted OP is missing the smiley at the end

Edited July 23, 2014 by Col1

[Lipitor11]

Marriage is just a piece of paper, saying I own you and if I want a divorce, I'm going to take all your money, the house, the cars and the kids. That's all it is! Being in a LTR, is enough, as long as there's love and trust that's all people need. Marriage is getting non traditional. If people think marriage is forever, why the heck is divorce an option? LTR is less complicated and not expensive if things don't work out. People shouldn't look down on couples who didn't sign a legal piece of paper saying you're my bitch forever!!!

[pink_sugar]

Marriage is just a piece of paper, saying I own you and if I want a divorce, I'm going to take all your money, the house, the cars and the kids. That's all it is! Being in a LTR, is enough, as long as there's love and trust that's all people need. Marriage is getting non traditional. If people think marriage is forever, why the heck is divorce an option? LTR is less complicated and not expensive if things don't work out. People shouldn't look down on couples who didn't sign a legal piece of paper saying you're my bitch forever!!!

 

Bitter much? That's a rather negative way to look at it. While I understand that it is somewhat of a religious connotation and practice, unfortunately, we're still in a society that will not recognize your relationship as legitimate without that piece of paper.

[Tbisb74]

Feel free to think what you want. Just know that I have stated my view:

 

In that case I will feel completely free to think that there's definitely something in what we have surmised, and I will not probe your evident embarrassment and reticence any further. I'm sorry you feel that you just can't talk about it, but given that you threw in the bomb to begin with, it's understandable people wanted to help you through it.

I hope you manage to find a way to speak to your grandchild in a way that will keep you both happy.

Or else, you could just fob them off, as you have done here. Works a treat!

 

Big

[thekid36]

That's unfair. YOU began this thread, with a post which has to all intents and purposes been dispelled by others as invalid, and frankly, smacks of being closed-minded. The least YOU could do when people ask you to elaborate on a point YOU have raised, and who seek some kind of clarifications of the denials YOU are making, is to have the courtesy to at least respond with some kind of explanation.

We have all expanded on what we feel the general consensus of opinion is, and how we feel about the matter. Why is it unreasonable - in a thread YOU posted, and for a point YOU raised - to at least not be given some kind of response as to why YOU view things this way?

 

 

I seem to remember you from my previous thread. Why do you feel the need to call out people like this? You are not the judge and jury of everything. How do you know what the exact intent was of the original poster? Do you happen to have personal knowledge of what every single person is thinking? Just because a group of people agree with you and consider these thoughts as invalid does not necessarily make them right.

 

 

Why do you call this person close minded? I really don't think that the reason people come to these threads is to be attacked by people who have nothing else to do than be retroactive to what the original intent of these posts are. My thought is that they come here looking for advice or to give useful information. Did no one ever tell you that unless there is something nice to say, perhaps it is best to remain silent? Unless you are actually perfect, I think you owe an apology to every single one of those you continue to feel the need to judge.

[thekid36]

Some people have married and divorced, and say they won't get married again. Yet, they are in wonderful LTRs. Will they just live together for the rest of their lives if they are both happy? 15 years go by and they are still in bliss. 20 years go by and still the same. 30 years!

 

"This is my girlfriend/boyfriend of 30 years" will sound odd!

 

How do they explain their relationship to little grandchildren: "We love each other so much that we decided not to get married!" ?

 

 

First of all, I apologize for those who feel the need to attack you. I have a hunch you did not post this with this intent. None of them are perfect nor deserve to wear any kind of robe.

 

 

As to your actual question. I was married and divorced twice. Did it the conventional way and neither relationship was that right one for me. Now, I am with a woman who is coming out of an abusive marriage that also did not work. Neither of us necessarily has any immediate plans to marry. It is honestly just a piece of paper in the end. You have to do what is best for the both of you.

 

 

The world is not the same as it once was. I would just be honest with grandchildren and focus more on the love as opposed to the actual technical terms and specific papers.

[Tbisb74]

I seem to remember you from my previous thread. Why do you feel the need to call out people like this? You are not the judge and jury of everything. How do you know what the exact intent was of the original poster?

I'm not, but that's what I was trying to find out. And the OP, having begun a thread with a relatively contentious post, has been given ample responses, but refuses to supply any herself. Kinda weird that.

Besides, I seem to remember from your previous thread that I was not alone in my comments. Don't pick on me or feel you can take the moral high ground. It is both misplaced and inappropriate.

 

Do you happen to have personal knowledge of what every single person is thinking? Just because a group of people agree with you and consider these thoughts as invalid does not necessarily make them right.

By that token, 'or wrong either'.

 

 

Why do you call this person close minded? I really don't think that the reason people come to these threads is to be attacked by people who have nothing else to do than be retroactive to what the original intent of these posts are.

What WAS the original intent? Until the OP clarifies, it's hard to know.

 

My thought is that they come here looking for advice or to give useful information. Did no one ever tell you that unless there is something nice to say, perhaps it is best to remain silent? Unless you are actually perfect, I think you owe an apology to every single one of those you continue to feel the need to judge.

I don't think so. People are permitted to have differing opinions, PoV's and comments to make. That's what makes a forum. It's extremely irregular though, for a person to create a post containing a relatively controversial statement, and then, in spite of several posts pointing out different views, refuses to be drawn on their opinion....

 

First of all, I apologize for those who feel the need to attack you. I have a hunch you did not post this with this intent. None of them are perfect nor deserve to wear any kind of robe.

Don't apologise on my behalf. It is not necessary. You accuse me of judgement then do the same yourself. Don't wear that robe for me, because it does not apply. You are not my apologist, nor anyone else's.

Edited July 23, 2014 by Tbisb74

[Col1]

In that case I will feel completely free to think that there's definitely something in what we have surmised, and I will not probe your evident embarrassment and reticence any further. I'm sorry you feel that you just can't talk about it, but given that you threw in the bomb to begin with, it's understandable people wanted to help you through it.

I hope you manage to find a way to speak to your grandchild in a way that will keep you both happy.

Or else, you could just fob them off, as you have done here. Works a treat!

 

Big

Wow, still trying to convince me of what I am thinking. How's that been working' for you?

[thekid36]

I'm not, but that's what I was trying to find out. And the OP, having begun a thread with a relatively contentious post, has been given ample responses, but refuses to supply any herself. Kinda weird that.

Besides, I seem to remember from your previous thread that I was not alone in my comments. Don't pick on me or feel you can take the moral high ground. It is both misplaced and inappropriate.

 

By that token, 'or wrong either'.

 

 

 

What WAS the original intent? Until the OP clarifies, it's hard to know.

 

 

I don't think so. People are permitted to have differing opinions, PoV's and comments to make. That's what makes a forum. It's extremely irregular though, for a person to create a post containing a relatively controversial statement, and then, in spite of several posts pointing out different views, refuses to be drawn on their opinion....

 

 

Don't apologise on my behalf. It is not necessary. You accuse me of judgement then do the same yourself. Don't wear that robe for me, because it does not apply. You are not my apologist, nor anyone else's.

 

 

First of all, the OP seems to be a man. I am not guessing this based on my own assumptions. It actually says this in the profile. Guess you are not always right.

 

 

Second of all, no one owes you answers just because you're feeling entitled to them.

 

 

No, you were not alone in your comments on my thread. As I have said, just because a group of people say something does not mean that it is always right. It is the way that you put your comments out there that I have an issue with. You are acting like a bully in a playground. Kids tend to follow them at times. I bet more side with the bully than the ones getting picked on. Does that make the bully in the right? Sad that you seem to use the popular opinion of others to validate your own perceptions.

 

 

I already took responsibility for my own actions on that thread. This has nothing to do with that. I saw you on this thread trying to judge someone unfairly and find it to be sort of harsh. No doubt that I will stand up for what is right and wrong and those who are treated unfairly.

 

 

How do you know what is regular or not? This totally fascinates me to be honest. The OP directly stated that he does not think that couples who refuse to marry should be embarrassed at all. Yet, you continue to make your own inferences even still.

 

 

Perhaps the OP said what he did because what you say to a child may be different than that you explain to an adult. That does not necessarily mean that he is saying that one who is not married and together with someone should be embarrassed. Does every single simple question have to lead to an inquiry?

 

 

What follows is quotes of yours from this one thread. I think this is going a little overboard.

 

 

"A young grandchild won't be asking, what possible reason could they have to ask?"

 

"Everyone else considers it to be perfectly acceptable and the norm. The OP seems to think it would be a topic for embarrassment".

 

"The implication here is that you would be embarrassed to reveal it to your grandchild. So, actually, whether you think you implied it or not - that's how it comes over. And I'm obviously not the only one to think so...."

 

"That's unfair. YOU began this thread, with a post which has to all intents and purposes been dispelled by others as invalid, and frankly, smacks of being closed-minded. The least YOU could do when people ask you to elaborate on a point YOU have raised, and who seek some kind of clarifications of the denials YOU are making, is to have the courtesy to at least respond with some kind of explanation".

 

"We have all expanded on what we feel the general consensus of opinion is, and how we feel about the matter. Why is it unreasonable - in a thread YOU posted, and for a point YOU raised - to at least not be given some kind of response as to why YOU view things this way?"

 

"So I and others have asked you what would be the difficulty actually talking to a grandchild and explaining that you are not married?"

 

"The above quotes absolutely convey a sense of embarrassment, reticence, and even, perhaps, an amount of shame (though of course you will deny that too) but you have avoided answering the question by stating our assumptions are incorrect".

 

"So, how can we construe they are incorrect when everything you have responded with so far indicates that we aren't?"