Sensible or settling? Marriage of "convenience"

[neowulf]

I disagree. There are other countries with arranged marriages where the couple says that they fell in love with one another. If there's no situation where one of them is in love with someone else, the likelihood of falling in love with someone who cares for you, who becomes your friend, and makes you feel cared for and safe, is very high.

 

Oh, I'm sure you can feel love. I feel love for my parents. My sister, my friends.

 

None of whom I want to sleep with.

 

I can't imagine anything worse than trying to have sex with someone who you feel zero attraction too, while knowing they feel much the same about you.

 

I'm sure that situation can work for some people. I'm obviously not one of them.

[Woggle]

I disagree. There are other countries with arranged marriages where the couple says that they fell in love with one another. If there's no situation where one of them is in love with someone else, the likelihood of falling in love with someone who cares for you, who becomes your friend, and makes you feel cared for and safe, is very high.

 

You can't apply their standards to America and the west. Not knocking their culture but is different from ours. If somebody only seems to feel passion for men who are unavailable or not relationship material that is certain something she should examine and maybe try to fix but being in love should be required for commitment.

[Ruby Slippers]

I don't seem to be very good at settling. I've had several clear opportunities to settle comfortably. I look at the lives of people around me who are better at settling, and their lives seem more in order, more peaceful, less angsty than my own. I totally see the sense in a more pragmatic approach to romantic relationships. I am striving myself to become more pragmatic. But in battles between head and heart, my heart still usually wins. Maybe that makes me foolish or childish or romantic. But that's the way it is for me.

[neowulf]

I don't seem to be very good at settling. I've had several clear opportunities to settle comfortably. I look at the lives of people around me who are better at settling, and their lives seem more in order, more peaceful, less angsty than my own. I totally see the sense in a more pragmatic approach to romantic relationships. I am striving myself to become more pragmatic. But in battles between head and heart, my heart still usually wins. Maybe that makes me foolish or childish or romantic. But that's the way it is for me.

 

Better to be true to who you are, than drag some poor soul through the mud trying to be "pragmatic" I say. Not an easy road, but an honest one

[Standard-Fare]

I didn't read all the posts here, and OP, I don't think anyone here has a good sense of your background with this guy ... like, are you very close friends? For a long time? Has he had a crush on you or even been in love with you? Etc.

 

So, pretty shallow, possibly misinformed opinion coming:

 

Maybe you could consider having a child with him. And sort of arranging that like a divorced couple would... splitting the duties and time. But in your situation, given that you're friends with no history of acrimony, ideally you could also share some of those times together... like spend some holidays together, go on trips, etc.

 

But you would still have your own places, your own lives, and the right to pursue romantic relationships with others.

 

It just seems to me that the ultimate goal here for you is having a child. That's different than sharing your life and bed with someone you feel no romance for or no chemistry with. Given the way married couples get on each other's nerves and get to know each other's every last flaw, it would be tough to manage that without a foundation of love.

[Woggle]

I don't think stability and passion are mutually exclusive and many people confuse passion with drama and uncertainty. The solution to that though is confronting those issues not being with somebody you aren't in love with.

[Ruby Slippers]

Not an easy road, but an honest one

Yes, that's how it feels. Honest but hard. Versus... not fully honest but easy.

[Noproblem]

try dating him and see how it goes!

 

 

We can't know that for you!

[LookAtThisPOst]

Funny you mention this. Recently I met this woman online that she was going through a divorce of 10 years. The reason she's divoring...she was never attracted to him in the FIRST place.

 

She was apparently just helping him run his business (she did the books).

 

So I am taking from the wedding night they never had sex, or if during the honeymoon stage she felt is an obligation and to him an endorphin rush of pleasure? *shrug*

 

 

 

Thoughts on settling for a marriage of "convenience"??

 

So I've had a really uneventful love life and I'm 35. Not much to report, I like guys who aren't into me or the other way round. I'm attractive, great social life and a great career. All I can think it's the way I give off vibes or I'm too picky with the guys I want. I've recently been disappointed by this guy which made me rethink everything. Being brought up on Mr Darcy has done me no favors. Now I've got to the stage where I'm sick of guys who don't know what they want, are looking for some magical thing, go off to find "themselves" etc etc. And I'm sick of waiting for this perfect guy I've been imagining in my head. I came to realise a couple of months ago that I want that stability now and maybe that hot French surgeon who adores me and has been waiting for me, just me, his whole life and who owns an apartment in Manhattan and rescues kittens in his spare time just doesn't exist.

 

ANYWAY. A friend who I've known for 5 years has had a weird conversation with me a couple of days ago. He's admitted he doesn't believe in "falling in love" and that even if you do at some point you fall out of love. His whole theory is you pick someone, anyone, and then make it work no matter what. He figures you can make it work almost anyone. The whole point of the conversation was that that someone should be me. I laughed it off, but he has got me thinking. I'm kind of beginning to believe the same thing but to a lesser extent, I feel something has to be there at first and THEN you make it work when things get bad.

 

Thing is, he's actually got me thinking now if I should have a conversation with him and backtrack on laughing it off. The reasons are: even though I have never been attracted to him AT ALL I'm actually not that concerned about appearance. This guy is complete husband and father material. He's kind, caring, great with kids, would never, ever stray. And, I know this makes me sound totally shallow, but ivy league educated and great career. The reason I mention that, is that if I'm going to "settle" it may as well be with someone who I can have a good life with, right? I've never fallen insanely in love, I wonder if I'm the type who will? I want kids and I want a solid husband who would never cheat or decide to "find himself" years into the marriage. I also want the financial security to give up work if I decide to be a stay at home mother. We get on, we can talk about anything.. But I don't know if I should do it. Part of me wants to be someone special not the wife whose name you picked out a hat. The other part of me thinks that 'specialness' may either never come (hasn't come in 35 years) or if it does it won't last long. Let's face it, my biological clock is ticking and if I don't have kids in the next 3 or 4 years it ain't happening. Having kids with an Ivy league educated attorney who would be the most hands on dad imaginable doesn't sound like a bad deal? Sensible? Or settling when something better could be around the corner?

[Els]

I think that the romance vs stability argument is a false dichotomy. Obviously romantic feelings are not sufficient to maintain a relationship for the long term, but IMO they are one of the necessary ingredients.

 

"People have fallen in love with arranged marriage partners before" is not a good argument either. Yes people have also survived bacterial infections without antibiotics, but I'm not so sure that's good proof of "antibiotics being unnecessary". The fact that those people remained together is absolutely not indicative of happiness - people serving lifetime jail sentences also remain there for life, because they have no choice. Perhaps a few people in arranged marriages do eventually fall in love with each other and end up desiring each other, but are you going to bet your life on that? My observation of such marriages in real life (which I suspect is more extensive than that of many posting here) is not exactly rosy.

 

Is it worth holding out for both chemistry and stability? You have to make the decision for yourself. I just hope you don't end up cheating on this man several years down the road when you do meet someone whom you actually have feelings for.

 

If children are a big issue, then perhaps consider getting your eggs frozen so you don't need to make a desperate decision.

Edited November 24, 2014 by Elswyth

[ascendotum]

I think its fine if both partners are on the same page and know they would both make a good team in the long run, but realize the relationship is based more on utility & companionship rather than passion. The guy she is talking about sounds like he would be, but maybe he is not quite sure of her true feelings about him and the sort of guy she would rather do anything to please. Who knows what his ideal would be either if he had more choices.

 

Where it sucks is when one person has been duped into believing the other truly loves them where as they are just 2nd/3rd best fall back options fulfilling the role of good provider husband/wife and person that will look after then when they are old & less healthy or someone to give them the child they want (which they will dot on better than their partner). Some of my friends have ended up in marriages like this and their relationships kind of suck (imo). A couple lost a lot when things deteriorated after a few years and their wife/defacto bounced out feeling unfulfilled. I think a lot of people settle. If one or both come to terms with it and make the best of the situation and learn to really appreciate their partner its not so bad. If there is resentment that they deserved better or they pine over their lost love they had 'amazing chemistry' with, then it will show up in less passion & enthusiasm got the other person after a while. Some guys would be better off being single, having his freedom and visiting a pro regularly or finding fwbs online.

Edited November 24, 2014 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[Eternal Sunshine]

It depends what type of person you are. I am independent and happy enough in my own company. Sure, I would be much happier if I was with someone I was in love with, but my current state is still better than "settling". And with settling I am not talking about "all passion fades", I am talking about starting a relationship when there is no passion, ever. How deeply depressing.

 

I had chances to "settle" and live a good, comfortable life. I am still glad I didn't take them. At the end of the day, I know I will be happier living the life that is "true to me". Not what my parents want or what society thinks is "normal" or what what my friends do.

[Revolver]

This happens much more than people want to admit

[Ruby Slippers]

My observation of such marriages in real life (which I suspect is more extensive than that of many posting here) is not exactly rosy.

Care to elaborate? I'm curious.

[carhill]

IME, relationships of convenience happen, more than I would have imagined as a young man, but I'd give serious thought before creating a legal partnership, ostensibly based upon love and compatibility, arising out of such circumstances. I think such relationships work for people who have a focus on the now and life being transactional. It works now and when it doesn't work or I'm not getting what I bargained for, I move on. As long as both parties communicate clearly and there's no ambiguity or misunderstanding, it can be very sensible. History is replete with such business arrangement marriages and, if history serves me correctly, 'love' marriages only became commonplace in the last century or two.

 

I had what turned out to be a transactional marriage, though I wasn't aware of it at the time, and I think it would have turned out pretty good had we both been on the same page. I'll do better next time, if there is a next time.

 

So, if finding the well-educated lawyer who demonstrates being a great father, and both parties understand the parameters and agree to them, then get the contracts done and live life and enjoy what comes. When that period ends, it ends and another one begins. Rinse and repeat until dead. Good luck!

[GoodOnPaper]

I think people settle because they give up. Giving up is not a great place to start something like a life long commitment.

 

I agree - that's exactly what it feels like. There is some relief to be moving on in life but if there were self-esteem or other emotional issues that needed to be dealt with, settling won't erase those.

 

I'd be especially wary of advising a woman to settle. If a man is contemplating settling, chances are it's because he has trouble attracting women. Once married, he's still a guy who can't attract women, so there isn't much of a threat to the marriage. With women, offers come to them whether they are married or not and no-strings sex is available at the drop of a hat. There will be a LOT more temptation to deal with -- a much bigger threat to the marriage.

[MissBee]

In the end, you'll still find that there's something missing in the relationship, and when all is said and done, it may be YOU that ends up the cheater.

 

Fall in love with the man of your dreams, not the idea. I found mine at 37, but not before I endured 10 yrs of hell married to the wrong man. If you ask me, happiness is worth the wait and far more fulfilling than "convenience".

 

Beautifully said.

 

Lots of people do choose convenience but I know for me it wouldn't work as I would get very restless and bored easily and then maybe start resenting him or our life. For some though, the convenience is practical and works for them, so it's about what you want and need. I don't think marriages just built on the high of romance necessarily work well as that can wear off and things can come to a sour end, but I do think true romantic love and desire along with the practical concerns about lifestyle and values are key.

 

I don't think you need to jump into marriage with your friend, but nothing is wrong with seeing how things would go if you were to date. If you start dating and realize you don't have any romantic desire for him then don't progress to marriage but if you date and surprisingly start falling for him, then you'll be lucky! It's not like you're gonna run to the courthouse next week right? So you can date like other people date and see what happens.

[Copelandsanity]

I didn't read all the posts here, and OP, I don't think anyone here has a good sense of your background with this guy ... like, are you very close friends? For a long time? Has he had a crush on you or even been in love with you? Etc.

 

So, pretty shallow, possibly misinformed opinion coming:

 

Maybe you could consider having a child with him. And sort of arranging that like a divorced couple would... splitting the duties and time. But in your situation, given that you're friends with no history of acrimony, ideally you could also share some of those times together... like spend some holidays together, go on trips, etc.

 

But you would still have your own places, your own lives, and the right to pursue romantic relationships with others.

 

It just seems to me that the ultimate goal here for you is having a child. That's different than sharing your life and bed with someone you feel no romance for or no chemistry with. Given the way married couples get on each other's nerves and get to know each other's every last flaw, it would be tough to manage that without a foundation of love.

 

If you do it, this is the way it should be done. The two of you don't even have to get married; you can draw up a contract for how you want to handle the child-rearing duties. Or even have intercourse...you can be artificially inseminated or use the turkey baster method.

 

Ultimately, you get what you want: a child and a someone that will help raise and take care of the child with you. And there's still the opportunity that perhaps at 37, or 40, or 45 that you meet someone that you want to love with all of you and ultimately, marry.

 

Finally, let this be a cautionary tale to other people on this board to continually make progress when it comes to learning about love and relationships. It isn't about finding the perfect person with the perfect set of traits; it's about finding someone who can unselfishly fulfill your needs and having openness and flexibility to the process.

[Adele0908]

Blueberrymuffin,

 

I've come to believe that yes, it's wise to *go all in* with the men you attract, if you have at least some attraction to them.

 

The reason being, is that you attracted the men. So you need to learn why you attracted them, and that comes with spending time with them and really getting to know them.

 

This short clip sums it up

 

I also find that when a woman is very attracted to a man but he's not that into her, or is only partially attracted to her, it's often because she's not fully into her feminine side, or that she is attached to her freedom (masculine trait), or she is chasing and initiating too much (masculine trait)

[Quiet Storm]

Your thinking right now is being influenced by your biological clock. You are doing the math in your head and realize you need to act now, in order to fulfill your dream of being a mother. Although it may not feel like it, you are kind of in an emotional crisis due to your impending decline in fertility, and it's affecting your thought process.

 

Your desire is to settle down & make a family, and this is a solution that will give you what you want (almost).

 

The problem is that your thinking & priorities are likely to change. Right now, your priorities are finding a suitable partner/father because time is running out. Right now, you feel like it may be OK to sacrifice certain "wants" in order to get to this end goal. Having what you "almost" want, is better than not having anything. Your focus is on the big picture, so you are considering whether or not to overlook things like "feelings".

 

However, if you make this a reality, the sense of urgency & crisis will pass. You will have your marriage & kids, and once that need of yours has been satisfied, it won't feel important anymore. Your mind will instead focus on what's missing (like it's doing now). The husband and kids won't be hopes & dreams, they will be your reality. Over time, the day to day stress of having a young family will happen, and how will you handle it? Will you feel fortunate that in spite of the lack of passion, you found a man to have kids with? Or will you focus on the lack of passion and attraction, and feel unfulfilled & unhappy? Will you be able to put that unhappiness aside & raise a family with this man? Or will you be resentful of him, for not inspiring the passion and connection that you really want? Will you eventually meet someone who you think would've been "perfect" for you, and then blame yourself for settling? Will you be tempted to be unfaithful? Will your husband also have these same feelings, and regret settling for a woman that isn't attracted to him? Will he feel entitled to regular sex, even if you aren't attracted? Will you be OK with providing that? If not, he could feel very resentful, thinking "I provide for her, gave her the kids she wanted, but she can't even stand to have sex with me once a week?"

 

Some posters may feel it's OK, as long as the guy is aware, but IMO that leaves out a huge factor- the kids. Even if you are both aware & agree to this mutual "settling", you have no idea if it will still be acceptable to you 5, 10, 15 years down the line. Is it right to have kids in those circumstances? True, kids are born into much more difficult situations, but dysfunctional marriages & divorce harm kids. This mutually agreed upon arrangement could quickly change when negative feelings are involved. Right now you two are "neutral" towards each other, but familiarity can often breed contempt, especially when there is no attraction. Are you both realistic about this possibility? How will both of you cope with feelings of resentment and contempt?

 

My husband and I have been together 23 years, and I have noticed that our passion, our sex, our romantic love, is what holds us together during the tough times. Marriage isn't 24/7 bliss. You two will have conflicts, you will face outside stress, you will disagree on many things over the years, everything ranging from financial matters to parenting to issues with your own parents. A romantic connection & bond, even one that's faded, is often what prompts a couple to compromise & resolve their issues. Without that, is it realistic to believe that BOTH of you will keep wanting this marriage, at least for the 20 years it will take to have & raise a kid? And if not, is it fair to give your kid this legacy?

 

Just some things to consider...

[insert_name]

If you do it, this is the way it should be done. The two of you don't even have to get married; you can draw up a contract for how you want to handle the child-rearing duties. Or even have intercourse...you can be artificially inseminated or use the turkey baster method.

 

Ultimately, you get what you want: a child and a someone that will help raise and take care of the child with you. And there's still the opportunity that perhaps at 37, or 40, or 45 that you meet someone that you want to love with all of you and ultimately, marry.

 

Finally, let this be a cautionary tale to other people on this board to continually make progress when it comes to learning about love and relationships. It isn't about finding the perfect person with the perfect set of traits; it's about finding someone who can unselfishly fulfill your needs and having openness and flexibility to the process.

 

So you are suggesting OP says to the guy: "I cant stand to look at you but your education and salary are kinda hot- get me up the duff cus Im desperate to knock a child out, you can pay for it for the rest of your life while I sleep around with people".

 

Im sure the dude is going to be ecstatic that he worked so hard to get where he is just so he could be used as a child rearing service.

 

All I can say in response to thst is that I give top marks for the honesty, at least thats slightly more classy than drinking the contents of a condom while no-one is looking.

Edited November 24, 2014 by insert_name

[bathtub-row]

Oh, I'm sure you can feel love. I feel love for my parents. My sister, my friends.

 

None of whom I want to sleep with.

 

I can't imagine anything worse than trying to have sex with someone who you feel zero attraction too, while knowing they feel much the same about you.

 

I'm sure that situation can work for some people. I'm obviously not one of them.

 

Now, I do agree that it would be impossible to have sex with someone that I'm not attracted to. I would have to date the guy and get to know him to see if there was anything there. If there wasn't anything there, it would be a no-go.

 

As far as the thing about love, I was talking about the possibility of falling in love, not about familial love. It is possible.

[Els]

Care to elaborate? I'm curious.

 

I knew some people IRL whose parents or grandparents were in arranged marriages. It isn't exactly the utopia that it is made out to be here.

[Ruby Slippers]

I knew some people IRL whose parents or grandparents were in arranged marriages. It isn't exactly the utopia that it is made out to be here.

Gotcha. I also have a friend from a culture where arranged marriage is the norm. Her family is conservative, and two of her siblings had arranged marriages. Those relationships seem to be pretty traditional and stable, oriented around raising a family, but overall they have as many problems as non-arranged marriages. I think arranged marriages are less likely to end in divorce more because of cultural forces around them than anything - family expectations, harsher judgment about divorce, etc.

[Leigh 87]

I think a common denominator that surrounds the issue of settling versus not settling is: a persons lack of ability to attract or possibly to meet that person who they have natural chemistry with, and who is also a good long term partner....

 

Why do some people meet their matches, their true love and romantic equal, where as others either remain single or marry for convenience?

 

I have the ability to be attracted to all types of men, and the fact I don't care their line of work or income as it only matters to me that they can support themselves and have pride in their career...

 

If you want the fairy tale, it wont likely be with a fit man that adorns a 6 pack and is at least 6 feet tall, and who has a high flying job!