Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

Scarlett

Not wanting to risk it

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Scarlett said:

So what about a marriage is so much more terrifying than a relationship?

There are may legal issues that can arise in marriage that one is not exposed to in a relationship.  In some states, a spouse can take out debt that you are totally unaware of and you are 100% responsible for that debt.  You can be 100% responsible for taxes on a spouse's income you are unaware of.  

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

I feel super fortunate to have the step family I do.  My step sister and I trust each other 100%.  I trust my own brother barely at all.  I would never keep something of her dad's that she wanted nor would she keep something of my mom's .  Our parents are the ones who are causing us grief by not having a will.  My step brother is a ward of the state and does not have his mind so any inheritance he gets could cause my sister a lot of grief in regards to his care.  

Edited to add--My step sister and I were not strangers when our parents married though.  Our families had been friends for 25 years at that time and now over 40.  So I am sure it might be different if we were strangers.

 

My step mom is a peach. And frankly, my bio sisters and I couldn't care less if my dad leaves everything to her. I don't know my stepsisters well, but they put up with my dad a lot more than I or my bio sisters do, and I adore them for it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

I do not think everyone should want to be married.  The part I was musing about is being involved in a long term romantic relationship and not wanting to marry.  I know a lot of single people who plan to never marry.  But they aren't involved with anyone. So as is normal there are different 'worlds' represented on this board.

The bolded is perfectly normal in my "world". I know people in committed relationships for decades, without marriage. But they are not of your particular religion.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess so much is proximity.  My dad lived states away. He married twice and had several nearly live in situations too.  I cared in the sense of morality and mild confusion why he wanted to but otherwise it didn't matter to me.  Not my circus.  Not my monkeys. I never thought any of them were going to care about taking care of him, it was obvious they wanted money and equally obvious he didn't mind that.  But if he would have preferred them to care for him during his last days? That would have been fine by me bc that would have been his prerogative.  It would have been nice if some crappy new wife could have paid for his burial and inherited his debt mess and dealt with the lawyers from hell.  I don't think my stance would have changed if he lived locally though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Scarlett said:

Yes, I get that, but this man was talking about this woman AS IF he loved her and all that...but he wont marry her.  

Maybe the question should be why would you allow yourself to be that woman. 

Hearing a couple of sentences of someone's conversation, I would not be drawing these conclusions.  What baffles me is why Person A would ask "are you getting married?", especially in a public situation where other people are overhearing. 

Person B may have been surprised by the question and needed a quick answer.  Maybe he is planning on proposing this weekend and needed an answer so that the word didn't get out.  Maybe Person B really wants to get married and the woman does not want to marry him.  Maybe the couple has discussed marriage but doesn't want family members to know yet.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're kind of hitting on the reason, but not really viewing it as logical I think. Because really, it isn't. But it's still the reason. Someone who is burned very badly in a marriage will often say never again. Is this a problem with marriage or the people they married? The people of course, in 99% of situations. But saying they won't get married again makes them feel like they can prevent being burned the same way. Even if it doesn't make sense. 

I will tell you, I had a dream marriage. My husband was nearly perfect and we were so GOOD together. Then he was diagnosed with a terminal illness 5 years ago. As he declined I took care of him. I took care of him through the very end. I can not express the ways it broke me to be front row center to my big, strong man wasting away, and forgetting his life, little by little. I had thought before that I would never remarry - because he set the bar so very high. But after end of life care there is another layer. Marriage vows are HEAVY. For better or for worse, richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part. I have done it all and I am not sure I would survive it again. 

That does not mean that one day, when my kids are much bigger, I would not be open to a long-term, committed relationship. And the question a logical brain would ask would be that if we were together a long time, and loved each other, and a partner got sick, would I not still take care of him. And of course I probably would. But knowing that rationally doesn't actually change my stance. And I am generally a logical person vs. an emotional one. But sometimes something wounds you in such a fundamental way that reason takes a backseat. Thinking about taking marriage vows again would give me a full-fledged panic attack. 

If you're looking for logical reasons people do the things they do, you will look forever. 😜 Humans are, all in all, an extremely illogical group.

Edited by Sk8ermaiden
  • Like 11
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

Hearing a couple of sentences of someone's conversation, I would not be drawing these conclusions.  What baffles me is why Person A would ask "are you getting married?", especially in a public situation where other people are overhearing. 

Person B may have been surprised by the question and needed a quick answer.  Maybe he is planning on proposing this weekend and needed an answer so that the word didn't get out.  Maybe Person B really wants to get married and the woman does not want to marry him.  Maybe the couple has discussed marriage but doesn't want family members to know yet.   

Well sure.  But the clerk clearly knew the man very well.  And he already knew the guy didn't want to get married again.  He knew he had two terrible marriages that ended in divorce.  I don't really know exactly what the clerk said to him first because I only started listening (I was standing 2 feet from him in a check out line) when the customer started talking about what a wonderful girlfriend he had and how great she is all around.  

And I really am not drawing any conclusions.  I repeated what I heard and was just thinking about it all afternoon.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sk8ermaiden said:

You're kind of hitting on the reason, but not really viewing it as logical I think. Because really, it isn't. But it's still the reason. Someone who is burned very badly in a marriage will often say never again. Is this a problem with marriage or the people they married? The people of course, in 99% of situations. But saying they won't get married again makes them feel like they can prevent being burned the same way. Even if it doesn't make sense. 

I will tell you, I had a dream marriage. My husband was nearly perfect and we were so GOOD together. Then he was diagnosed with a terminal illness 5 years ago. As he declined I took care of him. I took care of him through the very end. I can not express the ways it broke me to be front row center to my big, strong man wasting away, and forgetting his life, little by little. I had thought before that I would never remarry - because he set the bar so very high. But after end of life care there is another layer. Marriage vows are HEAVY. For better or for worse, richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, until death do us part. I have done it all and I am not sure I would survive it again. 

That does not mean that one day, when my kids are much bigger, I would not be open to a long-term, committed relationship. And the question a logical brain would ask would be that if we were together a long time, and loved each other, and a partner got sick, would I not still take care of him. And of course I probably would. But knowing that rationally doesn't actually change my stance. And I am generally a logical person vs. an emotional one. But sometimes something wounds you in such a fundamental way that reason takes a backseat. Thinking about taking marriage vows again would give me a full-fledged panic attack. 

If you looking for logical reasons people do the things they do, you will look forever. 😜 Humans are, all in all, an extremely illogical group.

I am so sorry for your loss.  

And your post is very very good at explaining what it is I was looking to understand.  Thank you.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

Hearing a couple of sentences of someone's conversation, I would not be drawing these conclusions.  What baffles me is why Person A would ask "are you getting married?", especially in a public situation where other people are overhearing. 

Person B may have been surprised by the question and needed a quick answer.  Maybe he is planning on proposing this weekend and needed an answer so that the word didn't get out.  Maybe Person B really wants to get married and the woman does not want to marry him.  Maybe the couple has discussed marriage but doesn't want family members to know yet.   

IF person B had just said to person A:

"She's the love of my life. I can't imagine ever being without her."

Then I could imagine Person B asking about marriage. 

Is not like person B asked about an*l in public where anyone could hear.

Edited by unsinkable
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of understand Scarlett's question because, for me, all the reasons I would not want to remarry are mostly the same reasons I would not want to deal with any type of long term relationship at all if my current marriage were to end for whatever reason. I get there are additional financial and legal things that come with marriage but those things, again just IMO, are just as serious or just as big as any issues that come with a long-term-committed-but-not-willing-to-marry situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, EmseB said:

I kind of understand Scarlett's question because, for me, all the reasons I would not want to remarry are mostly the same reasons I would not want to deal with any type of long term relationship at all if my current marriage were to end for whatever reason. I get there are additional financial and legal things that come with marriage but those things, again just IMO, are just as serious or just as big as any issues that come with a long-term-committed-but-not-willing-to-marry situation.

 

Sure.  If both parties are equally well off, it is probably less of an issue.  But if one would be better off financially if they married - that might be a reason they want to get married in a committed relationship.  The better off one might genuinely want to help the other and feel marriage is the least difficult way to do so.  Some might call that gold digging, but that doesn't mean that's the motive. And really if family is going to get upset about the gold digger possibility, they are going to be upset whether it's done in or outside of marriage.  I wouldn't care either way, but maybe if I'd had wealth to get used to it'd be harder to part with it. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m going to guess that what stands out to the OP is that the man is having a sexual relationship and says there is no plan to marry. It bothers some Christians, I think the OP’s religion is playing a major part in her pondering what she overheard.

If that’s the case, then perhaps we should get into a debate on living in sin, going to hell for sex outside of marriage, etc. Would definitely be more of an interesting thread!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dotwithaperiod said:

I’m going to guess that what stands out to the OP is that the man is having a sexual relationship and says there is no plan to marry. It bothers some Christians, I think the OP’s religion is playing a major part in her pondering what she overheard.

If that’s the case, then perhaps we should get into a debate on living in sin, going to hell for sex outside of marriage, etc. Would definitely be more of an interesting thread!

You would be wrong.  That wasn't really my question at all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dotwithaperiod said:

I’m going to guess that what stands out to the OP is that the man is having a sexual relationship and says there is no plan to marry. It bothers some Christians, I think the OP’s religion is playing a major part in her pondering what she overheard.

If that’s the case, then perhaps we should get into a debate on living in sin, going to hell for sex outside of marriage, etc. Would definitely be more of an interesting thread!

She has a name. It's Scarlett.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biggest reason now would be financial as our kids are young adults. Dh and I are good with money and are on the same page about spending and saving. If something happened to dh now, I would be fine financially for the rest of my life, could still help our kids if needed, and could leave them an inheritance.

I could be in a long term relationship with someone who wasn’t as good with his money since I could still control my own money, but it would be very difficult for me to trust someone else with my money, and marriage entails financial entanglement legally. Getting married might mean eventually I would not be fine financially, and that is too much insecurity for me. I’ve read too many horror stories about the financial disasters of divorce. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, livetoread said:

My biggest reason now would be financial as our kids are young adults. Dh and I are good with money and are on the same page about spending and saving. If something happened to dh now, I would be fine financially for the rest of my life, could still help our kids if needed, and could leave them an inheritance.

I could be in a long term relationship with someone who wasn’t as good with his money since I could still control my own money, but it would be very difficult for me to trust someone else with my money, and marriage entails financial entanglement legally. Getting married might mean eventually I would not be fine financially, and that is too much insecurity for me. I’ve read too many horror stories about the financial disasters of divorce. 

It really doesn't have to be entangled.  You just don't mix things together.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Murphy101 said:

 

Sure.  If both parties are equally well off, it is probably less of an issue.  But if one would be better off financially if they married - that might be a reason they want to get married in a committed relationship.  The better off one might genuinely want to help the other and feel marriage is the least difficult way to do so.  Some might call that gold digging, but that doesn't mean that's the motive. And really if family is going to get upset about the gold digger possibility, they are going to be upset whether it's done in or outside of marriage.  I wouldn't care either way, but maybe if I'd had wealth to get used to it'd be harder to part with it. lol

Right, but I'm just saying that financial and legal issues are going to be a concern either way, maybe slightly less so than if someone doesn't get legally married, but for me the reasons of not being in a long-term-live-in relationship (having another adult in my kids' lives is the HUGE one) are the same practically and emotionally and in all other ways if we get married or not. So I understand the question of, "If you're going to have this long term relationship with someone you love, why would you consider marriage to be the point where you draw the line?" For me, 99% of the issues that are present in a marriage are present in a long-term relationship. I don't care if someone wants to get married or not, I just think it's a little bit of denial to think that not getting married is some kind of protection against being burned again.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Faith-manor said:

The legal ramifications, and it isn't easy in this day and age to extract oneself from a bad relationship once the paperwork is signed. It is pretty darn expensive, and way more emotionally damaging because the process through the courts is fairly awful, some states being worse than others.

My MIL has a boyfriend. But she's an 82 year old widower with a complicated trust for her estate, and if she married, the whole thing would have to be re-done. Michigan is a community property state, and they each both have three grown children and herd of grandchildren. His kids would have a cow if he remarried. We also said no. Because marriage has legal responsibilities that come with it, and we aren't going to be involved in decision making with his grown kids from another state whom we have never met. Our lives are complicated enough without that! Both of their health is failing so easily something could happen to one of them before all of the complicated financial and legal mess was sorted out, and that would leave all six of us in a whale of a disaster on top of which one of his kids has indicated he'd really like to end up with MIL's house. Of course he does. He's a recovering drug addict, and we live six miles away. His father has even indicated how it would be nice for us to look after the grown son! UHM NO!

So they hang out, the travel together, they go to church together, and they genuinely do love each other, but their lives remain legally, formally separate. That's the way it should be.

My uncle had a long term relationship for 30 years before he died in his sixties. They both had complicated retirement pensions and plans, both had complicated estates just from a young age (my uncle was fostering a niece and nephew and in order to marry her and keep the children, there hoops to jump with the state as well). The children were pretty unstable over what happened to them so until they were grown, he kept his relationship with her on the down low. She loved uncle very much and was quite happy with the situation. After the kids grew up, they had settled into a happy, content situation that met both of their needs. Neither one had a religious reason to marry, and they both really liked their own houses, neither wanted to give the other place up permanently. It was easy to continue the status quo. We all came to love her, and she was at his side when he passed away.

 

My grandmother re-married after my grandfather died. The man was nice and everything, that wasn't the issue. The marriage complicated her survivor's benefits on my grandfather's pensions, messed up her new husband's benefits which he had been receiving based on his previous wife's pension, caused a six month mess at social security which admittedly was more incompetency in the department and not so much about the marriage but still would never have happened if they had remained single, stuck her with responsibility that she thought his kids would handle but their attitude was "you married him, he's your problem now", etc. She took a huge hit financially, the guy only lived two years, and then my aunt and father figure had to dive in and straighten it all out. Total mess!

And especially where there are kids involved....just because the parent really loves someone else, it doesn't naturally equal their getting married as being a good move for the kids.

I can think of a lot of scenarios that would make the legal entanglements of marriage undesirable for many, legitimate reasons, yet the relationship is beneficial to both parties.

Maybe if we did it like France, it would be easier. They have the Pacs. (Not sure if I spelled that right.) Is a layer of marriage or civil union/civil solidarity that allows the couple involved to easily dissolve with a 50/50 split of marital assets. It has some of the responsibilities of marriage, but allows financial independence and easy separation while still having the tax benefits that France gives to married couples. Fully married is the next option, and it is a legally binding contract that is more involved than here in the USA. It is governed by matriomonial regimes. Here is a description of them. There are four matrimonial ‘regimes’ ( régime matrimonial😞 two communal regimes ( régime communautaire) and two ‘separatist’ regimes ( régime séparatiste). Under a communauté universelle, all assets and all debts are jointly owned; under a communauté réduite aux acquêts, each spouse retains ownership of assets acquired before marriage (and assets acquired after marriage in the form of inheritances and gifts), while all assets acquired jointly after marriage are jointly owned. Under a séparation de biens, nothing is jointly owned; and under a participation aux acquêts, nothing is jointly owned but if the marriage is dissolved, assets acquired during the marriage are divided equally.

The above would kind of spell things out ahead of time, and make the financial arrangements standardized.

Wow, if I was your MIL, I'd probably not date again. I remember you wrote that you FIL was gay and kept it a secret until he was older then started having affairs outside of marriage with men.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think often this sort of thing is not part of a real thought process.  It can be almost a sort of superstitious attitude - like, "things are going well now.  When I married, things went to pot.  So I am just not going to mess with it."  Not that even that is really thought out, but it's just a kind of feeling of not wanting to mess with something.

Now, I am thinking of a case where the people are living together etc.  It might also be that the person has decided not to do that, and any relationship is more like a dating thing, and they both maintain their own household and such.  I think that can be something that works well - they get on, care for each other, they can do things together and have companionship for concerts or walks or whatever.  But essentially, they are single.  I think for someone who realises that marriage is not something they are good at, that can be a logical approach.  My step fathers father took that approach after his wife died - he had no desire to remarry, but he still wanted a female friend to do things with.

But for the people who are living together - I think in reality they are fooling themselves if they think they are not becoming entangled emotionally, financially, and so on.  It isn't necessarily simpler to sort those things out just because there is no marriage.  IN many places there are all kinds of obligations even if they are just living together.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, EmseB said:

Right, but I'm just saying that financial and legal issues are going to be a concern either way, maybe slightly less so than if someone doesn't get legally married, but for me the reasons of not being in a long-term-live-in relationship (having another adult in my kids' lives is the HUGE one) are the same practically and emotionally and in all other ways if we get married or not. So I understand the question of, "If you're going to have this long term relationship with someone you love, why would you consider marriage to be the point where you draw the line?" For me, 99% of the issues that are present in a marriage are present in a long-term relationship. I don't care if someone wants to get married or not, I just think it's a little bit of denial to think that not getting married is some kind of protection against being burned again.

Yes  exactly! 

I do think Sk8ermaiden above explained it well though....and that it isn't as logical as it is emotional

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, unsinkable said:

Wow, if I was your MIL, I'd probably not date again. I remember you wrote that you FIL was gay and kept it a secret until he was older then started having affairs outside of marriage with men.

 

Yes, so I think there is an emotional element at play here in why she has a boyfriend at 82 and in failing health. But, I've also never been in her situation either so I can't be sure I'm sussing out the situation or not. So hard to know. I just suspect that the issues within the first marriage has something to do with the landscape of the current relationship.

 

ETA: and yes, if it were me, I would have sworn off men, LOL!

Edited by Faith-manor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

It really doesn't have to be entangled.  You just don't mix things together.

 

In some states it is difficult, if not impossible, to not have things entangled.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Scarlett said:

You would be wrong.  That wasn't really my question at all.

 

I have been thinking about this, and I think the reason we seem to be disagreeing might be because we are looking at the same conversation from two different angles. I’m picturing the guy and his girlfriend agreeing to be in a relationship without getting married, whereas I think maybe you are looking at it as the guy stringing the girlfriend along without telling her he never plans to marry her.

If that’s what the guy is doing, I would agree that he is wrong. If he never wants to get married again and he thinks she might want to marry at some point, he owes to to her to tell her the truth. If he tells her and she goes along with it, while secretly assuming she will get him to change his mind, it’s her own fault if she ends up disappointed.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EmseB said:

Right, but I'm just saying that financial and legal issues are going to be a concern either way, maybe slightly less so than if someone doesn't get legally married, but for me the reasons of not being in a long-term-live-in relationship (having another adult in my kids' lives is the HUGE one) are the same practically and emotionally and in all other ways if we get married or not. So I understand the question of, "If you're going to have this long term relationship with someone you love, why would you consider marriage to be the point where you draw the line?" For me, 99% of the issues that are present in a marriage are present in a long-term relationship. I don't care if someone wants to get married or not, I just think it's a little bit of denial to think that not getting married is some kind of protection against being burned again.

 

4 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

 

I have been thinking about this, and I think the reason we seem to be disagreeing might be because we are looking at the same conversation from two different angles. I’m picturing the guy and his girlfriend agreeing to be in a relationship without getting married, whereas I think maybe you are looking at it as the guy stringing the girlfriend along without telling her he never plans to marry her.

If that’s what the guy is doing, I would agree that he is wrong. If he never wants to get married again and he thinks she might want to marry at some point, he owes to to her to tell her the truth. If he tells her and she goes along with it, while secretly assuming she will get him to change his mind, it’s her own fault if she ends up disappointed.

No I am not looking at it like he is stringing her along.  I don't know either way.  My wondering and thought process is like what EmseB said above, especially the bolded. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scarlett said:

 

No I am not looking at it like he is stringing her along.  I don't know either way.  My wondering and thought process is like what EmseB said above, especially the bolded. 

 

Okay, thanks. Sorry to have put words into your mouth!  🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EmseB said:

Right, but I'm just saying that financial and legal issues are going to be a concern either way, maybe slightly less so than if someone doesn't get legally married, but for me the reasons of not being in a long-term-live-in relationship (having another adult in my kids' lives is the HUGE one) are the same practically and emotionally and in all other ways if we get married or not. So I understand the question of, "If you're going to have this long term relationship with someone you love, why would you consider marriage to be the point where you draw the line?" For me, 99% of the issues that are present in a marriage are present in a long-term relationship. I don't care if someone wants to get married or not, I just think it's a little bit of denial to think that not getting married is some kind of protection against being burned again.

There could be a lot of reasons that marriage would be the point of drawing the line.  If there are kids in the mix, perhaps issues of custody and child support and such are involved.  Or, issues of inheritance.  

 

Also from a financial standpoint, divorce can have have a bigger impact than just "simply" breaking off a long term relationship again.  Yes, breaking off a LTR can be quite a financial mess too, but I suspect that in cases like that, divorce would be an even bigger cluster mess.  

 

Plus, lawyers cost money and in most cases, divorce requires one whereas breaking up a LTR does not.

 

Not getting married may not protect a person against being burned again.....but it may be a protection against a specific kind of being burned that comes with a divorce.

 

And, emotionally, I mentioned before how marriage is IMO one of the most serious promises ever.....It may just be that a person doesn't feel that they could EVER make that promise again, even if their feeling of protection from not making it again is false.

 

Also......it could be that a person SAYS they couldn't risk marriage again, but what they are actually saying is they actually don't want to marry that particular person, but don't quite know how to say that politely.

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Scarlett said:

Correct...as well as those IN marriages.  

Scarlett,

You've said before that your religion doesn't value dating for the sake of dating, that it is really intended to lead to marriage. In that case, the end game is always marriage (I'm not sure how 2nd marriages are viewed by JW religion - I think not well?) In the lives of people who are not religious, or are less conservatively religious, the end game is love...the marriage piece can be much less important to BOTH partners. Many people simply don't care to get married. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hippiemamato3 said:

Scarlett,

You've said before that your religion doesn't value dating for the sake of dating, that it is really intended to lead to marriage. In that case, the end game is always marriage (I'm not sure how 2nd marriages are viewed by JW religion - I think not well?) In the lives of people who are not religious, or are less conservatively religious, the end game is love...the marriage piece can be much less important to BOTH partners. Many people simply don't care to get married. 

The end game of dating is love? 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hippiemamato3 said:

Scarlett,

You've said before that your religion doesn't value dating for the sake of dating, that it is really intended to lead to marriage. In that case, the end game is always marriage (I'm not sure how 2nd marriages are viewed by JW religion - I think not well?) In the lives of people who are not religious, or are less conservatively religious, the end game is love...the marriage piece can be much less important to BOTH partners. Many people simply don't care to get married. 

It isn't as if love is not valued as part of marriage, but nonetheless this man did not seem like he just didn't value marriage.  Not AT ALL.  He sounded like he had tried that and he just couldn't 'risk' it again.  And after he left the clerk confirmed that the man was just too afraid to get married again (would be number 3).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, unsinkable said:

The end game of dating is love? 

 

If you are involved in a relationship like the guy in OP was with "a keeper" - yes. Maybe dating multiple people, the end game is fun. But if you want a long term relationship but not marriage, being in love is enough, or maybe companionship is enough. I'm sure it's different for everyone. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Scarlett said:

Yes, I get that, but this man was talking about this woman AS IF he loved her and all that...but he wont marry her.  

Maybe the question should be why would you allow yourself to be that woman. 

I have a number of friends who have not only allowed themselves to be that woman, but have CHOSEN to be that woman.  One did not want to lose rights to her ex-husband's pension benefits.  Another did not want to lose access to some benefits she received from her deceased husband that she would lose if she remarried.  One wanted to maintain the right to have the man leave her home immediately should the relationship sour and felt this was important to protect her children.  One did not want to open herself up to having to provide information (in particular tax returns that contained her salary) to the man's ex-wife in child support determination for children from a previous marriage.  Another had no interest in the contemporary institution of legal marriage.  One knew her parents would not approve of the marriage because of the race of the man and she just didn't want to deal with that.  Another would not be able to marry the man in her religion because he was divorced; she saw no reason for a state marriage if she could not marry within her faith.  

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hippiemamato3 said:

 

If you are involved in a relationship like the guy in OP was with "a keeper" - yes. Maybe dating multiple people, the end game is fun. But if you want a long term relationship but not marriage, being in love is enough, or maybe companionship is enough. I'm sure it's different for everyone. 

Again though this man didn't come across as if he is thrilled with the situation. He seemed a little sad even.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Scarlett said:

Again though this man didn't come across as if he is thrilled with the situation. He seemed a little sad even.

Maybe he's paying so much out in alimony and child support that he actually CAN'T afford to risk it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One other thing to consider.....perhaps an ex is CRAZY and the risk is not to the guy not wanting to get married, but perhaps to the person he is in a LTR with.  Someone who has been involved in domestic violence or in other complicated things.......may not want to have a spouse wrapped up in the craziness of an ex or crazy family members, etc etc.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

It isn't as if love is not valued as part of marriage, but nonetheless this man did not seem like he just didn't value marriage.  Not AT ALL.  He sounded like he had tried that and he just couldn't 'risk' it again.  And after he left the clerk confirmed that the man was just too afraid to get married again (would be number 3).  

 

Maybe he’s just being sensible.

Let’s face it, at some point he probably thought his first wife was a keeper, and I’m sure he felt the same way about his second wife, as well... but he was wrong about them, so he's probably justifiably concerned that he might be in the same situation with this girlfriend in the future. Maybe he realizes he has a history of picking the wrong women, or maybe he picks wonderful women and he’s the one who’s the problem, but either way, remaining single may be a wise choice for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, happysmileylady said:

One other thing to consider.....perhaps an ex is CRAZY and the risk is not to the guy not wanting to get married, but perhaps to the person he is in a LTR with.  Someone who has been involved in domestic violence or in other complicated things.......may not want to have a spouse wrapped up in the craziness of an ex or crazy family members, etc etc.  

To which I would refer back to the post below

3 hours ago, EmseB said:

Right, but I'm just saying that financial and legal issues are going to be a concern either way, maybe slightly less so than if someone doesn't get legally married, but for me the reasons of not being in a long-term-live-in relationship (having another adult in my kids' lives is the HUGE one) are the same practically and emotionally and in all other ways if we get married or not. So I understand the question of, "If you're going to have this long term relationship with someone you love, why would you consider marriage to be the point where you draw the line?" For me, 99% of the issues that are present in a marriage are present in a long-term relationship. I don't care if someone wants to get married or not, I just think it's a little bit of denial to think that not getting married is some kind of protection against being burned again.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EmseB said:

Right, but I'm just saying that financial and legal issues are going to be a concern either way, maybe slightly less so than if someone doesn't get legally married, but for me the reasons of not being in a long-term-live-in relationship (having another adult in my kids' lives is the HUGE one) are the same practically and emotionally and in all other ways if we get married or not. So I understand the question of, "If you're going to have this long term relationship with someone you love, why would you consider marriage to be the point where you draw the line?" For me, 99% of the issues that are present in a marriage are present in a long-term relationship. I don't care if someone wants to get married or not, I just think it's a little bit of denial to think that not getting married is some kind of protection against being burned again.

See above.  One isn't 'single' just because one is not married.

2 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

 

Maybe he’s just being sensible.

Let’s face it, at some point he probably thought his first wife was a keeper, and I’m sure he felt the same way about his second wife, as well... but he was wrong about them, so he's probably justifiably concerned that he might be in the same situation with this girlfriend in the future. Maybe he realizes he has a history of picking the wrong women, or maybe he picks wonderful women and he’s the one who’s the problem, but either way, remaining single may be a wise choice for him.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Again though this man didn't come across as if he is thrilled with the situation. He seemed a little sad even.

 

If that’s the case, he will probably change his mind at some point. Maybe his divorce was recent and he’s still feeling very raw about it, so his knee-jerk reaction is that he will never let himself get hurt that way again, or that he will never let anyone take financial advantage of him again, or he may have any number of other reasons for being wary of marriage. But who knows how he will feel in the future? He may have said the exact same thing after his divorce from his first wife... but then he married wife #2... so there could very well eventually be a wife #3, as well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

I have a number of friends who have not only allowed themselves to be that woman, but have CHOSEN to be that woman.  One did not want to lose rights to her ex-husband's pension benefits.  Another did not want to lose access to some benefits she received from her deceased husband that she would lose if she remarried.  One wanted to maintain the right to have the man leave her home immediately should the relationship sour and felt this was important to protect her children.  One did not want to open herself up to having to provide information (in particular tax returns that contained her salary) to the man's ex-wife in child support determination for children from a previous marriage.  Another had no interest in the contemporary institution of legal marriage.  One knew her parents would not approve of the marriage because of the race of the man and she just didn't want to deal with that.  Another would not be able to marry the man in her religion because he was divorced; she saw no reason for a state marriage if she could not marry within her faith.  

Except for rare exceptions I do not think this is a concern. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

To which I would refer back to the post below

 

 

Well, I disagree with that statement. When you own a CPA firm like we do, you see a lot of evidence that there are far more significant issues between married couples who are divorcing than between couples who break up after dating but living separately. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Scarlett said:
9 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

One other thing to consider.....perhaps an ex is CRAZY and the risk is not to the guy not wanting to get married, but perhaps to the person he is in a LTR with.  Someone who has been involved in domestic violence or in other complicated things.......may not want to have a spouse wrapped up in the craziness of an ex or crazy family members, etc etc.  

To which I would refer back to the post below

3 hours ago, EmseB said:

Right, but I'm just saying that financial and legal issues are going to be a concern either way, maybe slightly less so than if someone doesn't get legally married, but for me the reasons of not being in a long-term-live-in relationship (having another adult in my kids' lives is the HUGE one) are the same practically and emotionally and in all other ways if we get married or not. So I understand the question of, "If you're going to have this long term relationship with someone you love, why would you consider marriage to be the point where you draw the line?" For me, 99% of the issues that are present in a marriage are present in a long-term relationship. I don't care if someone wants to get married or not, I just think it's a little bit of denial to think that not getting married is some kind of protection against being burned again.

 

I can see how you, as a rational person, might think that the whole marriage vs LTR thing might not matter to an ex..............but to a CRAZY person.....to a person who isn't rational?  It could really be a THING.  Shoot too a whole lot of rational people, the difference between the two is pretty clear, so of course it's just as likely to be pretty clear to someone who is CRAZY.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

 

Well, I disagree with that statement. When you own a CPA firm like we do, you see a lot of evidence that there are far more significant issues between married couples who are divorcing than between couples who break up after dating but living separately. 

You handle accounting issues for people who are dating and living separately?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Again though this man didn't come across as if he is thrilled with the situation. He seemed a little sad even.

I get that. There are a lot of sad reasons for this. One can be quite saddened about the possibility that something will not ever happen for them again, sense of loss, of grief even. He may have some extenuating circumstances that dictate he not legally entangle himself with his girlfriend, and feel very down about that.

My niece in law went through something similar. In her case it was children. She reached a place where she realized she simply should not have children. She did something permanent, and doesn't regret it, yet felt some grief for a while about the loss of choice. Her health was the deciding factor so it is what it is, however, we all like having the choice and when that is stripped away, some melancholy feelings are natural.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

You handle accounting issues for people who are dating and living separately?

She would tell you but she 'd have to kill you.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Except for rare exceptions I do not think this is a concern. 

I do not know how common it is, but I know it was a concern of my friend (and at least one reason why she preferred not to marry a man she was dating with children from a previous marriage)  For her it didn't matter how common it was, but it was her reason.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

I do not know how common it is, but I know it was a concern of my friend (and at least one reason why she preferred not to marry a man she was dating with children from a previous marriage)  For her it didn't matter how common it was, but it was her reason.  

Right my dh's XW's new husband has always made such a big deal out of that....he says he will NEVER file taxes with his wife for fear of his income being used in some way.  He is an idiot though.  The state we live in would never go after him for his wife's kids support.  He just likes to feel important.  Not sure about your friend.

Edited to add---I am almost POSITIVE he doesn't know that she is paying dh child support.  

Edited by Scarlett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Except for rare exceptions I do not think this is a concern. 

Actually it is. There are states in which marital income, ie that of a step, is considered in child support determinations. If the child is perceived to have a higher level of living at one home, the other home can be ordered to pay up even though most people would not consider a step parent to be financially responsible in the matter. Courts don't always see it that way. My brother had to provide his second wife's tax returns to the courts when they married. Michigan courts though don't really look at live in income though because they consider these folks likely somewhat transient with household incomes not combined. However, they do consider household income including domestic partners for SNAP/BRIDGE. So it is very inconsistent.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

You handle accounting issues for people who are dating and living separately?

 

Yes. It’s not an uncommon thing at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

Actually it is. There are states in which marital income, ie that of a step, is considered in child support determinations. If the child is perceived to have a higher level of living at one home, the other home can be ordered to pay up even though most people would not consider a step parent to be financially responsible in the matter. Courts don't always see it that way. My brother had to provide his second wife's tax returns to the courts when they married. Michigan courts though don't really look at live in income though because they consider these folks likely somewhat transient with household incomes not combined. However, they do consider household income including domestic partners for SNAP/BRIDGE. So it is very inconsistent.

My understanding is it is considered in some cases only to determine the ability of the actual parent to pay. Step parent won't be responsible for the child support though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...