Why don't men want to get married?

[frankie881388]

I find it strange that people keep talking about wives cheating. I always thought it was the men who cheated the most.

 

It's because you only want to hear men cheat. By the way, when a woman put herself out there, she won't have a problem getting multiple men in the same time that it would take a man to try to get one laid. It is just the way it is. A man has to work hard to get a woman.

[frankie881388]

But this isn't true. I know many women, myself included, who have lost much more than their husbands financially due to the divorce. Many women have had to raise their kids by themselves, without spousal support.

 

I think my ex paid about 10% or the cost of raising my kids after the divorce. My mom paid about 40% (with her money that she made working), and I paid the remaining 50%.

 

If you are so worried about losing money financially from the divorce, then why don't you marry a successful woman? There are many women who are making a lot of money. My sister's husband got to stay home and raise the kids for almost 10 years before going back to work. He still doesn't make as much money as my sister due to having stayed home and taking care of the kids for 10 years. My mom makes a lot more money than her second husband. In fact, she now makes a lot more money than my dad ever made, who by the way refused to pay my mom one cent in child support. Yes. There are ways to get out of paying child support if you really don't want to pay it.

 

The thing is my boyfriend deep down wants to pay child support. He wants his daughter to live in a good neighborhood, go to private school, and have good things. It's not all about the ex-wife, it's also about the kids. When my dad refused to pay child support, he also refused to pay for us kids.

 

Anyway, what I'm finding out is that the men who don't want to get married have very little confidence, both in themselves and in the women they are with.

 

Gee, where are you from? So any man can just go out and marry a successful woman? Let me tell you something. A successful woman would still go marry a even more successful man! You advertised and bragged a lot about how the women in your family are making it to the top and you put down the men in your life for making less and not paying this and that all because you had a divorce. Well, if you women are making so much more than why would you need to mention custody money from the men. We are talking about average joe out there making payments here.

[stillafool]

[

QUOTE=Sexyshannon79;2104672]

but what about those women who gave up their careers to stay home and raise children, clean house and take care of their husbands, for no pay and no pension? How often do men quit their jobs to do that? How many men take a paternity leave when expecting? I had to quit my job when I had children, which meant my career was at a standstill while my husband's career was in full swing. I was still at the same place while my husband moved forward in his career. Over time, I slowly became obsolete in my field and my husband shone in his.

 

Now, after two children and days of Play-Doh, diapers and Barney, I was no longer interesting or attractive to him and he started seeing other women. Never mind that I spent my days cleaning his house, washing his clothes, cooking his meals and sitting at home with his baby on my swollen breast while changing diapers on two babies.

 

After reading this the big question is 'WHY IN THE HELL DO WOMEN WANT TO GET MARRIED????' Ladies WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE before you go around begging these guys to marry you. Look at what's in store for you. Certainly not a good time that's for sure.

[samspade]

CAn someone please shed some light on this? It seems men and women's views on marriage can be so different? I have been withmy b/f for 2 years now, he is 42 I am 33. When we first met, it was quite clear he was anti marriage, but as our relationship has developed he has said a few things that have offered a glimmer of hope to me, i.e. the next time you will meet my parents again will be at your wedding, or, do you like diamonds, or, if I ever was going to get married it would be with you...is it wrong for me to have thought he was warming up to the marriage idea?

 

We met some friends we had not seen for a few months and the first thing they said, are you married yet? This led to THE conversation, which resulted in him saying, I am sure there are many men out there that would marry you but I am not one of them. I am stunned.

 

I love him with every fibre of my being, he says he has not loved anyone the way he loves me. But without him showing the world that he wants to be my life partner, where am I? I can only conclude that he thinks there is a flaw in our relationship that a marriage would make difficult to undo in teh form of a divorce. He thinks I am beautiful, sexy, a good homemaker, funny, supportive, intelligent and he said he will never get a better offer than me.

 

Then what is wrong? I really do not know whether I should invest more of me into this if he thinks it will break one day anyway...Any advice?

 

Because there is nothing you can have in a marriage that you can't have outside of one.

[carhill]

As long as the couple is willing to spend the legal fees to make the desired rights and privileges which marriage intrinsically confers, then I agree there is nothing different legally between the two states of relationship (living together vs marriage). Emotional differences are entirely different and completely fluid and situational.

 

Brief example, using my mom as a guinea pig....

 

She's a widow and has a boyfriend and they live together but are unmarried and have no legal ties. She has a stroke while alone in public and is transported to emergency and is operated on to save her life. She is comatose on a ventilator in ICU. Who makes decisions about her health care as she is not able to? Who handles matters of business for her while she is incapacitated? Her boyfriend is living in her house, which remains in her name as it is hers and her dead husband's. How is this handled?

 

If she was married, all such things would have been handled by the stroke of a pen. As it is, she would need to have a myriad of legal documents established prior giving her boyfriend authority to act on her behalf and for her benefit. The hospital would look to myself, her son, as the next of kin and person of interest, barring any documents to the contrary. Who would relevant survivor benefits go to, if she were to die? It's common for a spouse to receive survivor benefits. Less common for a domestic partner, though that is changing. Examples abound, in all facets of the couple's life together, and in death.

 

Again, none of this is emotional or even relevant to a loving relationship, but it is relevant to the differences between married and unmarried states, at least in jurisdictions I'm familiar with.

 

I'm personally not afraid of (nor have any compelling reasons not to) getting married so have no irons in this fire. IME, most of men's reasons are based in financial fears, which can easily be addressed prior. The rest is their psychology. You're not going to change a man's psychology if he's marriage-averse. It's who he is. Put whatever lipstick you want on it; that's the way it is.

[crazzycat]

As long as the couple is willing to spend the legal fees to make the desired rights and privileges which marriage intrinsically confers, then I agree there is nothing different legally between the two states of relationship (living together vs marriage). Emotional differences are entirely different and completely fluid and situational.

 

Brief example, using my mom as a guinea pig....

 

She's a widow and has a boyfriend and they live together but are unmarried and have no legal ties. She has a stroke while alone in public and is transported to emergency and is operated on to save her life. She is comatose on a ventilator in ICU. Who makes decisions about her health care as she is not able to? Who handles matters of business for her while she is incapacitated? Her boyfriend is living in her house, which remains in her name as it is hers and her dead husband's. How is this handled?

 

If she was married, all such things would have been handled by the stroke of a pen. As it is, she would need to have a myriad of legal documents established prior giving her boyfriend authority to act on her behalf and for her benefit. The hospital would look to myself, her son, as the next of kin and person of interest, barring any documents to the contrary. Who would relevant survivor benefits go to, if she were to die? It's common for a spouse to receive survivor benefits. Less common for a domestic partner, though that is changing. Examples abound, in all facets of the couple's life together, and in death.

 

Again, none of this is emotional or even relevant to a loving relationship, but it is relevant to the differences between married and unmarried states, at least in jurisdictions I'm familiar with.

 

I'm personally not afraid of (nor have any compelling reasons not to) getting married so have no irons in this fire. IME, most of men's reasons are based in financial fears, which can easily be addressed prior. The rest is their psychology. You're not going to change a man's psychology if he's marriage-averse. It's who he is. Put whatever lipstick you want on it; that's the way it is.

your truth, i agree with you

[hilljilly]

the answer is because men are taught their whole lives to be choosy about their partners and not to go into something so serious as marriage lightly. they are taught to protect their finances and be certain a person is worthy of marriage rather than just marrying whoever comes along. women are taught that they are "supposed" to get married one day.

 

i think little girls should be told the same thing little boys are told. men have it right. women we are too trusting we end up in marriages that make us miserable and we don't leave and i'm not gonna sugarcoat the reason most women won't leave regardless of what it is that makes them unhappy in their marriage is simple - it's money.

 

if i could go back in time i would NEVER have gotten married. biggest mistake i ever made.

 

you can't fault men for protecting themselves and their assets, being married is not all it's cracked up to be but i guess most people wouldn't believe it until they see it for themselves.

[Dexter Morgan]

the answer is because men are taught their whole lives to be choosy about their partners and not to go into something so serious as marriage lightly.

 

actually I think its women that are taught to be choosy.

 

I can tell you, as a man, I never want to be married again after already being married and divorced. that is crap i don't want to deal with ever again. I want to be able to get up and walk out next time I have to deal with crap without having to get a lawyer involved.

[clv0116]

If she was married, all such things would have been handled by the stroke of a pen. As it is, she would need to have a myriad of legal documents established ...

 

 

I understand your point but it's hardly a myriad. Less than 1 dozen would be more than sufficient I'd imagine. Probably about the same number of signatures as buying a new car on credit.

[carhill]

Well, since my story, sans the boyfriend, is actually true, and I do know exactly the legal fees and complexity involved, and having been married, I can compare and opine that getting married is much simpler and much more cost-effective, irrespective of papers and signatures. Of course, the marriage exit tax is far higher

[clv0116]

Well, since my story, sans the boyfriend, is actually true, and I do know exactly the legal fees and complexity involved, and having been married, I can compare and opine that getting married is much simpler and much more cost-effective, irrespective of papers and signatures. Of course, the marriage exit tax is far higher

 

Durable power of attorney, Will, and what? Leaving children out of it I'm drawing a blank but then I'm not a lawyer.

[carhill]

DPOAF, DPOAH, Trust, Will are the general requirements. I've found that, with the government especially, such documents are not recognized without court intervention or going through a completely separate procedure essentially paralleling the original action.

 

Took me about 2 years to obtain replacement successor trustee status and about 3 years to obtain fiduciary status with the VA. I'm still working on Social Security and Medicare, two other government agencies which don't recognize customary legal documents. I would say the easiest agency to work with so far has been MedicAid.

 

If similar circumstances had befallen my wife, everything would have been straightforward, with simple documentation of our marriage and directives. We would speak as one unit. I did this, as she had medical procedures early on in our marriage in which I participated.

[clv0116]

DPOAF, DPOAH, Trust, Will are the general requirements.

 

So separate DPOA for ? Seriously asking here. I've known people who were NOT romantically involved (nor did they have to interact with the VA, in fairness, nor were they in CA) who had a medical DPOA and had no issues with directing medical care as long as the 'relatives' stayed out of it.

 

Will seems straight forward.

[stillafool]

the answer is because men are taught their whole lives to be choosy about their partners and not to go into something so serious as marriage lightly. they are taught to protect their finances and be certain a person is worthy of marriage rather than just marrying whoever comes along. women are taught that they are "supposed" to get married one day.

 

i think little girls should be told the same thing little boys are told. men have it right. women we are too trusting we end up in marriages that make us miserable and we don't leave and i'm not gonna sugarcoat the reason most women won't leave regardless of what it is that makes them unhappy in their marriage is simple - it's money.

 

if i could go back in time i would NEVER have gotten married. biggest mistake i ever made.

 

you can't fault men for protecting themselves and their assets, being married is not all it's cracked up to be but i guess most people wouldn't believe it until they see it for themselves.

 

 

Finally, another woman sees what I see. If girls only knew what "real marriage" was all about they wouldn't be busting at the seams to walk down the aisle. It's definitely no cake walk for women and that's for sure. Their hormones trick them into wanting to get married. Damn hormones!

[carhill]

So separate DPOA for ? Seriously asking here. I've known people who were NOT romantically involved (nor did they have to interact with the VA, in fairness, nor were they in CA) who had a medical DPOA and had no issues with directing medical care as long as the 'relatives' stayed out of it.

Depends on jurisdiction and who the provider is. I needed separate POA's to manage actual health care and health care benefits from the various entities. A regular DPOAH has worked fine with hospitals and doctors. A DPOAF facilitates non-health financial matters, but, again, some jurisdications have their own requirements and procedures which weren't known until broached. About the only action left would be conservatorship, but managing successor trustee comes close. I'm just not overseen by the courts.

 

The key is, and I found this out by painful experience, one can't merely assume a couple pieces of paper with a signature guarantee them anything. I've paid enough lawyer fees and heard enough "we don't recognize that" to know this. If an entity refuses to cooperate, the only successful remedies IME have been either playing their game or taking them to court. Neither is cheap in terms of money and/or time. We're talking about the totality of management, not just health care.

 

My situation is complicated by the incompetence of the principal, but this could obtain to a cohabiting couple as well. Probably the best way to understand the experience is to go through it, though I wouldn't wish it upon anyone.

 

Perhaps we should start a separate thread on the subject, as the details have little to do with men's motivations to *not* get married.

[California]

Because there is nothing you can have in a marriage that you can't have outside of one.

 

Yes there is, quite a lot in fact. For one thing, the expression of Committment. It is the man (or woman) who is taking the risk--a big, idealistic risk--to say "You and only You" I want to Committ to.

 

We only always hear about how marriage does people in. It gets such a bad rap largely, I believe, not because of "marriage" but the general flakiness of people. There is a "cheapness" to society that is pervasive.

 

Marriage is and can be beautiful. There is a difference between the man who grants a woman the title of "My wife" versus someome being "the girlfriend". It is a mark of pride (it should be). I have seen and heard from friends who were happil and passionately married well on for years.

 

And there is something about wanting to be idealistic, wanting to be responsible, wanting to be dedicated, wanting to be exclusive that is rather nice in human character.

 

For all the problems of marriage, I truly do believe in it. It should be a grand story and adventure.

 

Of course, divorce should be an option where things just do not work out. The situations where a person is abused emotionally, or has been betrayed without his or her being aware of it for the long haul are truly sad. They give marriage a rotten name. I absolutely sympathize.

 

I also believe a man should not be taken to the cleaners after a divorce. That is just barbaric and makes women in general look terrible (assuming that it takes two to tango).

 

What the secret of marriage is I do not know. But I will say, I think less is more between a man and woman somehow. Less familiarity, less chatter, less moods, less problems. Mystery is a huge factor in attraction. And I know that a man who always remains a bit aloof, a bit of the stallion still needing to be tamed will always ALWAYS have his girl's attention.

 

California

[clv0116]

Perhaps we should start a separate thread on the subject, as the details have little to do with men's motivations to *not* get married.

 

As a society we should sort this out and make the legal concept of marriage obsolete.

[carhill]

Yeah, I'd like to end the government but that's not likely gonna happen either

[Suzzie]

If you want to be married and he doesnt then either you accept things as they are or walk.

 

I'd be inclined to walk myself as men like him who give you mixed messages tend to be mixed up inside. The only person who can answer if or why or why not he does or does not want to marry is him. Perhaps you are better off asking him face to face, if its not want you want to hear then perhaps youre just getting yourself into more and more heartache by continuing. You cant change anyone.

 

If its important to you then walk. It not just what he wants, what about what you want?

[RickyAvon]

I came here today because I was doing a search on 'marriage and pressure.' At 29, not only is everyone around me 'sitting down in musical chairs of marriage,' but my own girlfriend of 5 years (she's now 25) has been pushing the gas on this for 2+ years as her own social circle begins nesting.

 

But to the point of this specific post...

 

I believe alot of misunderstandings about marriage and peoples' attitudes toward it come from much ignorance about our past. In terms of social rankings, white land-owners were the supreme rulers of the US. I won't get into how it was before the 1700's, etc, as then marriages were arranged, women were property, and men could do as they pleased. Even then, white land-owning men were the top of the totem pole.

 

From there white non-land owning men were just a touch above women, who were just above black men and immigrants and finally black women or black immigrants occupied the final rung of the ladder. Such people had no rights. No right to vote. Land was given out by decree of the crown, nepotism, favoritism, or victory in battle in high-ranking positions.

 

WOMEN NEEDED MEN, if only because of status and protection. The laws of the land at those times were not created for the 99% of the population who exist today, but the rich landing owning gentry who sought protection from the crown and their various scuffles, as well as "no taxation without representation" (they wanted a say in the international affairs of the world since the new colonies were making so much $ for the crown, but getting us involved in affairs). The early colonies were much like early cuba was to the US when we kicked spain out, a profit center that we protected and set up to benefit us with little regard for the people there; we just needed expanded markets to sell domestic goods.

 

Marriage is NOT the same interation that it was, yet many men have very bitter views of marriage. Conversely, many women today, particularly young ones, expect to be married, while providing very little. A great many girls have had colleged partially or fully paid for. Many are able to date many men and get by, live with a man early on, or just simply go from Daddy to bf to marriage without contributing as much as her forebears did.

 

This may not be the case with women here in the forums, but it is most certainly a growing case of our current and future generations of consumer women who seek high-faluting lifestyles that are unsustainable for MOST of the population.

 

I see marriage as a viable means to children, the pen-ultimate expression of committment, and a celebration of one's religious values, yet most women really only cross the first base, children. Many women who presume to be religious have no followed their faith as they should (i.e. be a good ___, no premarital sex, etc). Moreover, many women are rather 'used up.' They've smoked or drank excessively, partied, been trained by sports teams, are drama queens, or simply have no concept of femininity and committment.

 

To modern women (whatever code you believe in), committment is doing what she says, period. It is SHE who directs the man in pushing when it is time to marry, unless she is the perfect blend of Martha Stewart and Eva Longori (or Jenna Jameson).

 

I would submit that in a committed relationship, alot has already been given or exchanged. Beyond that, the complexities of law, government and finance come into play and normally they are only concerns a man has. I have witnessed how divorce ruins families, most notably women coming out the worse off, but the men should never have entered it as they did and I am assuming were likely pressured to be pushed into marriage.

 

With that ring and the law, a modern western woman has free reign to be nuts and know the complete hassel that it is to unravel the problems that come with fixing or annuling a marriage.

 

In my opinion, the ONLY reason to do marriage is for PURELY romantic reasons today. If it is not the penultimate expression of love and committment, I would scrap the whole idea. The thought that time is up, or that no good women will be available, or everyone is doing it, or you've been together long enough is unacceptable. Too much is stake in a marriage. Only you can make you happy; there's no ONE person; a person is not to be owned through love or relationships.

 

If a woman came to me, stating that she would be with me NO matter the title of our relationships or bond, I'd immediately throw the world at her. Instead, women come calling for marriage and barely get that. I believe the greater motivator of men is witnessing a selfless woman who is devoted no matter what, who asks for nothing, but gives everything, and in turn she is given the world. When you beg, nag or request, you set a ceiling upon your demands and rarely get what you ask for, often less, and not in a timely manner.

 

RickyAvon

[stillafool]

In my opinion, the ONLY reason to do marriage is for PURELY romantic reasons today. If it is not the penultimate expression of love and committment, I would scrap the whole idea.

 

I would have to agree with you on this!