Why is marriage considered different than other relationships?

[taylor]

When the purpose of getting married to begin with is to prove to the world that you are special enough for each other that you are DONE with sleeping with or loving other people?

 

The purpose of the marriage ceremony is to pledge to the other person that you intend to forsake all others.

 

We also make many other pledges of intent during a marriage ceremony...to love, honor, respect, and to care for each other in sickness and in health, in good times and bad..etc.

 

Many of the pledges of intent made during a marriage ceremony are broken over the years...some over and over again. And even though many of these pledges are broken, there are couples who choose to stay together because of the committment.

[taylor]

You could have been living together for 10yrs and one day decided you needed space and split up and gone your seperate ways only to get back together again to rediscover the meaning of your love for each other.

 

My point is your marriage agreement does not provide or prevent anything that a living arrangement when you are commited to one another does. The idea you feel more "special" or more "loved" because he decided to marry is my point exactly that psychologically the paper makes a difference.

 

Infidelity can happen in any relationship, married or cohabitating. No one owns the rights to that one.

 

And no, marriage is absolutely no guarantee that infidelity will not occur. I did not marry my husband to "guarantee" he won't cheat.

 

I married my husband believing it was our mutual intent to stay committed to each other NO MATTER WHAT PROBLEMS WE WOULD HAVE TO ENDURE...believing that committment was strong enough to overcome whatever obstacle threatened our marriage.

 

In our case, we did not address the tiny threats that accumulated over the years..we minimized their hazard potential. It wasn't until I started to develop feelings for another man that we realized how serious the threat was to the marriage and decided to take drastic action to strengthen our marriage against such threats.

 

Never in a million years would I, as a young girl walking down the aisle, ever have imagined that my husband and I would allow our marriage to deteriorate to a point where an affair could penetrate it. The fact that we both want to save our marriage in spite of everything is a sign of how much we value it and each other.

[taylor]

The purpose of declaring your commitment to your partner is to pledge to the other person that you intend to forsake all others.

 

I agree, but believe the commitment is even more encompassing.

 

When you commit, you pledge to stay with that person through thick or thin...no matter what life throws at you...infidelity, chronic illness, disability, infertility, addiction, etc.

 

And you commit to love, honor and respect that person which entails alot more than just pledging not to cheat. In essence, you are also pledging not to be physically, mentally or emotionally abusive; to respect their rights as human beings; to care for that other person as you would want to be cared for.

 

The purpose of the commitment isn't just to pledge that you won't sleep with anyone else. If it was, it would make for a very short wedding ceremony.

[Alma Mobley]

Skipping to end cuz there was .. well... too much.

 

If you have ever taken a course in sociology, you should know that marriage has historically been a bedrock in every society. This has carried over into ours. I am not saying it is wrong or right -- but you have to have some kind of family unit to build on, then worry about the "village" or community and keep going up and up and up until you reach the government. Marriage has historically been the starting mark for society. And it is the ideal form to raise children.

 

This is why I am in favor of gay marriage. It doesn't matter what form an intact family takes, as long as the children are raised in a loving, supportive home -- however mixed it might be. I am in favor of redefining it, even, if that is what it takes, and removing the religious aspect to "marriage."

 

Just my opinion.

[taylor]

If two people living together for 48 years, such as the long ago example in this thread, aren't "pledging to stay with that person through thick or thin ...commiting to love, honor and respect that person... then a marriage between them would have made no difference.

 

True. That is why I say what happens in the middle of a relationship doesn't matter. It's the same, regardless of whether you marry or you cohabitate. Relationships are going to run their course.

 

The only difference I see is the beginning and the end. Married couples express an intent. Cohabitating couples don't necessarily do that. You assume young marrieds are taking their vows seriously, or you hope that they are. You don't assume anything, expecially in the beginning, with cohabitating couples.

 

And again, whether a couple stays married for 48 years or cohabitates for 48 years, tells you nothing about the quality of their relationship. It only tells you that by virtue of their time together, they chose to stay committed. Committed does not necessarily mean happy.

 

The only difference between a long standing marriage and a long-standing cohabitation is the married couple made a formal, legal pledge to stay together; the cohabitating couple did not.

 

But it still begs the question...if your intention is to stay together for 48 years and you have faith that you will, why not marry? Why not make it legal?

 

I have a friend I exercise with. She and her fiance have been engaged for 13 years! A couple weeks ago they took the engagement off the table. Because he refused to "take it further"...to marriage...she ended the relationship. She now feels free to date, claiming the engagement held her "in limbo"..not married yet not free to date.

 

Why do you believe this woman was not satisfied to stay in a perpetual state of "engagement"? After all, she had been with this man for 13 years...

 

And what would marriage have changed for her? What would she have gained that she didn't already have?

[taylor]

There is a new thread this a.m. which illustrates clearly why marriage doesn't make a relationship. A committed relationship without marriage but WITH respect would be MUCH better than that illustrated in that thread.

 

Who says marriage makes a relationship?

 

There are no guarantees in any relationship.

 

People don't get married thinking it's a guarantee that they won't suffer hardships. They don't get married thinking it's going to be all sunshine and rainbows. They go into marriage expecting hardships and expecting that they will work together to endure them as best they can.

 

If a couple is looking for guarantees, they best not walk down the aisle because they will surely be disappointed. They should buy a home appliance instead...maybe a car...something with a warranty.

[taylor]

She must be the type to "psychologically" need the signature on the dotted line. Insecurity perhaps? Who knows? That's for her to answer.

 

As for a "legal" pledge, a "legal" pledge adds nothing to the quality of a relationship. I know this for a personal fact.

 

There are alot of insecure people who want that signature on that dotted line, IMO.

 

Also,I agree, a legal document adds nothing to the quality of a relationship. That's not what the document is designed for...to bring quality to the relationship.

 

But the legality of the marriage does add more cement to the intent...more psychological proof that a couple intends to take what they say seriously...like "put your money where your mouth is" attitude...."back up what you say you're planning to do" attitude.

 

The legal document also provides a couple with some legal benefits that nonmarrieds can't partake in.

[pollywag]

You ask some hard questions, pollywag.

 

I don't think as a young girl entering into marriage that I gave the "long term" much thought. I was in love and had faith that I had found the man I wanted to spend the rest of my life with.

 

Well that is the first obvious problem with getting married so young, anyone in their 20's and with very little life experience may think they have their life pathed out but without the experience of being in a long term committed relationship of experiencing their own ups and downs along in correlations to the ebbs and flows of the relationship, can't possible look at a marriage and think they know what they want. I can appreciate when you are in your 20's what seems to you one way is BOUND to change in time and as you gain life experience. I am not disputing that! I am all for that in fact. The 20's are for self-discovery and for stabalizing a future, rooting yourself as an independent adult if you will.

 

 

I felt SECURE in the knowledge that my husband did indeed love me completely because he wanted to MARRY me. If he did not want to marry, but wanted to cohabitate, I would have questioned his love and commitment to me. I would have felt like he did not love me ENOUGH to marry me.

 

I needed "proof" that he loved me enough and the only "proof" in my book was that he was willing to marry me. If he was willing to marry me, he was committed. If he wasn't willing to marry me, he wasn't committed. And if he wasn't committed, I wasn't going to put my heart on the line. I wasn't willing to take that risk. I wasn't going to hand a man my heart if he couldn't prove to me he was committed to me or loved me enough to marry me

 

 

I measured his level of commitment to me by his willingness to marry me. It made me feel secure that he loved me enough and was committed to me enough for me to hand my heart over to him.

 

As a young girl, this is how I thought. .

 

 

I know that, and totally understand that which is why a lot of really young women push for marriage so much. They need to be reassured they are good enough to be loved in front of the eyes of the world and this is why they are so intent on pushing the marriage issue. I get that!

 

That's sort of my point all along, marriage is "proof". Proof of what, I really don't get?

 

 

 

 

The purpose of declaring your commitment to your partner is to pledge to the other person that you intend to forsake all others.

 

Well you would think that, but for a lot of relationships there is nothing that will foolproof it, so that brings us back to the original question "Why is marriage considered different than other relationships" well the answer is simple, because as a society we place all the onus on "marriage" (as if it were an independent magical entity) to create the ideal relationship/union.

 

Many people find out the hard way that there are not fairies and little love elves that come along to magically create a loving relationship after the paper is signed, it's all up to you and your spouse. The illusion usually comes crashing once the problems of a relationship start to set in and the comforts of not having to fix things also sets in because now you have immunity or a "magical paper" to bound you together so no matter what, no one is going anywhere. And once there are kids involved, even more card blanche to do as you please if you want to throw in the towel in terms of the relationship between partners.

 

Taylor, your dam theory is a PERFECT example of what I am speaking.

 

In fact I would think a cohabiting relationship is more realistic in it's intent because there is always the fear the other person can get up and leave so that is a legitimate incentive to be cognisant of the relationship to always put your best foot forward with someone, not because a paper tells you that "no matter" you will be with each other forever but because you legitimately don't want to lose that person and want to work your hardest to keep your love on a growing path! It's almost like a marriage is signing a lease to be excused of feck ups and security for permanent companionship.

 

And guess what? The other day I read some stat about how 68% of people forgive infidelity in a marriage, they stay in a marriage and try to recover from the damage of betrayal. But at least 79% of those cases were NOT happy in the long run for staying together, the marriage was dead and the main culprit for staying in a marriage that is dead is fear.

 

So to be held accountable for the rest of you life for a decision you made as a "leap of faith" when you were 24 and because you needed proof that someone loved you enough, (my god when I was 24 I was making decisions that were just not the best for me, and I was a mature grounded kid) is a HUGE ordeal.

 

I can understand that over time you grow to love someone deeper and the companionship takes on a different meaning in long term love, but when there are so many people looking to get out without really getting out, you can't help but wonder the effects that paper has on people. It adds security someone won't leave you as easily if you feck up, but also provides reassurance that even if you do feck up and forsake your vows, you can't easily say "I am done I am walking away"

 

So a marriage license is security but security to what?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Never in a million years would I, as a young girl walking down the aisle, ever have imagined that my husband and I would allow our marriage to deteriorate to a point where an affair could penetrate it. The fact that we both want to save our marriage in spite of everything is a sign of how much we value it and each other.

 

Why would you? You were all of what, 21? Life seems like an open road lined with lush trees and eternal sunshine when you are 21, nothing is impossible. Of course you later find out it's not so like that, and that's how we end up with a very close second for women in terms of females being adulterous. Almost all women that cheat are the ones who were married very young and did not have much other experiences. It's almost understandable, you rushed into a facade of responsibility, all in the name of love with proof of personal worthiness, and then once you figure out what's what you were expected to keep up a good act.

[pollywag]

Bottom line, the person who invented marriage must have been 100 years old. They knew full well what humans are capable of and what long term relationships are like, there is no way people would put up with half of the crap they do in a non marriage relationship if it weren't for that magical paper. You could not come up with such a conniving plan to lock people in under the pretext of "I am special an ultimately loved" if you did not have a 100yrs of life experience behind you.

 

The concept of marriage must have been like the equivalent of the first infomercial. It seems like a great idea and you are gungho to do it and absolutely fall in love with product after you see the mini movie of how it can enrich your life, so you bite the bullet and order it. Next you want to shout to the heavens about the spectacular find including the steal of a price considering there is nothing like it out there. Once you get the product you realize it is not at all that you would hope it would be, so you try to return it because you come to the conclusion you were actually better off before you had, not to mention you could use the extra cash. In finding how incredibly arduous they make the return process, you give up and opt to keep it. You proceed to shove it under your bathroom sink because why throw it out, you DID pay for it. Every so many years when you spring clean you are tempted to throw it out but tuck it right back into the same spot hoping eventually some day you will find some use for it and fall in love with it the same way you did that first hazy morning you saw it for the first time on the tv screen. That day never comes...

[pollywag]

"Proof of personal worthiness." Wow. What a great description.

 

And that's what it was to me at 19 when I received my first proposal. I'm a big girl now, and I know what true commitment is all about. It has nothing to do with anyone but the two people who make that commitment to each other, even if it's only verbal and only between them without friends and family watching the high priced processional complete with fancy only-to-be-worn-once dresses and rented tuxes.

 

 

Have you ment my East Asian friend "Binder Dundat"?

[pkn06002]

Wow for a very simple question I really did start a conversation didn't I?

 

I especially like the last few posts they (personally) very much hit a nerve, especially yours pollywag.

[taylor]

Well that is the first obvious problem with getting married so young, butanyone in their 20's and with very little life experience may think they have their life pathed out but without the experience of being in a long term committed relationship of experiencing their own ups and downs along in correlations to the ebbs and flows of the relationship, can't possible look at a marriage and think they know what they want.

 

The thing is the 20's are a time many couples do get married. They are drawn to it like bees to honey.

 

a lot of really young women push for marriage so much. They need to be reassured they are good enough to be loved in front of the eyes of the world and this is why they are so intent on pushing the marriage issue.

 

I think it's more the case that they need to be reassured that the guy's feelings are genuine..before they give him their heart. At least this was what it was in my case. I had alot of self-worth. I needed proof that his love was worthy enough.

 

 

That's sort of my point all along, marriage is "proof". Proof of what, I really don't get?

 

Proof that the man is serious about his intent to commit to you.

 

 

 

Many people find out the hard way that there are not fairies and little love elves that come along to magically create a loving relationship after the paper is signed, it's all up to you and your spouse. The illusion usually comes crashing once the problems of a relationship start to set in and the comforts of not having to fix things also sets in because now you have immunity or a "magical paper" to bound you together so no matter what, no one is going anywhere. And once there are kids involved, even more card blanche to do as you please if you want to throw in the towel in terms of the relationship between partners.

 

I see your point here, pollywag. Couples (including my husband and I) get COMFORTABLE. We put the marriage on autopilot, thinking it is static..that it doesn't really change. And then when it does change, it's a huge surprise...as if it caught us off-guard. And then we realize the hard work that's necessary to keep an ever-changing marriage healthy and on track.

I don't think the marriage license itself is what makes couples get comfortable. I think it's the illusion that the marriage will remain in tact and static once you get settled into a particular rhythm and routine. You take for granted that it will remain unchanged. You don't realize that it truly is a living, growing, ever-changing entity that needs constant maintenance and tender loving care

 

 

Taylor, your dam theory

 

I thought for a split second here that you were swearing at me (lol)!!!:laugh:

 

 

In fact I would think a cohabiting relationship is more realistic in it's intent because there is always the fear the other person can get up and leave so that is a legitimate incentive to be cognisant of the relationship to always put your best foot forward with someone

 

Oooh, this line of thought makes me feel truly uncomfortable. As if FEAR of ABANDONMENT was the motivation to put your best foot forward, rather than the REMINDER OF A LOVING COMMITMENT.

 

 

And guess what? The other day I read some stat about how 68% of people forgive infidelity in a marriage, they stay in a marriage and try to recover from the damage of betrayal. But at least 79% of those cases were NOT happy in the long run for staying together, the marriage was dead and the main culprit for staying in a marriage that is dead is fear.

 

The thing is married couples in a dead marriage do have a choice. They can leave. It is a viable option. And there is a legitimate course of action to take to end the union...DIVORCE. It's there for the taking. No one holds a gun to anyone's head and tells them they have to stay married.

 

If someone is afraid to walk away from their relationship, it may be because they've been in it for so long they don't know anything else. It's a fear of the unknown. Or it's fear of financial hardship once they are on their own again.

 

But these fears can exist in both marriages and cohabitations that are long term.

 

 

So to be held accountable for the rest of you life for a decision you made as a "leap of faith" when you were 24 and because you needed proof that someone loved you enough, (my god when I was 24 I was making decisions that were just not the best for me, and I was a mature grounded kid) is a HUGE ordeal.

 

Yes, it is a huge ordeal. It's called marriage and should never be entered into lightly.

 

 

So a marriage license is security but security to what?

 

I really don't see the marriage license that I signed years ago being any kind of security. Like I said earlier, there are no guarantees in marriage, or any relationship, for that matter.

 

To me, the marriage license is just another step to demonstrate INTENT.

 

 

 

Why would you? You were all of what, 21? Life seems like an open road lined with lush trees and eternal sunshine when you are 21, nothing is impossible. Of course you later find out it's not so like that, and that's how we end up with a very close second for women in terms of females being adulterous. Almost all women that cheat are the ones who were married very young and did not have much other experiences. It's almost understandable, you rushed into a facade of responsibility, all in the name of love with proof of personal worthiness, and then once you figure out what's what you were expected to keep up a good act.

 

Would it surprise you to know that if I was set completely FREE tomorrow I would turn around and marry my husband again?

[taylor]

I think Polly meant the general "you," not you in particular.

 

Got it! Thanks.

[taylor]

You were all of what, 21? Life seems like an open road lined with lush trees and eternal sunshine when you are 21, nothing is impossible. Of course you later find out it's not so like that, and that's how we end up with a very close second for women in terms of females being adulterous. Almost all women that cheat are the ones who were married very young and did not have much other experiences. It's almost understandable, you rushed into a facade of responsibility, all in the name of love with proof of personal worthiness, and then once you figure out what's what you were expected to keep up a good act.

 

I don't think when marriage was invented the intent was for people to "keep up a good act" when disillusionment sets in.

 

But I do believe this does happen. I think many couples deny there are problems in their marriage for a long, long time. They are afraid to address them. They feel guilty for not feeling happy in the marriage. They feel guilty for "falling out of love" when they promised their spouse they would never do that. They trudge along hoping the problems will just go away or that they will one day be able to tolerate them.

 

But the problems don't go away. They only get worse..and then unbearable.

 

But the fault is not with the marriage certificate. The fault is with the partners who CHOOSE not to address the problems or who CHOOSE not to leave the marriage by divorce.

 

No one says anyone has to put on an act. Certainly that is the last thing a spouse wants his or her partner to do. It makes the marriage a lie.

 

Married couples should be true to their marriage...either live it the way it was intended or get out of it. Commit, Recommit or Divorce.

 

I, of all people, understand the challenge here. Prior to my EA, I was not living my marriage as it was intended...nor was I getting out of it. I was in a gray dead zone. A very unhealthy, dangerous place to be.

 

Best to get off the fence, make the marriage real, or get out of it.

 

I hope you are reading PKN....

[pollywag]

I don't think the marriage license itself is what makes couples get comfortable. I think it's the illusion that the marriage will remain in tact and static once you get settled into a particular rhythm and routine. You take for granted that it will remain unchanged. You don't realize that it truly is a living, growing, ever-changing entity that needs constant maintenance and tender loving car

 

The psychology of what it represents. It's almost a placebo if you think about it.

 

 

 

I thought for a split second here that you were swearing at me (lol)!!!:laugh:

 

YOU, YOUUUUUU AND YOUR DAM THEORY, TAYLOR!!! (waving fist)

 

 

:lmao::lmao: that was funny. I had ran spell check and it had changed it to "damn" initially!

 

 

Oooh, this line of thought makes me feel truly uncomfortable. As if FEAR of ABANDONMENT was the motivation to put your best foot forward, rather than the REMINDER OF A LOVING COMMITMENT.

 

I see what you are saying. I guess it's all in how you look at it, glass half empty or full...I was thinking more along the lines of fear of failure and the repercussions of what failure brings, which in this case would be heart ache and pain, not so much fear of abandonment. Is that not reasonable incentive to stay on track?

 

It's like being at a job on contract basis with the promise of long term employment, benefits, and the possibility of making even more money vs being in the same job for 10 yrs doing the exact same thing not being motivated for more because you know the check is in your account every 15 days anyway. Some people see work as security others strive for growth. For some people it takes security to stagnate while others see the promise as an opportunity to continually progress. It's human nature I

think....

 

 

Would it surprise you to know that if I was set completely FREE tomorrow I would turn around and marry my husband again?

 

 

Doesn't surprise me, it makes perfect sense. For example I could look back to how my life has been say for the last 10 yrs and even given the choices I made that at times may not have been the "most beneficial" in the grand scheme of things, if given the chance to do it all over again I would do it exactly the same. It's what you know. But perhaps if I had an insight into how my life would have improved by making different choices, I might think differently.

[pollywag]

Wow for a very simple question I really did start a conversation didn't I?

 

I especially like the last few posts they (personally) very much hit a nerve, especially yours pollywag.

 

 

thanks pkn! It's definitely an interesting topic for discussion, thanks for initiating it.

 

 

And yes to the other posts about "you" I did mean the general "you"