Why is marriage considered different than other relationships?

[clv0116]

I predict I will not get an answer ....

 

Simple logic suffices. Given that some relationships will progress to marriage and some will not, we can examine those that do so, and see what entering and exiting the state of being married signifies in relation to the changes in the commitment level of the couple involved.

 

My hypothesis is that marriage in those cases is the result of a desire to express increased commitment and divorce is the result of desire to express reduced levels of commitment.

 

I further believe that for those relationships that will never progress to marriage, there is a reason.

[complicatedlife]

Simple logic suffices. Given that some relationships will progress to marriage and some will not, we can examine those that do so, and see what entering and exiting the state of being married signifies in relation to the changes in the commitment level of the couple involved.

 

Logic is a science.

 

My hypothesis is that marriage in those cases is the result of a desire to express increased commitment and divorce is the result of desire to express reduced levels of commitment.

 

Your hypothesis? You do know that a hypothesis is an assumption, concession, or interpretation, right? NOT logic, which is what I asked for. You are simply reiterating your stance.

 

I further believe that for those relationships that will never progress to marriage, there is a reason.

 

Of course there is. They either 1. don't want to get married 2. don't share YOUR idea of marriage.

 

Like I wrote before: please back these things up with fact or your word, "logic". Not a hypothesis or a personal opinion. If you want to go back to saying that all of these things are your personal opinion, then cool. Otherwise, you are applying YOUR "logic" and personal theories to everyone else's. And sometimes, we're not all on the same page as we all as individuals and couples have our own sense of logic and opinion on commitment, marriage, relationships, and cohabitating.

[clv0116]

Would you consider a divorce in most cases to be a sign of increased commitment?

[complicatedlife]

"Simple logic suffices. Given that some relationships will progress to marriage and some will not, we can examine those that do so, and see what entering and exiting the state of being married signifies in relation to the changes in the commitment level of the couple involved."

 

 

LMFAOROTF!!! So you're suggesting a case study, then, wherein you follow around several couples, married and unmarried, watch their sexual and other intimate types of interaction, see how they progress through their relationship the, after years of gathering data, you're going to come back and present some REAL facts? Uh, yeah. Sounds good...

 

Uh...yeah! This is my point - no citations whatsoever. And then look at the answer to my question under your post! Father in Heaven!

[clv0116]

There are none so blind as those whose emotional scarring won't let them see. So to speak.

[complicatedlife]

Would you consider a divorce in most cases to be a sign of increased commitment?

 

Umm...what does a divorce have to do with an increase or decrease in commitment that a break-up doesn't in a non-marital 48 year relationship? They are both terminations of the relationship, not an increase or decrease in your "commitment stage" theory!!

 

Jesus - is it me? I am not getting this "logic". But maybe I'm not supposed to! Lol.

[complicatedlife]

There are none so blind as those whose emotional scarring won't let them see. So to speak.

 

Which one of us is emotionally scarred and how so - me or Donna? Because I take it that's it's one of us that you are referring to as we are the only two bothering to entertain you right now. Actually, I am trying to show you a different point of view that you really don't have to agree with (agree to disagree, there is such a thing!) - that you could acknowledge is indeed other people's view but choose not to.

 

My guess, Donna? He won't answer this one, either.

[clv0116]

Umm...what does a divorce have to do with an increase or decrease in commitment that a break-up doesn't in a non-marital 48 year relationship?

 

Nothing. They are both regressions to a state requiring lesser commitment. Name a state in a relationship that comes after marriage and requires deeper levels of commitment than marriage.

[complicatedlife]

What you want to do and are choosing to do is invalidate everyone's opinion that is not aligned with your own on this subject. That is...kinda not cool.

[pkn06002]

Would you consider a divorce in most cases to be a sign of increased commitment?

 

Why are you even discussing divorce in the same breath as commitment? Divorce is the END of the commitment.

[clv0116]

Why are you even discussing divorce in the same breath as commitment? Divorce is the END of the commitment.

 

Precisely. While not all relationships progress to marriage, nothing progresses past marriage because everything else is a regression.

[complicatedlife]

Nothing. They are both regressions to a state requiring lesser commitment. Name a state in a relationship that comes after marriage and requires deeper levels of commitment than marriage.

 

Ok - Merriam Webter and maybe Dictionary.com....they are two good sources to know. To regress is to....fall back from. It's not a dissolvement or termination. You can regress from cancer...doesn't mean you don't still have it lingering somewhere undetected. Lesser is just that - lesser. You could have used separation - that is lesser or a regression in a marriage.

 

To break-up or to divorce is a termination, not a regression or lesser commitment! By the way....marriage by it's definition has the word contract (and legal) in it - NOT commitment!

[complicatedlife]

Why are you even discussing divorce in the same breath as commitment? Divorce is the END of the commitment.

 

Ding, ding, ding!! Exactly.

[complicatedlife]

Why are you even discussing divorce in the same breath as commitment? Divorce is the END of the commitment.

 

PKN - are any of these posts continuing to help you in your original question at all?

[clv0116]

MW is not the sole arbiter of everything in all contexts. Marriage is almost a Universal constant in human society, even those without courthouses, lawyers and priests.

[complicatedlife]

And still the inescapable fact.

 

It's pointless, Donna. That's why I asked PKN if he is continuing to benefit from this thread.

[pkn06002]

PKN - are any of these posts continuing to help you in your original question at all?

 

I am starting to wonder what the point of the discussion is. Because now it has gone off into something that does not even come close to my original question.

[sunny20]

The only difference between marriage and a committed relationship (in my opinon) is the legal contract that binds two people together. It is often more of an incentive to treat one another well and work through issues together because you have made a very strong commitment to be with that person. My boyfriend and I are getting married so that we can establish how serious we are about one another as well as support each other legally in every aspect of our lives. Other than that, marriage is just as important as a serious relationship, especially one that you have been in for a long time. It is more difficult to get out of than simply breaking up, which can cause some people to feel trapped.

[DayDreamer75]

Personally, I think marriage or not all long-term live-in relationships encounter the same issues after time. There are researches that demonstrate that all long-term relationships go through turbulent times. All long-term relationships go through boring phase. Honestly, how often does it happen that 2 people who know each other for years and that see each other every day and live together have a lot of new information to discover about the other person?

 

The long-term relationships are missing the novelty, the excitement that the new relationships have. But success of any long-term relationship depends on the commitment.

 

Commitment means a lot of things to me. It means wanting to stay even when things get bad and you feel you can't take it any longer. Commitment means trying every day to make the relationship better through small things such as helping out, listening, making the other person priority. Commitment means understanding and accepting the differences of the other person. Of course, in order for the long-term relationship to work out, both people have to be committed. If only one person is committed it won't take you far any more.

 

Unfortunately, it's very easy in long-term relationships to feel trapped, to feel that you can do better because you will always miss something. You can't have 100%. I once read that good relationships are based on giving 60% and receiving 40%, it's never 50-50. Both sides should give 60% and should receive 40%.

 

Plus men and women are very different. Sometimes we have different expectations of each other and a relationship requires a great deal of work and maturity on both sides.

 

When you stay with the same person for 30 years whether you are married or not, it will never be the same. It's like being married / or being in a relationship with 5-6 different people over life time. I don't know about you but I am constantly changing . I am not who I was when I was 20, 25 or even 30. Gosh, I am not even who I was just 1-2 years ago! I daily live experiences that change me, that make me mature in some ways or make me uncover new feelings and interests. In the end of the day, I guess, I want a person who will stick to me no matter what. Even when I am unbearable. Even when I am sick and even when I am feeling so low that I have nothing to give in that moment.

[taylor]

You know as I read through the threads here on LS something popped into my head.

 

Why is a marriage considered so different than other relationships? You read thread after thread of how people (like me) lose that love, passion, desire for their spouse. Which in a normal (pre-marriage) relationship would be a signal that you move on. But divorce is ugly so people cheat or just stay and are unhappy.

 

I know you see those "special" couples that are that perfect match that last forever, but those seem more like the exception than the rule.

 

But why is marriage supposed to be so much different?

 

The relationship is not different. Both will have highs and lows; meet expectations and demonstate deficiencies; have varying degrees of commitment over time.

 

The main difference is how couples get IN and get OUT of a marriage as compared to a cohabitation.

 

Marriage - formal vow

Cohabitation - informal vow or no vow

 

Marriage - vow said before witnesses

Cohabitation - informal vow said between couple or understood between couple; or not said at all

 

Marriage - formal promise to God in some cases (believing a third entity exists in the union of the couple)

Cohabitation - no promise or informal promise made to God in private

 

Marriage - a public declaration of intent

Cohabitation - no public declaration of intent

 

Marriage - formal public declaration of intent to commit for life

Cohabitation - nor formal public declaration of intent to commit for life or no declaration of intent to commit for life

 

All married couples make a formal declaration of intent to commit to their partners for life. Cohabitating couples make no such formal declaration. They MAY make a private declaration but not always.

 

Some cohabitating couples declare undying love to each other and tell each other they want to build a lasting relationship. Some tell each other they will never leave. They make a commitment to each other. But they don't take the step to legalize their intent to commit; nor do they make a verbal promise in front of family, friends or God that they intend to commit for life. I have a cousin in a cohabitation relationship like this. He and his SO both wear rings to tell each other and the world that they are committed. Neither wants marriage because they've both BT,DT.

 

However, there are cohabitating couples who decide to live together without making any kind of commitment. There are some who start out living together because it's easier and more convenient that way to have sex and to pay the bills. They adopt a "Well, let's see where it goes" attitude. It's easy for these couples to walk away from each other when conflicts or tough times start making the relationship strained. I have a coworker friend like this. She walked after 15 months because she felt "used" for sex, babysitter, and income source.

 

There are other cohabitating couples who choose to live together with the intention of "someday" getting married, but, for some reason, never do. I have a brother who lived with his girlfriend for 7 years like this. When she finally "walked," I asked him why he never married her. He said, "Because I knew she would never stop spending money like water. We'd always be broke."

 

Cohabitating couples end their relationships by "walking." They don't necessarily have to deal with the psychological fallout of breaking a vow or their failure to follow thru with a promise to commit for life. Of course they mourn the end of the relationship but it's not the same.

 

Married couples have to sever the tie with a formal divorce. They have to deal with the psychological fallout of breaking a vow they made and failing at something they tried to do, ie, make a commitment for life.

[treyfan88]

Nice post, Taylor.

[carhill]

The death of the relationship *and* the death of the marriage. That's the best description I can use to delineate divorce from 'walking'. That's what it's felt like to me anyway.

[treyfan88]

Non married couples who have made life long vows to each other and find themselves in this predicament would have to deal with the same fallout.

 

Perhaps emotionally it would be the same fallout--but legally/socially the two would be different. There's the formality of a divorce that makes it different from a normal breakup. You need a lawyer and an official document declaring the end of your relationship, if you have kids, you have to go to court, you're forever "branded" as a divorcee which does in fact carry a stigma. If you just broke up--there wouldn't be a need for lawyers (usually) or courts or stigmas. It's easier legally/socially to break up from a long-time relationship than a married one.

[taylor]

marriage is the result of a desire to express increased commitment

 

 

I agree with this clv. Marriage is just one more step (albeit a huge step) a couple takes to show their desire and intent to commit for life with one partner. The key word is INTENT.

 

All married couples express intent when they sign a marriage license and when they declare their vows before witnesses.

 

Cohabitating couples don't necessarily express intent, ie., physically moving in together does not necessarily mean the couple has made a committment to spend the rest of their lives together.

 

 

 

I further believe that for those relationships that will never progress to marriage, there is a reason.

 

This was definitely the case in my brother's cohabitation relationship with his girlfriend of 7 years.

 

But my sister has 5 children with her partner. Some jokingly tell her she's more married than any married couple they know. My sister has endured alot of rough times but they stick together like glue.

 

I think in our society, we are conditioned to believe that marriage is the ultimate form of declaring love and commitment to another. And that if a couple doesn't marry (especially a young, never-married couple) it's assumed something is preventing them from taking that "ultimate" step.

 

However, I think with couples who have previously been married, there may be many other reasons not to do it again. These couples often blame the institution of marriage, rather than the fact that they just got into a bad relationship that made them feel trapped and that was hard to get out of. Marriage is only bad if your relationship is bad. If the married relationship had remained good and viable, the institution of marriage itself would have remained as something valuable and desireable.

 

And then I think of very old people who have lost their spouses after long-term marriages and have no desire to remarry. I think many of these elderly folks still value marriage but aren't willing to give their hearts again to someone else so completely because it still belongs to the SO they lost. A new marriage would be considered some kind of betrayal.

[complicatedlife]

Personally, I think marriage or not all long-term live-in relationships encounter the same issues after time. There are researches that demonstrate that all long-term relationships go through turbulent times. All long-term relationships go through boring phase. Honestly, how often does it happen that 2 people who know each other for years and that see each other every day and live together have a lot of new information to discover about the other person?

 

The long-term relationships are missing the novelty, the excitement that the new relationships have. But success of any long-term relationship depends on the commitment.

 

Commitment means a lot of things to me. It means wanting to stay even when things get bad and you feel you can't take it any longer. Commitment means trying every day to make the relationship better through small things such as helping out, listening, making the other person priority. Commitment means understanding and accepting the differences of the other person. Of course, in order for the long-term relationship to work out, both people have to be committed. If only one person is committed it won't take you far any more.

 

Unfortunately, it's very easy in long-term relationships to feel trapped, to feel that you can do better because you will always miss something. You can't have 100%. I once read that good relationships are based on giving 60% and receiving 40%, it's never 50-50. Both sides should give 60% and should receive 40%.

 

Plus men and women are very different. Sometimes we have different expectations of each other and a relationship requires a great deal of work and maturity on both sides.

 

When you stay with the same person for 30 years whether you are married or not, it will never be the same. It's like being married / or being in a relationship with 5-6 different people over life time. I don't know about you but I am constantly changing . I am not who I was when I was 20, 25 or even 30. Gosh, I am not even who I was just 1-2 years ago! I daily live experiences that change me, that make me mature in some ways or make me uncover new feelings and interests. In the end of the day, I guess, I want a person who will stick to me no matter what. Even when I am unbearable. Even when I am sick and even when I am feeling so low that I have nothing to give in that moment.

 

What a great post. I kept nodding my head while reading this. I did it even more with the bolded part.