Why some women are not wife material

[Toots]

Why some women are not wife material

 

November 22 2011 at 12:00pm

By FRANCIS CHILDS

 

 

REUTERS

The sister-in-law to the future King of England possesses an undeniable sex appeal, not to mention perhaps the most lusted-after derriere in the world.

Related Stories

More women proposing, study finds

London - We’ve all heard - or perhaps experienced - a version of this story: man meets woman, they fall in love, date for a while, move in together. They frame photos, arrange them on the walls, pick out furniture, make a nest. A few years on, marriage is on her mind. But she puts no pressure on him - he’ll ask when he’s ready, right? He doesn’t. She doesn’t push it. The relationship stagnates. Man leaves woman. Man swiftly marries subsequent girlfriend, leaving ex mystified and heartbroken.

 

This is what happened to Laura Hall, a 34-year-old financial adviser from London. Laura had been living with Douglas for four years when he walked out. “I just let the relationship drift on, hoping he’d pop the question in his own time. But he never did. I was devastated when he left.”

 

And she was even more devastated when she heard he’d proposed to his next girlfriend within a matter of months.

 

But why her and not Laura? Does it mean there are some women who are acceptable as a girlfriend, but not really quite the ticket when it comes to getting hitched?

 

A recent celebrity example that comes to mind is Pippa Middleton. With her long, luscious hair and legs to die for, Pippa is one of the most eligible women on the planet. The sister-in-law to the future King of England possesses an undeniable sex appeal, not to mention perhaps the most lusted-after derriere in the world.

 

Yet, according to reports, Pippa’s 18-month romance with Old Etonian Alex Loudon recently ended because his family considered her not quite “wife material” - a phrase guaranteed to make female hackles rise. In this supposedly egalitarian age, is there really such a thing as “wife material”?

 

Well, yes, according to John Molloy, author of Why Men Marry Some Women And Not Others. Molloy claims there are definite types of women that men marry - and, equally definitely, women they do not.

 

Molloy interviewed more than 3,500 people in his quest to discover exactly why men pop the question to some of us and not others.

 

When he asked men who were about to be married to describe their fiancees, only 20 percent said “gorgeous” or “sexy”. The others focused on their future wives’ personalities. One man summed up his future bride as “the kind of woman you can take anywhere and be proud of” - a sentiment echoed by many other men in the course of Molloy’s research. More than 30 percent of the men Molloy interviewed who were about to get married said their family’s positive opinion of their future bride had helped them decide she was “the one” - and most parents aren’t looking for an incredibly sexy or very attention-seeking spouse for their son.

 

There’s another good reason why men eschew sexiness in favour of other qualities when they look for a wife.

 

“Men don’t look for very sexy wives, because - at a very basic animal level - they want to be sure the children they are raising are their own,” explains psychologist Dr Jane McCartney, an expert in human behaviour and relationships. “Men are attracted to qualities such as loyalty, discretion and kindness when they look for a wife. Feisty and flirty is fine for a girlfriend. It’s just not what men want in life partners.”

 

Just look at feisty, flirty, gorgeous Cameron Diaz. Men fall for her in their droves, yet she always ends up single again. If we believe Molloy”s thesis, Cameron’s just too sexy - on some deep, evolutionary level, the men she dates don’t believe she’ll stick around.

 

But while men apparently don’t want sexy wives, they do want women who take care of themselves. Molloy found women who are slim and well-groomed with nice hair and nails are prized, although those who wear revealing, attention-grabbing clothes are not.

 

It all sounds a bit schizophrenic: men want to marry women who are sexy and fit, but not too sexy and fit.

 

Another reason women find themselves without a ring on their finger, Molloy says, is that many simply do not push hard enough for it. He found 73 percent of the wives-to-be he spoke to had forced the issue themselves rather than waiting for a romantic proposal.

 

This rings true for Laura Hall. “I should have been clear about how much marriage meant to me,” she says now. “I was living with him, doing all the things a wife does, but without a ring on my finger. He could just walk out and in the end that’s exactly what he did.”

 

While she concedes things had become stale between them, she says it happened precisely because the relationship had lost its momentum - the explicit acknowledgement of commitment that typically leads to engagement, then marriage, then children.

 

Experts say this is common when couples live together. According to Dr Joel Block, psychologist and author of the book The Real Reasons Men Commit, women need to be wary of serial co-habiters. If a man has had more than one live-in relationship, he is less likely to marry than a man who hasn’t or who is in his first co-habiting relationship.

 

If you are with a man who has lived with someone before and you want to get married, you need to say so and stick to your guns early on in the relationship. Make your wishes known.

 

It worked for Gemma Jones, 30, a childminder from Kent. “I lived with Mark for a year and then I told him I wanted to get married. He was a bit fazed at first and came out with lines like ‘it’s only a bit of paper’ but I explained that marriage was important to me and to my family, who are Roman Catholics.”

 

“Mark agreed to set a date when he understood that I really wanted to get married and that I wouldn’t be happy if the relationship just carried on,” she explains.

 

Research also demonstrates that men prize women who don’t cook and clean for them as a matter of course. As one man in the survey ungallantly put it: “No one marries a servant.” It seems that men are attracted to women who are aware of their own self-worth.

 

But nowadays isn’t co-habiting merely a sensible step to take before vowing to spend the rest of your life together?

 

Psychologists agree that moving in together is fine - as long as both people are clear about where they think it will lead. “Simply put, most men place marriage on a higher level of commitment than just living together,” explains Block.

 

“While women might think that living together is a step towards marriage, many men view it as a way of buying time - or worse, a good option until they find their real soulmate.”

 

John Molloy is equally blunt. “The statistics say most men propose after 22 months. For the next three-and-a-half years, the prospects of marriage gradually diminish. After seven years, the likelihood you’ll get married is virtually nil,” he says.

 

“If you want to get married, statistically speaking, you should start to look seriously for a husband at 28.”

 

Molloy also advises a little lowering of standards. Some women never get married, he says, because they are simply too fussy. Of the women he interviewed who were about to get married, 20 percent admitted disliking their future husbands when they first met them. “Of course, you should have standards, but it sometimes pays to give men a second or even third chance,” Molloy advises.

 

Web designer Nicki Carter from Reading, who at 41 has never been married, worries that now she never will. She ruefully admits: “I was probably too picky. I finished with one boyfriend because I thought he wasn’t focused enough on his career. And I finished with another one because I decided he was too possessive.

 

“In fact, he was madly in love with me, handsome, funny, well-educated and kind. He wanted to marry me but I wasn’t interested. I always thought I could do better and now I wonder if I was wrong.”

 

Joel Block argues that there is no such thing as perfect. “I think that women who are growing older as they search for Mr Right should reconsider. Would finding Mr ‘Almost Right’ be better than a single life?” he asks.

 

For some it wouldn’t. “Some women just don’t want to get married. They aren’t the marrying type,” Molloy says.

 

Whether Pippa is or isn’t remains to be seen. Certainly, she will have no shortage of eligible suitors queuing up to replace Alex Loudon and, at 28, she’s hardly left on the shelf.

 

However, she may well be rueing the day that, dressed in that plunging, cleavage-enhancing scarlet dress, she allowed herself to be photographed being hoisted in the air by her ex-boyfriend Charlie Astor on the dance floor at the Boodles ball. - Daily Mail

 

“The statistics say most men propose after 22 months. For the next three-and-a-half years, the prospects of marriage gradually diminish. After seven years, the likelihood you’ll get married is virtually nil.”

 

I don't know anybody who felt they knew their partner well enough to get married after 22 months! Would you marry someone you knew for under two years? Did you?

[Tayla]

Interesting article. Gave food for thought that a late bloomer in love may well be left to the side walk. Ahh well, life is too short to have "marriage" or the attempt at it be the goal in life....IT is a journey and its a path I chose to not go down a second time. I have met men who delay marriage til there late 40's /50's and they seem to have a real knack for staying put in it. The concept is, when the foundation has been layed the burdens of marriage can be sustained as well as the over abundance contained there in.

 

To answer the OP question, only one man comes to mind that had he proposed I would have been in for the long haul. For his sake he chose a different path . No harm no foul, simply a choice .

[smokey bear]

I agree this does sound a bit far fetched, i dont think you truly know someone until you live with them and dont think you ahould do until about 18months onwards.

 

I dont think 2 years is long enough to truly know someone and is why the divorce rate is so high.

[make me believe]

“The statistics say most men propose after 22 months. For the next three-and-a-half years, the prospects of marriage gradually diminish. After seven years, the likelihood you’ll get married is virtually nil.”

 

I don't know anybody who felt they knew their partner well enough to get married after 22 months! Would you marry someone you knew for under two years? Did you?

 

Actually, that statistic seems accurate from what I've seen. My husband proposed a week after our one year anniversary and we were married 8 months after that. From what I see in my social circle, the couples that get married do so after dating for about 2 years. And then there are the couples like my best friend and her boyfriend, where the woman wants to get married but the guy basically seems to be stringing her along -- they've been together for 6 years with no sign of marriage in sight. I can totally see them breaking up and then him marrying the next girl he dates.

 

I think guys generally know if the girl they are with is "wife material" pretty quickly. I personally wouldn't wait longer than 2 years without a proposal or a serious discussion about marriage. I would feel like I was wasting my time. And, again, from what I see around me (and read about on LS), it seems like after approximately 2 years, the girl is often wanting to get married & the guy is dragging his feet. IMO if he wants to marry the woman he is with, most guys won't wait years & years to make it happen.

[foreverinlove]

I don't know anybody who felt they knew their partner well enough to get married after 22 months! Would you marry someone you knew for under two years? Did you?

 

 

Interesting article. I met my husband in September and he proposed on New Year. We were married the following year. That was 46 years ago. I have never regretted it and neither has he.

[Eeyore79]

My parents got engaged after about 3-4 months and married the same year. They never regretted it and are still together 30 years later. My grandparents also got married within a year of meeting, and it ended up being till death us do part. I think years ago, people saw dating as a process of looking for someone to marry, and when you made your decision you just got on with it. Nowadays it seems that dating ends up dragging on for years because it no longer seems to be specifically aimed at evaluating someone as a potential spouse.

 

My friend got engaged after dating her boyfriend for one year. I actually have a lot of respect for the guy - he met someone he cared about and he didn't play games, he just stepped up to the plate. He has a very straightforward attitude; if you've found someone you care about then why beat around the bush?

[alphamale]

“The statistics say most men propose after 22 months. For the next three-and-a-half years, the prospects of marriage gradually diminish. After seven years, the likelihood you’ll get married is virtually nil.”

thats true

 

I don't know anybody who felt they knew their partner well enough to get married after 22 months! Would you marry someone you knew for under two years? Did you?

I do, yes and yes...there is no co-relation between how long a couple knows each other before marriage and how long their marriage will last.

 

actually, couples that live together before they wed have a higher divorce rate

[delilah123]

thats true

 

 

I do, yes and yes...there is no co-relation between how long a couple knows each other before marriage and how long their marriage will last.

 

actually, couples that live together before they wed have a higher divorce rate

 

this is potentially because the couples that live together before they wed aren't religious like the majority of couples who believe it's a sin to live together before marriage... hence those that don't live together also don't believe in divorce.. so the statistic doesn't actually hold a lot of weight. it doesn't mean the marriages are actually happier.

[musemaj11]

Getting married is what idiotic men do.

 

You risk your hard-earned lifetime wealth and you give up your freedom to explore other women for the rest of your life.

[StoneCold]

he just stepped up to the plate. He has a very straightforward attitude; if you've found someone you care about then why beat around the bush?

 

Why do you see actions not leading to marriage as "beating around the bush"?

[Eeyore79]

Why do you see actions not leading to marriage as "beating around the bush"?

 

The way I see it, you date someone in order to get to know them well enough to decide if you want to marry them. If you decide NO, you end the relationship and don't waste any more of that person's time. If you decide YES, you get married.

 

What I think is unacceptable is to drag out the dating for years on end without actually making a decision one way or the other. The woman is wasting her prime years sitting around hoping for a proposal; if her boyfriend was honest and admitted that wasn't going to marry her, she could be back on the market while she's still in her prime, and find someone who does want to marry her. The guy who takes a woman off the market for years and doesn't propose is ruining that woman's chances of finding a husband, which seems extremely selfish.

 

I have enormous respect for guys who don't waste a woman's time, who make a decision one way or the other and either marry her or end the relationship. I have no respect at all for guys who date a woman for several years, thereby wasting all the years in which she was attractive enough to find a good husband, and then dump her.

 

I realise that not everyone wants to get married, and some people are happy dating for years on end... and that's fine, as long as both people are on the same page and there's a clear understanding that the relationship isn't heading towards marriage in the foreseeable future. But unfortunately what often tends to happen is that the woman wants to progress towards marriage and the guy basically wastes her time. Too many of my friends have wasted their twenties on guys who never proposed but never admitted that they weren't going to. I've wasted a good few years myself!

 

Nowadays I see more and more women who realize that their prime years are limited, and if a guy makes no move towards marriage in 3-4 years they dump him and move on. Some of my male friends have been dumped for exactly this reason, and they later admitted that they would never have married her, so if she wants marriage she made the right choice in leaving.

Edited November 25, 2011 by Eeyore79

[musemaj11]

The way I see it, you date someone in order to get to know them well enough to decide if you want to marry them. If you decide NO, you end the relationship and don't waste any more of that person's time. If you decide YES, you get married.

 

What I think is unacceptable is to drag out the dating for years on end without actually making a decision one way or the other. The woman is wasting her prime years sitting around hoping for a proposal; if her boyfriend was honest and admitted that wasn't going to marry her, she could be back on the market while she's still in her prime, and find someone who does want to marry her. The guy who takes a woman off the market for years and doesn't propose is ruining that woman's chances of finding a husband, which seems extremely selfish.

 

I have enormous respect for guys who don't waste a woman's time, who make a decision one way or the other and either marry her or end the relationship. I have no respect at all for guys who date a woman for several years, thereby wasting all the years in which she was attractive enough to find a good husband, and then dump her.

 

I realise that not everyone wants to get married, and some people are happy dating for years on end... and that's fine, as long as both people are on the same page and there's a clear understanding that the relationship isn't heading towards marriage in the foreseeable future. But unfortunately what often tends to happen is that the woman wants to progress towards marriage and the guy basically wastes her time. Too many of my friends have wasted their twenties on guys who never proposed but never admitted that they weren't going to. I've wasted a good few years myself!

 

Nowadays I see more and more women who realize that their prime years are limited, and if a guy makes no move towards marriage in 3-4 years they dump him and move on. Some of my male friends have been dumped for exactly this reason, and they later admitted that they would never have married her, so if she wants marriage she made the right choice in leaving.

Yea, marriage is all that important because unlike unmarried relationship, once you get married you are going to remain married forever. Because unlike unmarried relationship, marriage doesnt last only for one, two, or three years. :rolleyes:

 

This logically faulty fantasy that most women seem to follow never ceases to amaze me. They seem to be a lot more fixated on the childish imagination of marriage (or wedding to be exact) rather than having a healthy long lasting relationship.

 

I mean dude, wake the **** up. These days marriages dont last any longer than other types of relationship.

 

A marriage doesnt guarantee a woman a neverending commitment. It simply guarantees her a legal right over a portion of the man's personal wealth should he or she choose to leave the marriage.

 

To me, a never married woman is like a virgin man. She is just curious and dying to find out how it feels to be married the same way a virgin man is curious and dying to find out how it feels to get laid.

Edited November 26, 2011 by musemaj11

[Eeyore79]

Maybe you won't remain married forever. But the point of getting married is to at least make an attempt at having a "till death us do part" relationship. Most women would like to try to build a lasting lifetime relationship with a man, and you can't do that if you haven't made a mutual commitment. So even if it isn't guaranteed to work out, most people would still like the opportunity to give it a go.

 

By taking a woman off the market during her prime years and then not marrying her, the guy has ruined her chance to even make an attempt at making a marriage work out. Whether the marriage would have succeeded or not is irrelevant - he's taken away her opportunity to even give it a go.

Edited November 26, 2011 by Eeyore79

[musemaj11]

Maybe you won't remain married forever. But the point of getting married is to at least make an attempt at having a "till death us do part" relationship. Most women would like to try to build a lasting lifetime relationship with a man, and you can't do that if you haven't made a mutual commitment. So even if it isn't guaranteed to work out, most people would still like the opportunity to give it a go.

 

By taking a woman off the market during her prime years and then not marrying her, the guy has ruined her chance to even make an attempt at making a marriage work out. Whether the marriage would have succeeded or not is irrelevant - he's taken away her opportunity to even give it a go.

You dont need to get married in order to stay committed until death do you apart.

 

Dumping a girlfriend after five years of dating has no difference than divorcing a wife after five years of marriage. Either way the woman still gets thrown out after her 'prime years' were used up.

 

Instead of obsessing on getting married just for the sake of getting married, you should use your energy to focus on building a lasting relationship.

[LoveTKO]

Getting married is what idiotic men do.

 

You risk your hard-earned lifetime wealth and you give up your freedom to explore other women for the rest of your life.

 

 

Good point. I was having coffee with a good friend of mine last night who emphatically said that I should avoid marriage at all cost....and she is the wife! Her husband told me the same thing.

 

You can end up raising a kid that isn't yours(10%-20% raising kids that aren't theirs); divorce can ruin you financially; most people cheat at some point in the relationship. It's crazy. Monogamy is not natural.

[Eeyore79]

Men and women get married any time after 18 and anytime before 90. A guy would have to string a mentally deficient female along for 50 years to 'ruin' her.

 

Not true. Most women are interested in marriage and children from age 20-25 onwards, and once you hit 35-37 it's getting a bit too late to have a husband and babies. The only other option is to have illegitimate children without a stable family context to raise them in, which isn't particularly desirable. If a guy strings a woman along until her early thirties, she's extremely pushed for time to meet someone else, get married and have babies before her fertility runs out... so the guy who strung her along has essentially ruined her opportunity to have a family.

 

Dumping a girlfriend after five years of dating has no difference than divorcing a wife after five years of marriage.

 

The two things are entirely different. For one thing, it's a damn sight harder to end a marriage than it is to just walk out on a dating relationship; people tend to think much more carefully before going through a divorce, and are much more inclined to try to make the relationship work. For another thing, you can't build a stable long term relationship without first making a commitment - as long as you're dating you're just two independent people who happen to spend time together, you aren't a committed couple until you marry, which is when you start properly building a committed relationship. Also marriage provides a lot more financial and legal security - it's not a good idea to start building a life with a man and having his babies without the security of a legal commitment.

[musemaj11]

Also marriage provides a lot more financial and legal security - it's not a good idea to start building a life with a man and having his babies without the security of a legal commitment.

There you go!

 

Just like I said,

 

At the bottom of it, for women marriage is all about MONEY, MONEY, and MONEY. They just want to have their hand in their men's bank accounts. It doesnt even have anything to do with child support because it is obligatory with or without marriage.

 

This is why smart men dont marry and these days more and more men have smarten up and refused to marry.

 

Men who marry are stupid suckers.

Edited November 27, 2011 by musemaj11

[Floridaman]

Why some women are not wife material

November 22 2011 at 12:00pm

By FRANCIS CHILDS

 

....

 

Another reason women find themselves without a ring on their finger, Molloy says, is that many simply do not push hard enough for it. He found 73 percent of the wives-to-be he spoke to had forced the issue themselves rather than waiting for a romantic proposal.

 

This rings true for Laura Hall. “I should have been clear about how much marriage meant to me,” she says now. “I was living with him, doing all the things a wife does, but without a ring on my finger. He could just walk out and in the end that’s exactly what he did.”

 

While she concedes things had become stale between them, she says it happened precisely because the relationship had lost its momentum - the explicit acknowledgement of commitment that typically leads to engagement, then marriage, then children.

 

Experts say this is common when couples live together. According to Dr Joel Block, psychologist and author of the book The Real Reasons Men Commit, women need to be wary of serial co-habiters. If a man has had more than one live-in relationship, he is less likely to marry than a man who hasn’t or who is in his first co-habiting relationship.

This is all true.

 

Many women make it all "too easy" for the guys.

Their love and their sexuality are the "prizes" yet it's given away at a cheap cost.

[Eeyore79]

So are you saying don't offer love and sex before marriage? Or just don't cohabit?

[Floridaman]

So are you saying don't offer love and sex before marriage? Or just don't cohabit?

No, don't just "give it away" so soon and so easily.

 

Let the other "earn it," whether that means living together (which I don't recommend) or getting engaged.

 

Never lived with anyone and didn't want to with anyone nor my future wife.

Didn't ask her to move-in with me and she as a traditional "Good Girl" woman wouldn't have had it had I asked.

 

Just seems some women foolishly think giving in that way, moving in together without any kind of commitment, will lead to engagement when if that's what she wanted, should have talked about that -- and making her feelings clear on that issue -- before moving in.

 

Being "not so easy" in that area shows some independence, as men often want what they can't have.

Edited November 28, 2011 by Floridaman

[Thornton]

I find this interesting cuz my bf insists that we have to live together as a trial run before he'd even consider marriage. I'd prefer to be committed (i.e. engaged) before we live together, but he says I'm being unreasonable cuz "everyone" lives together first nowadays and you can't marry someone without a trial run. I said even if he believes in cohabiting he should still respect my wishes not to, but he disagrees and says I'm just being stupid.

[LoveTKO]

"Don't give it away so easily.....or make him earn it"

 

So it's all about the woman, like she's some coveted prize? And men must acquiesce according to the parameters of a woman's game plan? Again, that's where the disingenuous part of a relationship comes into play, the part where you're manipulating someone into doing this your way or the highway.

 

This whole thing doesn't pass the smell test. Think about it.....if tying the knot really is the natural progression, or pinnacle of self actualization from a relationship standpoint, then it wouldn't be so hard. But in reality, it involves ultimatums, cajoling, veiled threats of leaving, counseling, etc. Don't you all get it? Things that are meant to be shouldn't be that hard.

[carhill]

I don't know anybody who felt they knew their partner well enough to get married after 22 months! Would you marry someone you knew for under two years? Did you?

It depends on age and life experience, IMO.

 

I did (marry someone I knew under two years, actually about 18 months after meeting) and received no real surprises while married. Everything which was there in the beginning was there at the end. The only mistake was mine, and it was two-fold:

1. Giving the benefit of the doubt too much, a personality trait I was socialized with and hadn't yet resolved through life experience.

 

2. Understanding the nuances of when and how someone lets you love them. That can be tricky when one does love another and believes it is mutual.

 

Anyway, one glaring insufficiency for wife-hood for myself is (and in no way relevant to my exW) emotional instability. It's OK for STR's and 'fun', but I need someone who will consistently stand with me and have my back while married and not turn on me at a moment's notice on a whim. The same would apply with emotional escape (her issue). While everything is rosy, it's good; the real tests are when life challenges and crises rear their ugly head. Of course, one could date a person until such issues arise, no matter the length of time, to test such compatibility, but one of such issues might be one's own death I prefer to rely on clues from minor conflicts/challenges, combined with an examination of family and relationship history. An example in my case would be the very strained relationship between my exW and her mother and how she dealt with it, along with her general family history. Big clue which I gave the 'benefit of the doubt' to, along with me being her third husband. I couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting some benefits.

 

if tying the knot really is the natural progression, or pinnacle of self actualization from a relationship standpoint, then it wouldn't be so hard. But in reality, it involves ultimatums, cajoling, veiled threats of leaving, counseling, etc. Don't you all get it? Things that are meant to be shouldn't be that hard.

I agree with this. The scary part is, with some personality types, it can go this way because they 'think it'. After having lived it, it's really, really scary to contemplate a person with that kind of pragmatism. I had all those clues too; no surprises. Too many benefits of the doubt. It's very subtle. After awhile, one begins to doubt themselves.

 

For young people, I say take your time and pay attention to those doubts. They're canaries.

Edited November 28, 2011 by carhill

[Untouchable_Fire]

Not true. Most women are interested in marriage and children from age 20-25 onwards, and once you hit 35-37 it's getting a bit too late to have a husband and babies. The only other option is to have illegitimate children without a stable family context to raise them in, which isn't particularly desirable. If a guy strings a woman along until her early thirties, she's extremely pushed for time to meet someone else, get married and have babies before her fertility runs out... so the guy who strung her along has essentially ruined her opportunity to have a family.

 

My God are you serious? Over half of our nations children wind up emotionally raped by their parents divorce. How stable is that?

 

I'm sorry but we need to take some drastic steps to save the institution of marriage. We should illegalize infidelity for one thing.

 

The two things are entirely different. For one thing, it's a damn sight harder to end a marriage than it is to just walk out on a dating rdivorce, and are much more inclined to try to make the relationship work. For another thing, you can't build a stable long term relationship without first makingelationship; people tend to think much more carefully before going through a a commitment - as long as you're dating you're just two independent people who happen to spend time together, you aren't a committed couple until you marry, which is when you start properly building a committed relationship. Also marriage provides a lot more financial and legal security - it's not a good idea to start building a life with a man and having his babies without the security of a legal commitment.

 

So it's really just about making sure you can get the money in the event of a divorce?

[Taramere]

So are you saying don't offer love and sex before marriage? Or just don't cohabit?

 

I think that if a woman is very geared towards wanting marriage and children then she should make that clear at a fairly early stage. Most men, in my experience, will quiz a woman about that very early on.

 

I actually never did want children. Not because I don't like them (I do) but because negative as it sounds, I've long felt dubious about the direction the world is headed in and so I would prefer to channel my maternal instincts towards my niece and nephew and do my bit to ensure they have the best chance for the future.

 

However, for those who do want children very badly, I think an honest and direct "yes I want children" is essential when they get the opportunity to give that information. If you've been dating a guy for more than a year, and there's no indication that he's thinking in terms of the two of you making a life together, then I think it's time to outline what you want...and to let him know that if it isn't what he wants then it's time for the two of you to go your separate ways without the degree of hard feelings that arise after 5 years.

 

I do think it's absolutely unforgivable for a man to string a woman along for her best child-bearing years, with false promises about making a life together...but it does happen. The way to avoid it happening to you would be to be very disciplined about placing a time limit on a relationship that seems to be going nowhere. However, that requires the head to over-rule the heart...and the word "disciplined" doesn't quite cover the strength that's required to oust somebody you love from your life.