Marriage vs. Committed Relationships

[d'Arthez]

Originally posted by rble618740

It appears that, statistically, there is some validity to the belief that marriage is more stable than cohabitation. A 1992 study of 3,300 cases, for example, based on the 1987 National Survey of Families and Households, found that people who married after cohabitation "are estimated to have a hazard of dissolution that is about 46% higher than for noncohabitors." After 5 to 7 years, 39% of all cohabiting couples have broken their relationship. In contrast, 65% of married couples reach their tenth anniversary.

 

I wonder, if this is corrected to account for the people who believe along lines similar to these:

1) cohabitation is a sin

2) divorce is a sin

3) thus once married, you are literally bound to the other until death takes them apart.

 

Not to mention, that people who marry before living together may have different values (for instance stress the role of the woman at home). These things by themselves influence marital happiness, and may influence the ability of either partner to get out of an unhappy marriage.

 

Statistically it can be shown that people who have a life-insurance run a greater risk to die, than the average member of the population (of the same sex, age, educational level, professional career et cetera). So what do the stats prove? That life-insurances cause deaths? No.

[Ladyjane14]

On topic.... A woman puts more at risk in the development of a family, both emotionally and financially, generally speaking.

 

In order to invest as the primary caregiver to her children, most women must sacrifice years of career-building. And that's not even including the "glass ceiling".

 

Take a look at Dresden's thread if you want to understand the true meaning of that. After years together, and children together, and the committments she has made to developing a family.... she's apparently on her own for all intents and purposes. At this time, she's seeing a career counselor, and trying to figure out how she's going to manage ALL the family responsibilities after her S/O has flaked out on her.

 

If a girl can read Dresden's story and still accept the half-hearted terms of a man bent on keeping his bachelorhood intact....and if she's still willing to invest in him and give him children.... Well, a girl who can't take warning from that, can't be warned off at all.

 

 

 

 

Off topic, btw. I've never been sooooo tempted, here on this forum, to tell somebody what a complete a$$ they are until just now. And I've read alot of bullsh*t here too!

 

Who are you to dictate terms to ANYONE? A piece of advice to you....because, in the end, that's what LS is all about, right?

 

Lighten up. People who go through life rigid and controlling are often treated to the mirror image of what they project to others.

[Craig]

In answer to the original post...

 

Intending to remain with each other for perpetuity or entering into a marriage contract are both meaningless without both parties at least understanding and embracing commitment to the relationship, each other and themselves. Therefore neither scenario would be "better" to me.

[rble618740]

As I indicated in my first post, "these are just statistics." I always take them with a grain of salt, as well. For what it's worth, I don't think these statistics show that cohabitation before marriage causes divorces, but I tend to believe that people who cohabitate have views on marriage that make them more accepting of divorce.

 

But for argument's sake, let me put another statistic out there since it seems we're not comparing cohabitation to marriage, but instead comparing cohabitation to living in an unhappy marriage. Annual rates of depression among cohabiting couples are more than three times what they are among married couples.

[ReluctantRomeo]

Originally posted by scratch

ad homenim arguments.

 

You only say this because you're a control freak

 

Relax, joke - just showing off my latin...

 

 

I propose two scenarios, A and B.

 

Scenario A: M and F live together and enjoy a monogamous relationship, have children together and intend to remain with each other in perpetuity.

 

Scenario B: Scenario A plus M and F enter into a marriage contract.

 

Marriage is a public declaration in front of friends, family and God. Juliet made all sorts of commitments in private... I want public

[thegoodhubbie]

First time poster here to this forum, which by the way, I LOVE this forum. Have had a lot of answers to my questions just by reading.

 

Anyway, When I asked my wife to marry me, it was because I wanted to show her that I loved her more than anyone in the universe. More than anyone that came before and that no matter what I would never leave her. To me that is the only reason to marry anyone, because you feel that strongly about them. The marriage vows say just that, sickness, health, richer, poorer, no matter what, I will stick by YOU and love YOU. That is what I wanted my girl to KNOW in her heart and her mind, and after 5 years of being together and 3 years of marriage, I still feel the same way. In fact, just last night I told her that I pray there is an eternity so that I can spend it with her!

 

To me shacking up is a total cop out. All it says is, you are okay for now until something better comes along. Marriage says I am putting my money where my mouth is.

[Jolene]

A corporation does not carry on business in the absence of an agreement or contract. Why do you think that is?

 

So when people argue that marriage is only a piece of paper, I usually point out that marriage is as much of a business arrangement when you look at owning property, getting loans, and having children.

 

Regardless of one's cohabitational arrangements, society has a better system in place for legally married people. I guess cause it is a common or preconceived notion that people who live together more easily quit and walk out on each other. I don't agree with that, and I also don't think marriage is a financial arrangement, but I do think that getting married is a special commitment worth sharing with family and some friends and making it a day to commemorrate. (apology for any spelling errors).

 

~Good luck

[Just Visiting]

Originally posted by thegoodhubbie

To me shacking up is a total cop out. All it says is, you are okay for now until something better comes along. Marriage says I am putting my money where my mouth is.

 

Couldn't have said it any better.

[Cecelius]

(B) is better because (1) they have children and (2) because marriage (or having at least once been married to each other) is a valid social norm, the kids may feel less secure or may get ridiculed under (A) more than they would otherwise. In any event, (A) will operate as a reason that the kids may feel different from others, and different is hard to swallow as a kid.

 

Take the kids away? (A), all the way. Marriage often is a disincentive for people to keep up what they already were doing to get together. Marriage and divorce law acts similarly to golden parachutes for executives. People may be more likely to conduct themselves well in a relationship that can end at any time.

 

All of this is moot if you meet someone who does their job no matter what.

[Iluvsiamese]

I don't think that you can universally say that one is better than the other. There are so many aspects and perspectives that it varies according to the people and situations in question.

 

This is a question that I have been considering for a while now (among others, lol!) While discussing some things with my SO last week, he stated that someone had asked "Why spoil a perfectly good relationship by getting married?" I replied with, "it's not the fact of marriage that spoils the relationship, it's the individual's concept of what married means that creates the problem." Often people have a different perception of their roles in different relationship areas. They behave one way while dating, another while living together, another while engaged and still another when married. Like it or not, most of us have deep seated feelings concerning marriage. And sometimes we don't want to admit to others or even ourselves that those feelings are there. Hence all of the excuses, for or against.

 

There is little question of the financial benefits of marriage, although in my case, it worked against me--my ex took all of my savings, my salary, and my inheritance for his "business" and left me with 50% of the debt incurred due to the aforementioned "business" even though I never signed anything nor ever agreed to his ventures as they were too high risk and resulted in major losses. And right now, as common-law, the financial disadvantages are definitely there without any of the benefits of legal marriage. I am getting dinged by the government big-time even though my partner and I maintain our finances separately and pay equally and I am currently unemployed.

 

I think that personally, I prefer marriage and not simply because of the security and/or financial issues. Marriage is not just a piece of paper. I feel that it is the importance of the vows that you take and your understanding and belief in them. If you are willing to carefully consider your vows and make them before witnesses, then you are making a declaration of how important your SO is to you. If you are unwilling to commit yourself by taking vows, then you are also making the opposite statement and indicating to your SO that you perhaps don't feel that you either want or can keep those promises. Doesn't inspire much confidence or trust and I don't think that this is gender exclusive in any way.