Married Shmarried.

[No_Go]

Really? Us older folks don't? In my circle of friends, mostly in our 50's, there have been 3 marriages just this year (2 of them second marriages, one a first) . I myself, may be getting engaged soon.

 

We don't want any more kids, financially we are set, taxes, property and the other things, we both have. So, what's left. Love, and the desire to grow old together.

 

Marriage is a commitment beyond love. It is a choice we freely choose to make. Anyone is free to make it or not. Personally, even at 57, I still like the idea of marriage.

 

I gave few other reasons: fear of being alone for example. I’d personally not let anyone in my home as well without a contract (marriage) to protect my property, not that I need/want another one.

 

But still kids I think is the frontrunner reason, especially at not so young but still fertile women (25-30 to up to 35-40). There the ring-seeking gets real and desperation reeks, and it has NOTHING to do with love. Been there done that. Biological urges are stronger than anything at that point.

[S2B]

You state it's logical and I notice that your scenario lacks boundaries.

 

It doesn't really matter much...IF the two married folks decide that a boundary is crossed within the commitment THEY have made to each other - you have no business involving yourself further.

 

 

That's just a respect issue at that point.

[NuevoYorko]

I'm always bemused by people who take a stance to tell others "how it is" and refute all other perspectives right out of the gate.

 

Bottom line: You are incorrect about the nature and experience of love and commitment in relationships for millions of people. Truly. I don't understand why you feel compelled to tell all of us why our experiences or beliefs are erroneous, but since you are, vent away.

 

Despite your misconceptions of other peoples' relationships, I fully respect and applaud your right to conduct yours as you see fit.

[Els]

Clearly a lot of rationalization going on here.

 

Relationships such as marriage and boyfriend/girlfriend teach us that it is okay to say, "This is mine" and it's really not yours. It's like standing out in a field and picking a wildflower and saying, "I saw it first and picked it first, it is mine!" -- Marriage and relationships are childish and elementary and they do more harm to the psyche than good.

Even in logical terms, your analogy makes zero sense. LTRs or marriage are a promise that each person makes to the other. It's not about "this is mine", it's about expecting the other person to honor and fulfill the commitment that they said they would. Going by your logic you shouldn't expect anyone to do or not do anything at all, since technically speaking nothing about that other person is "yours". Person blasting loud music at 4am right next to you? Not your house, how childish of you to expect basic consideration. Person slapping you? Not your hand, how dare you stipulate what they are allowed to do with their hand. So on and so forth.

 

FTR, some LTRs involve polygamy, and if that's what has been agreed upon by everyone involved, no issues there. It's only when deceit is involved that people get (rightfully) angry.

[NuevoYorko]

I wanted to make a thread where people admit the naked truth about what pushed them into marriages but then I though it will be hard because of all the falseness and fear surrounding the concept. .

So the bottom line is that anyone who does not agree with your very one dimensional view of relationships is hampered by "falseness and fear." I see.

 

Food for thought: The majority of people who tell you that they did not choose to make a commitment to another person because of desperation, social pressure, biology etc. might just be telling the truth. It could be you who is spinning yarns.

 

Don't get me wrong, I have no interest or desire to change your mind or convince you that you'd enjoy a relationship with another person. I think you are speaking your truth. Why don't you consider extending the same respect to people who don't share your beliefs.

[carhill]

Yeah, a lot of knees have worn out the confessional lumber on that

 

They had all that adultery and coveting stuff drummed into us before we were old enough to know anything else. Of course, with adults being the hypocrites they are, there was a lot of 'do as I say, not as I do' stuff too.

 

A lot of what gave rise to the current milieu happened when I was young.... Equality, sexual revolution, birth control, no-fault divorce, etc, etc. The whole smash became easier, less costly and more socially acceptable, even if infidelity was and continues to be socially derided in some circles, of course allowing for the acceptable level of hypocrisy.

[No_Go]

So the bottom line is that anyone who does not agree with your very one dimensional view of relationships is hampered by "falseness and fear." I see.

 

Food for thought: The majority of people who tell you that they did not choose to make a commitment to another person because of desperation, social pressure, biology etc. might just be telling the truth. It could be you who is spinning yarns.

 

Don't get me wrong, I have no interest or desire to change your mind or convince you that you'd enjoy a relationship with another person. I think you are speaking your truth. Why don't you consider extending the same respect to people who don't share your beliefs.

 

Ah not everyone of course. In real life (or any other situation where the fear of the sweetie reading is not overwhelming) many people had confessed to me about the reasons that I wrote.

 

But I’m sure there are relationships and marriages not starting on that ground. Especially in the young (18-22) crowd - I’m sure most started on love-base because these people are not yet beaten up from life to seek practical commitment.

 

I think I’m pretty good at reading between lines, that’s all. I accept other point of views but that doesn’t make me blind to false pretenses when they are screaming fake!fake!fake! it is always refreshing to read different opinions especially when they are genuine and unbiased on what people may think. It’s always endearing to see these, they are just so few and far in between...

[BluEyeL]

In my opinion you both may have a different ideas about what love is. There is a difference between adolescent love , the one at 18-22, and mature love . Some people never grow out of adolescence while many others do, and the two groups are yelling at each other while not being able to speak the same language.

 

I agree with someone who said that adolescent love is about the mirror of one's own ego, mature love is not. Since some never grow out of the adolescent mindset, there is a set of people who would never understand mature love, deep

Love and commitment.

 

And there are yet other people who use a lot of rationalization to justify their own choices, if these choices are seen as not fully acceptable by the society in some way.

[No_Go]

Adolescent love the way how you describe it reflects on someone's ego - and this is not the love definition that I personally accept. [For me it is hard to comment on this because I sadly skipped the puppy love stage whatsoever, the first time to look at a man in a romantic way was at 24, the first time to have bf - at 27-28. I only envy a little the people that did experience this pure love of the youth].

 

But *conditional* love is transaction, not emotion. Saying 'gimme ring or I'm out' is no different than saying 'I don't give a sh*t about you but if you provide what I want for xxx reason, I'll stick around and give you my commitment and conditional love'. What am I missing here according to your definition Blue?

 

In my opinion you both may have a different ideas about what love is. There is a difference between adolescent love , the one at 18-22, and mature love . Some people never grow out of adolescence while many others do, and the two groups are yelling at each other while not being able to speak the same language.

 

I agree with someone who said that adolescent love is about the mirror of one's own ego, mature love is not. Since some never grow out of the adolescent mindset, there is a set of people who would never understand mature love, deep

Love and commitment.

 

And there are yet other people who use a lot of rationalization to justify their own choices, if these choices are seen as not fully acceptable by the society in some way.

[S2B]

I do believe you are stating how you feel.

 

However, it looks one dimensional and closed minded since you are looking to be open to other/additional ideas and ideals.

 

Your idea of falseness and fears will likely change as time moves along.

 

I'm old - and I will tell you - the world is fascinating and diverse. What works for some doesn't work for others.

 

With that being said - I wish you luck in your endeavors... this crazy world is a beautiful thing!

[wmacbride]

I was waiting for you to use "age" to aid you in a response to me. It really has nothing to do with what I said though because all that I have said makes analytical sense...

 

I don't care that others agree with me. I came here to propose a different perspective and that is it. The ONLY reason I told someone to find an error in my logic is because clearly I hit some type of nerve and my position was challenged. That's what happens during a debate or a discussion when two people disagree. It doesn't mean I need you to agree. I already know that I'm right, whether you disagree or not.

 

There's nothing any of you can teach me about romance. I already get it. I don't need to be 60 to "get it." That's basic logic. You don't ONLY learn from your own experiences...but also from being objective and learning from others' experiences. Having a deeply analytical mind also helps a tremendous, lot. Sometimes, that's all it takes to "get it." It's like having a head-start. I'm lucky enough to have gotten this while I'm still young.

 

Sorry, but emotion and logic are often not compatible, and the fact that you feel they are shows your inexperience.

 

Also, just because you haven't experienced something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist for some. Mind you, I don't really think you posted what you did for discussion or debate. I think you just wanted to have your say. there's nothing wrong with that, but framing it as a "discussion" isn't valid.

[wmacbride]

Yeah, a lot of knees have worn out the confessional lumber on that

 

They had all that adultery and coveting stuff drummed into us before we were old enough to know anything else. Of course, with adults being the hypocrites they are, there was a lot of 'do as I say, not as I do' stuff too.

 

A lot of what gave rise to the current milieu happened when I was young.... Equality, sexual revolution, birth control, no-fault divorce, etc, etc. The whole smash became easier, less costly and more socially acceptable, even if infidelity was and continues to be socially derided in some circles, of course allowing for the acceptable level of hypocrisy.

 

 

One of the nearly universal facts about infidelity is that it hurts betrayed spouses. This isn't about jealousy or insecurity- it's something more.

 

The fact that this emotion can be found in bs across many cultures and times would indicate there there is a legitimate basis for this. Even in cultures where infidelity is tacitly accepted ( especially in male dominated cultures) the bs usually aren't as accepting as some would have us believe.

[BluEyeL]

It's not just rings that people demand of each other. They demand to be loved, cherished, appreciated and for the partner to have their best interests at heart. Yhata what means to be in a good relationship.

 

There are people who do marry for the wrong reasons, but in my opinion it happens earlier rather than later because of the lack of maturity to know one self and be confident .

 

But what's more important, things aren't ever black and white and all people are not the same.

[lana-banana]

I was blessed to grow up with two parents who loved, honored and supported each other in every possible way (except when in the car, since my mom can't stand my dad's driving). They were and are an incredible example of a healthy partnership and real love in action. I knew I wanted that for myself, but as I got older I began wondering if I could ever be selfless enough to love someone that way. In time I eventually fell in love with the man who is now my husband, and I understand what it means to love someone even when you want to shove them down the stairs.

 

Not everyone wants a permanent relationship. Some people find other forms of love and partnership suit them better. There are countless different choices you can make, and so long as you aren't hurting yourself or others in the process, you can go for it. But there's no reason to denigrate someone else's choice just because you don't understand or agree with it.

 

Committed relationships take work. They are often easy, and they can make the burdens of daily life much lighter, but they bring their own challenges. They aren't for everyone, and that's fine. But we chose to get married because we are in love, cherish our commitment and want to honor each other above all others. I have a feeling millions of other couples do the same thing every year. There is something farcical about being on a love-themed website and having to argue that love is real.

[No_Go]

It's not just rings that people demand of each other. They demand to be loved, cherished, appreciated and for the partner to have their best interests at heart. Yhata what means to be in a good relationship.

 

There are people who do marry for the wrong reasons, but in my opinion it happens earlier rather than later because of the lack of maturity to know one self and be confident .

 

But what's more important, things aren't ever black and white and all people are not the same.

 

The rings I gave just as one of the ugliest examples that I’ve seen/read about. Advice ‘if you don’t get the ringggg by year two - then take a hike’ is maybe the most unloving thing that one can demand.

 

Love or cherishing or appreciation of someone in demand .... I don’t know what to say, it is sad. This is what I was referring to when I said most relationships are not live based. These are conditions that may eventually be superficially met (aka faked). They usually come from within if and only if there is unconditional love.

 

Btw would you tell your son ‘If you don’t love or cherish or appreciate me, I won’t love you anymore?’

[elaine567]

I've been the OW a billion times and watched public figures fake their images of their relationships.. then would come back to me in private. I hold all of these secrets and know the ins and outs to everything.

 

Is that really any surprise to anyone?

Those in the public eye are often some of the most selfish, self centred. self obsessed, narcissistic, deceitful, superficial and fake people on the planet.

I do not think you can base anything on what those kind of people do and how they live their lives...

[carhill]

Yup, life has hurts. No doubt. It ain't fair either. When we engage in that first innocent lie to benefit ourselves at the cost of another, the trail of lies is begun and goes on throughout life. That underscores how selfish we all are and that definitely disagrees with at least one premise in the OP.

[No_Go]

I was just pounting our that conditional commitment is not love. Not that love and commitment can’t coexist (they can of course, thankfully:) it is part of our species reproductive strategy which makes it a very good reason to keep existing).

 

But as said to Blue - would you stop loving a blood relative (parent, sibling or child) if they don’t meet requirements? If no - why put different criteria for relationship partners?

 

I was blessed to grow up with two parents who loved, honored and supported each other in every possible way (except when in the car, since my mom can't stand my dad's driving). They were and are an incredible example of a healthy partnership and real love in action. I knew I wanted that for myself, but as I got older I began wondering if I could ever be selfless enough to love someone that way. In time I eventually fell in love with the man who is now my husband, and I understand what it means to love someone even when you want to shove them down the stairs.

 

Not everyone wants a permanent relationship. Some people find other forms of love and partnership suit them better. There are countless different choices you can make, and so long as you aren't hurting yourself or others in the process, you can go for it. But there's no reason to denigrate someone else's choice just because you don't understand or agree with it.

 

Committed relationships take work. They are often easy, and they can make the burdens of daily life much lighter, but they bring their own challenges. They aren't for everyone, and that's fine. But we chose to get married because we are in love, cherish our commitment and want to honor each other above all others. I have a feeling millions of other couples do the same thing every year. There is something farcical about being on a love-themed website and having to argue that love is real.

[lana-banana]

Your question seems deliberately obtuse. You don't hold blood relatives to the same standards as your partners because your relationship with them isn't forged by choice.

 

The point of that ring advice (which I don't agree with, but I do understand the underlying purpose) is not about a specific timeline, it's about not staying in a relationship where both partners don't share the same goals for the future. People get married because they want to take the same road together. If your idea of that road---whether it's marriage and kids, or just marriage, or saving up all your money for a helicopter with laser guns---is significantly different from your partner's, and you can't reconcile that, then yes, you should leave.

[NuevoYorko]

the fear of the sweetie reading is not overwhelming

What does that mean?

 

But I’m sure there are relationships and marriages not starting on that ground. Especially in the young (18-22) crowd - I’m sure most started on love-base because these people are not yet beaten up from life to seek practical commitment.

 

I think I’m pretty good at reading between lines, that’s all. I accept other point of views but that doesn’t make me blind to false pretenses when they are screaming fake!fake!fake!

 

Here's my read on it: You have not experienced a reciprocal relationship; possibly not even in friendship. This bothers you and drives your evidently desperate need to denigrate what you have not experienced and do not understand.

 

I get a "lady doth protest too much" vibe.

 

My issue is with anyone who persists on telling other people that what we think, how we live and feel, who and how we love or organize our families, spirituality, social values etc. are wrong. Your narrow minded take on MY experience of love, that of my daughter, friends and my own parents is not really pertinent to anyone but yourself; who are you trying to convince? Why so strident? You remind me of a child with your fingers stuck in your ears screaming "LALALALALALA, I can't hear you!" In fact, I have a suspicion that you are an adolescent person yourself. Am I correct? If I am, you get a pass because you almost certainly will be developing a capacity for understanding interpersonal relationships as you mature.

 

You are telling yourself tall tales when you insist that you can "read between the lines" where things like this are concerned; your own words belie you to those who read them. You see, we have personal experiences that have taught us things. You'd learn a lot about human relationships if you were interested in listening to people and refraining from telling yourself (and us) that we are all lying. That's not on the program at this stage, so carry on!

[No_Go]

Your question seems deliberately obtuse. You don't hold blood relatives to the same standards as your partners because your relationship with them isn't forged by choice.

 

The point of that ring advice (which I don't agree with, but I do understand the underlying purpose) is not about a specific timeline, it's about not staying in a relationship where both partners don't share the same goals for the future. People get married because they want to take the same road together. If your idea of that road---whether it's marriage and kids, or just marriage, or saving up all your money for a helicopter with laser guns---is significantly different from your partner's, and you can't reconcile that, then yes, you should leave.

 

It was not obtuse Lana - that’s exactly how my own values are - I don’t make distinction blood/random. But for simplicity- how about adopted child? Love will be given only in return of set of conditions then?

 

When you say you should leave if you don’t share the same goals- I get what you’re saying - self comes first. But this would have translated at leaving Your now-husband if he didn’t agree on you in your marriage matters talk. Would this mean you love him but only under the conditions your relationship goals match and otherwise love would have ceased?

[xoswtdreamsxo]

I enjoyed going through your responses but for the most part, I still think you're just offended because you like the idea of commitment and you are speaking from your emotions.

 

The one lady who was actually into something was the one who said I started intellectualizing pain. That's partly true, too. I often intellectualize things, anyways because a lot of times, emotions cloud our head. I never claimed emotions and logic were compatible by the way. I think logic is superior to be honest...and I don't just feel that way about monogamy.

 

On a universal scale, good and evil don't even exist but I don't want to open that can of worms. It also wouldn't be necessary because we need the world to work for efficiency. I also said that raising kids is the good that comes out of marriage in our culture.

 

If you want to be monogamous, go on ahead. I wish you the be in your relationships I was just saying, my perspective. I didn't come here to debate or discuss. I made that clear. I posted on here to teach another perspective but since some of you are challenging my views, I am responding.

 

It is quite interesting, in short..and if you think I'm just some young lady who lacks morals and doesn't get where you're coming from -- I do. I'd never sleep with a friend's husband or someone I'm familiar with. I'd feel bad. However, that's different because a friend is a friend.

 

On the other hand, too.. I don't sleep around, at all. I'm probably the most saintly woman whom you will eve speak to as far as physical actions go. I just overanalyze too much & I like to debate stuff like marriage & religion until I read enough perspectives to stop. So I am truly grateful for your replies and don't take me too seriously. Some things are entertaining and funny while at the same time, I really like the communication.

[No_Go]

Gah I get the same vibe from users shouting out glowing all relationships are. Whatever

 

I wish I was adolescent. How I wish that Turned 33 last month so sadly I’m counting myself as a middle aged lady from a good while.

 

I do have very reciprocal friendships if that matters but they work well so there is nothing worth discussing. As most of us, I like to discuss things that bother me not experiences where there’s nothing to complain.

 

Here OP presented a fresh new perspective that I happen to agree with. If you don’t - that’s fine. We all believe in what we believe, and I still insist I can easily read when someone is genuine vs fake positive, you probably can too if you care to put in some effort;)

 

What does that mean?

 

 

 

Here's my read on it: You have not experienced a reciprocal relationship; possibly not even in friendship. This bothers you and drives your evidently desperate need to denigrate what you have not experienced and do not understand.

 

I get a "lady doth protest too much" vibe.

 

My issue is with anyone who persists on telling other people that what we think, how we live and feel, who and how we love or organize our families, spirituality, social values etc. are wrong. Your narrow minded take on MY experience of love, that of my daughter, friends and my own parents is not really pertinent to anyone but yourself; who are you trying to convince? Why so strident? You remind me of a child with your fingers stuck in your ears screaming "LALALALALALA, I can't hear you!" In fact, I have a suspicion that you are an adolescent person yourself. Am I correct? If I am, you get a pass because you almost certainly will be developing a capacity for understanding interpersonal relationships as you mature.

 

You are telling yourself tall tales when you insist that you can "read between the lines" where things like this are concerned; your own words belie you to those who read them. You see, we have personal experiences that have taught us things. You'd learn a lot about human relationships if you were interested in listening to people and refraining from telling yourself (and us) that we are all lying. That's not on the program at this stage, so carry on!

[No_Go]

Amen. Your last 3 sentences are just golden - everyone should read them, read them again, and take notes. World will then be a slightly better place.

 

I enjoyed going through your responses but for the most part, I still think you're just offended because you like the idea of commitment and you are speaking from your emotions.

 

The one lady who was actually into something was the one who said I started intellectualizing pain. That's partly true, too. I often intellectualize things, anyways because a lot of times, emotions cloud our head. I never claimed emotions and logic were compatible by the way. I think logic is superior to be honest...and I don't just feel that way about monogamy.

 

On a universal scale, good and evil don't even exist but I don't want to open that can of worms. It also wouldn't be necessary because we need the world to work for efficiency. I also said that raising kids is the good that comes out of marriage in our culture.

 

If you want to be monogamous, go on ahead. I wish you the be in your relationships I was just saying, my perspective. I didn't come here to debate or discuss. I made that clear. I posted on here to teach another perspective but since some of you are challenging my views, I am responding.

 

It is quite interesting, in short..and if you think I'm just some young lady who lacks morals and doesn't get where you're coming from -- I do. I'd never sleep with a friend's husband or someone I'm familiar with. I'd feel bad. However, that's different because a friend is a friend.

 

On the other hand, too.. I don't sleep around, at all. I'm probably the most saintly woman whom you will eve speak to as far as physical actions go. I just overanalyze too much & I like to debate stuff like marriage & religion until I read enough perspectives to stop. So I am truly grateful for your replies and don't take me too seriously. Some things are entertaining and funny while at the same time, I really like the communication.

[lana-banana]

Yes, I would have broken up with my husband if our relationship goals didn't match. Marriage and kids are some of the very few issues where compromise really isn't possible. As much as I love him, if one of us had been against marriage and the other had been for it we would have split up. I couldn't stay with someone whose vision for the future was drastically different than mine. We have the same goals; that's why we're on this road together.

 

Family and partners literally cannot be the same. Your partner is family you choose, and part of that choice means picking someone who will hopefully share a harmonious future with you.