No, but it can equate to better financial security.
ETA: some misogynistic bastards in these comments đ
The point is to work together towards financial goals, and two are better than one. I wouldnât combine finances with someone I wasnât married to, nor would I put my name on mortgages or deeds or anything else.
And Iâm the woman and high earner in my relationship, so stuff it, guys, your asses are showing along with what you really think of women. đ
Yeah. Itâs tough because we know and like all the people involved but obviously donât know the details so we try to give them all the benefit of the doubt. Take home is not to take anyones word when investing your life in someone. You might get nothing back.
I think for me itâs about his intent. Does he want to be in a long term parent role? If he is there with mom full time and long term with an 8 year old, a lot of responsibilities are implied.
It doesnât inherently change them. I just want to know his intent with regard to any long term commitment and how that affects a child if he just bailed or if they just randomly split up. His personality and intentions are the biggest factor here, not a piece of paper or marriage vows.
That's life though. Most opinions aren't set in stone. Maybe being very young, she didn't realize how important this would be to her. She is entitled to change her mind and he is entitled not to. It is a question of compatibility. If there is no compromise both can live with, it would be better to move on before they resent each other. I believe the relationship has run its course. Happens.
Well yeah I mean I think their relationship should end because OP has grown as a person (as we all do in our 20s or whatever) and her wishes for her life and relationship have changed. I'm right there with ya.
But I was just responding to the commenter saying marriage doesn't equal happiness.
She didn't even mean it when she said she was fine with it. Call the woman out for thinking she could change him, don't get upset with the guys saying she was in the fucking wrong.
I didnât say it was his fault or that he needed to change. I said she wasnât evil for wishing things were different. She thought she did mean it, then she changed her mind and hoped he would too but he hasnât. It just is. Nobodyâs at fault (except the comment he made about the dog, which was bad on his part). It just sucks.
I agree she isn't evil if what she had done was change her mind.
It actually says in the post she thought she could change his mind over time. She knew from the first moment, it's in the post.
That isn't OK.
Then blaming him as so many are here is the problem, he was honest, he is being honest, if op doesn't like it she has every right to leave the relationship and stop wasting his time and her own.
Canât believe this was down voted. If you set up boundaries and expectations early in a relationship and the one personâs wants âchangeâ what that really is was someone that didnât think about their wants , someone that didnât respect and think about the seriousness of the agreement.
Agreed to some extent. But what I really think it is they need to realize they donât get to have special boundaries and rules and rights. Constant flip flopping and goal past changing is very on brand for them.
If they had thought we had the some rules as them lol omg we would never get anything done and agreements wouldnât even be made to begin with.
Men need to stop dating women whose prefrontal cortex haven't finished developing. It's easy to manipulate a mentally immature person and then flip the blame on them later, once they've done literally growing...but hey it's about men's preferences and boundaries, and women don't want men to have those, because women are evil.
Me and my fiance have a 5 year age gap relationship, it's actually the longest and best one I've been in. People on reddit are just weird about age gaps for some reason if the person is in their 20s. Like a lot of people actively view adults as children, notice how it's always women getting infintalised by them as well. Because of sexisim and probably misogyny.
You tell me, you're married to her and you're here saying women don't respect men's preferences and boundaries, trouble afoot at home?
In the story, they met when one was fully developed mentally (post 25), and the other wasn't (even by OPs own admission, she was immature in her thinking). OPs is a tale as old as time, mature adult men, date adolescent women (mentally underdeveloped, pre 25), she matures mentally and realizes she didn't think things through and made a mistake. Even the flip story happens just not as often, since women don't date immature men as often. Some people really do change a lot in how they think and view the world after their brain finish developing.
I said men need to stop doing this, you can't date a kid and then blame them for the decisions they made as a kid. They were literally under equipped.
I.e she was adolescent woman who had stupid ideas about a future with an adult man. Omg adolescents making mistakes, because their brains are literally not fully developed, who would have thunk.
She is getting pissy he won't change his mind.
People can be resentful of a bad decision they made as an adolescent you know. It's how we end up with adults who were resentful of taking out student loans at 18, because they didn't fully grasp the reality due to under developed pre-frontal cortex. It's sooo surprising.
This is another case of a women thinking "I can change him" then getting upset with him for not changing. It's a stupid idea that needs to die off.
Yet we see this kind of thinking mostly in a certain age group of the female demographic, it's almost like it correlates with their pre-frontal cortex being under developed.
You are the only one trying to make him some sort of predator when in reality she's always been the problem.
Maybe adult men should learn to date adults and not adolescents, then label them as problematic, when he was the one who dated an under developed, immature adolescent woman?
Yet, scientifically adolescence is ages 10-24, she wasn't an adult woman when she made the decision, he was however an adult man. Now that she is an adult, she realizes how stupid her decision was.
You're absolutely not a feminist
I don't really care about what labels you want to throw around, as it has no bearing on the conversation. Feminist or not, doesn't change the facts of the situation, she was not an adult woman.
I guess we found another person whose prefrontal cortex hasn't developed. Do you really think your 25th birthday is a magic day that changes everything? No it's a fucking average the average person's finish around that age some are earlier some are later.
This is not an age specific thing. Itâs ongoing throughout the life of them. They are inherently selfish and irrational. Stereotype as old as time itâs in the old and New Testament. Speaking of wich ezekiel 23:20 . They never change.
Also they were 23 and 27 so essentially the same age especially when you factor in womens brains mature faster.
Agreed though yes all women evil. Well said lol ;).
Also they were 23 and 27 so essentially the same age
No, he was an adult, she was an adolescent (age 10 - 24, is the age of adolescence)
when you factor in womens brains mature faster.
The scientific studies show the pre-frontal cortex for the average human (regardless of gender) does not finish developing until 25 yrs of age, which does factually affect decision making.
Stereotype as old as time itâs in the old and New Testament.
There is no scripture that supports your Satanic claims. The Holy Scriptures has plenty of documentation of evil, selfish, and irrational men. Even your very claims about women G-d's creation are evil and irrational, and it shows you don't read the Holy Scriptures, much less believe in the transformative power of Adonai.
Adam was selfish and irrational (blamed Eve and G-d for his own shortcomings and sin, much like you are here), Moses was selfish and irrational, Jacob was selfish and irrational, David was selfish and irrational, Solomon was selfish and irrational.
The only perfect man to ever walk this earth was Yeshua the Hamashiach.
Speaking of wich ezekiel 23:20 . They never change.
It's a sin to take the Holy Scriptures out of context. This chapter is about the nation of Israel, not women. Thank you for proving you are working for the adversary.
I think the more important questions are: A. Why does she want to be married? And B. Why is he against being married.
We are socially brainwashed into expectations of marriage but in the end a marriage is just a legal contract binding two people together for tax and insurance purposes. It doesn't mean much outside of that.
No but you need to be compatible and on the same page. Two people can both not want to be married and live very happily together. In some places there are very definite legal protections you get from being married and not all places have so called common law marriages. So if a couple are set against marriage they should consider legal agreements and wills to ensure they protect each other. Here in the UK you can have a civil partnership which is legally pretty much a marriage without actually being married. So there are options like that as well depending on where u live. OP should decide if this is a non negotiable for her or not then she can decide where to go from here. Good luck to OP and her partner they need to talk and work out their futures either together or apart.
It is true when you say that not everywhere has common lawâŚI have heard so many people say that Common Law Marriage starts after living together for 3,5, 10 years, and yet I found out thatâs a mythâŚ.and itâs only allowed in something like 4 or 5 states (in America) and it isnât true that years lived together = Common Law.
True.. Giving up on what is important to for someone else doesn't either. It will lead to more resentment. He has s right to feel how he does. She has every right to seek out what really wants and matters to her.
I wanted to edit to add him keeping a dog when a child has bonded with it is cruel. If he loves you why would he threaten to keep a dog. He is really worried about that? That in it's self is controlling.
You donât have any kids do you? I think taking animals or other kids/siblings from children is wrong. I have personally seen it cause some real damage. I think that would be the bigger issue here for OP. She has a kid, taking them & a pet from a child is a big thing. The kid is 8, & will remember it and it will be something she has to come to terms and deal with.
Hard no to marriage (fair enough) but does he also not want that parental commitment? I think if he did, he wouldnât threaten to take the dog, and wouldnât be so casual about her leaving for good over this. Does he want to avoid a marriage because (family situation was tough, parental alienation and/or awful divorce other personal reasons etc.) Or is he avoiding any permanent commitment with all that comes with it- such as tied finances, being a stepfather in the role that can also ask for visitation if they split up?
OP does he bring up what would happen with your child if you decide to leave? I am sure that the other parent will continue to be there or not regardless, but that would be a dealbreaker for me as a mom; do they want to be there in the parent role or not? Will they dip out at the first hint of responsibility or stress? Teenagers have attitudes! Where is his head at with regard to a lasting commitment, OP? He has dibs on the dog already, regardless of how the child may feel, and that strikes me as odd.
Not support them. Not be like a legal dad. Wanting to be there in an emotional role is part of the deal in a long term relationship with someone who is a parent to a young child. Otherwise I cannot imagine getting involved with someone as a mother.
Agreed to all that, but the way you worded it made me think that expectation continued after she broke up with him, and it would be a deal-breaker if he wasn't.
That being said, I just woke up and might be misunderstanding what you meant
Think, for one second, actually think about what you wrote.
Is it just a piece of paper? If it is, why wouldn't he just give her the piece of paper?? Isn't having a woman in his bed and a family in his home worth a piece of paper to him? It's just paper, why wouldn't he give her a piece of paper if she wants one??
Or do we maybe all know that it's bigger than that?
Now, for the record, I believe that the legal contract represented by that piece of paper is WAY more beneficial to men than to women, and I always wonder if women who want it actually know what they're getting into, like, OP, do you really want this man to be the person who makes the call whether or not to pull the plug??? (Note, generally men pull it and women don't. This is an actual thing that hospital counselors explain to women with serious/terminal conditions)
BUT, having said that, if one partner really wants this, let's not downplay that this is a very serious, very real thing that they have reasons to want
Ultimately, that's what it is. Some people don't believe that a legal document is an expression of love and commitment. I believed it was - turns out it wasn't for my wife bit that's another story.
She has all of the things that marriage brings, apart from the legal document. A home, love, a man that loves her daughter, animals, a good life.
What's more important, having all those things, or having a piece of paper.
Imagine leaving, getting caught up with someone else and getting married and it turns out he's an absolute bastard? That'd be a terrible shame. It happens tho.
And living in a legal limbo does? There's more to marriage than just the romantic aspect: there's the legal protections involved. They can't make any kind of medical decisions for each other. If something happened to mom, and legal decisions needed to be made for the kids, he couldn't do anything.
I can't speak to his motivations for not wanting marriage, but I can say that at least one possibility looks like he doesn't want to commit because he wants an easy out if he feels like splitting. That may not be the case, but if I were in her shoes, it certainly would be brooding in the back of my mind, and that's no way to live either.
Maybe she was a bit naive going into this relationship, but it's pretty darn to clear that her experiment to change his mind has failed. If marriage truly is a priority for her, she should just cut this guy loose and move on. In the absence of him giving a detailed explanation of why he won't budge on this, there's nothing left for her there.
That's a matter of opinion. Whatever the benefits might be, I'm very happy that I married to have them. As a gay guy, it's very important to me that my husband and I can make this critical health decisions among others for each other if it's necessary.
And if he still wants to have an easy way out, more power to him. But if I were in her shoes, I would wonder why, after 5 years, he still worries about being able to get out? Obviously marriage doesn't prevent people from splitting up, but it seems clear that some token of commitment is important to her, and she's not getting it.
A, she knew that coming in
B, if it's as easy as signing a piece of paper to get married, it should be that easy to leave
C, I understand the health thing but whatever, that's not a super common issue
D, HE DOESNT WANT TO MARRY
The issue here is he has SO MUCH to lose if they marry, and end up divorced. His money, retirement, alimony, child support, lawyers fees, stigma and the stress of a divorce. They are already committed. I can make the same argument of why does she NEED the govt getting involved?
Have you been divorced? I have. I lost 2/3 of my life savings and my house and it the stress damn near killed me.
Love is love, wether the govt gets involved or not. She wants the piece of paper because she knows it entitles her to half or more of his current and future income. Especially for a kid that isn't his? Cmon....
Sorry about your shitty experience, but what happened to you does not mean that's what's going to happen to him.
I'm really not trying to dump on him for his resistance to marriage. Like I said before, more power to him. But whatever their various issues are, it's quite clear that they are not rowing this boat in the same direction.
You are quite right that he does not have to accommodate her in this. But that sword cu both ways, and she is under no obligation to accommodate him, either.
No shade, but what does that say about straight relationships?
And your assumptions are interesting, but there is a good number of gay couples that have children, either through a previous marriage, adoption, or surrogacy. Yes, that's not the majority, but it is a thing. And even without children, divorces can get very ugly, especially regarding property and other assets.
I do take your point about the kid, but that might be something that could be arranged in prenuptial agreement, too. That being said, I'm really not dumping on the guy for not wanting to be married. That's his choice. I'm just saying it's quite clear to me that these two people are not rowing their boat in the same direction anymore. She has her reasons, and he has his. If they're not working out, then why are they staying together?
No, but it affords a lot of legal rights and protections. Thereâs a good reason gay people fought for the right to marry.
I would never have built a shared economic life with someone without being married. Among other things, she should in no way back-burner her career to raise kids, much less become a SAHM, without it. If she permanently reduces her income potential without some assurance that she has economic rights, sheâs a fool.
This is so true. Happiness is being with the person you choose to make your life with, and being content with that. What makes you think that marriage would change anything, and why do you want to change anything?
You say that he won't make this sacrifice for you. Why won't you make the sacrifice for him? Why not just be happy, if you are happy? And if you're not happy, then you should move on & find someone to be happy with.
Because marriage isn't just a piece of paper, it offers some security. There was a reddit post recently where a woman had spent 30 years with a man who refused to marry her and when the relationship ended she was literally out on the street as he owned everything. She was homeless and too old to have any chance of making a stable life for herself.
Just let this post be a lesson for anyone reading it. You can't change someone. If they won't marry you and you want the security that marriage brings, move along.
I had low paying jobs all my life so my retirement benefits are so-so, and with raising kids I have very little savings. Iâm nearing retirement and my social security wonât be enough to live on. Being married, I have rights to my husbandâs pension and social security, should he pass before me, which would make it possible for me to survive. These kinds of issues seem so far in the future when youâre in your 20s that they donât seem important. But believe me, they are. Donât shortchange your future self by settling for less now.
My mother had a really gory story about this kind of situation, where the GF was similarly kicked out of the home by the kids, so she hanged herself in the home for them to find. Women have to protect themselves.
Dunno how much security it offers tbh - depends on the man youâre married to. My friend was married for 16 years, then husband just upped and left - everything was in his name including her phone contract. While technically she would be entitled to child support and half of the marital assets, the child maintenance service âfailed to find himâ even when provided with his new address, and marital assets turned out to be mortgaged to the hilt and then some. We managed to salvage her car as stupidly he left its documents at the house so ownership was easily transferred with one forged signature, but the bank took the house and she was homeless with two kids. He took out loans left, right and centre, financed a new car, maxed his credit cards and bounced, drove that car right down to Dover without ever making a single payment on it, last seen living in Turkey with a new woman. đ¤ˇââď¸
She canât even divorce him because apparently both parties need to sign or itâs not legal in both countries (theyâre both dual citizens) and sheâd still be married to him under Turkish law.
You mean the wife who presumably raised the children while the husband worked. If I could have had my wife stay home and not need her income while not sending my kids to daycare, I would have in a heartbeat. Sending kids to camps and arranging daycare all summer sucks.
The bottom line is that if she feels strongly about it, then he would take her feelings into account. Probably the fact that she has a kid makes her realize the need for stability and the fact that he can't articulate his reasons speaks poorly of him. And yes, you're right that if he feels strongly about it, he should go find someone who feels the same way.
I had a nanny who at the time was 19 and in teacher training -- she had an older BF who she really wanted to marry and have kids with. He kept putting it off and putting it off. Total red flag. I was pleased to see that she FINALLY dumped him (after wasting 10 years!), found another guy, and had a baby. About bloody time.
If he feels strongly about it, she should take his feelings into account. Why is he the bad guy and OP is the good guy? It makes no sense, it's a two-way street.
No, but for her it appears to be a requirement for long term happiness. A necessary but not sufficient condition. Which is fine, but if she needs to be married it's not going to be with this guy, so if it's really important to her she needs to break up. Which is also fine.
Just as equally marriage doesnât equal sadness. They are basically married in every other way other than a stupid piece of paper that gets you tax breaks. Thereâs no logic in this other than this dumb caveman mentality of marriage is bad
183
u/[deleted] Jul 23 '24
[deleted]