Does anyone else think getting married is just a very bad idea.

pwurple

I kinda like hanging out with someone who likes me enough to promise to hang around for ever.

But hey, it's not for everyone.

conorhal

I can't believe the sad and cynical attitude of so many people. Are we so selfish and and everything in our lives so transitory and disposible that this is now a common attitude? That nobody's intrested in building a life and a stable home and children with sombody? Are that actually that many people who at the very least don't mind dying anonymous in some hospital bed with little or nobody that will mourn them?

At the very least it's a careless attitude.

Would you take a job without a legal contract?

Would you invest a couple of decades in a company and get made redundant from a whole life that defined who you are an not at least expect a severence package?

And ask your self, how well do you treat a rental car? :pac:

Abrasax

bonerm wrote: »

Why even that? Heather Mills got something like £25mill for 5 years with Paul McCarthney. Did she somehow contribute that much value to his earnings over the period in question? Take away his royalties (practically all of which were activated before he even met Mills) and I doubt he even generated a fraction of that amount himself over the same period (let alone with her input).

I dunno how she got away with that much.
She hadn't a leg to stand on.


:pac:

Abi

bad2dabone wrote: »

thats true but Biggins goes on about his wife so much that it's become kind of....gay....

And I quote :pac:

bad2dabone wrote: »

I dunno, I enjoy being married, my wife is totally amazing and i'm very happy that I've "bagsied" her for the rest of my life.

^^ that said, I do not judge. If you're both quite happy with your lot, and anyone else who is -well thats pretty cool.


Its just not for some people, and its unfortunate that they find this out too late. I include myself in that, I followed stupid steps that are 'expected' of a couple, and lets say I had something of an allergic reaction to it. It doesnt come natually to some (men and women).

I just felt suffrocated, and like my whole life was mapped out for me. Some birds are just not meant to be caged, and I think I'm one of them. Tbh, I wouldn't have a problem with a long term relationship, but even say the word 'marriage' and I'll break out into a rash.


But like I said- if its for you, its for you.

fikay

SugarHigh wrote: »

I'm not afraid of commitment or against long term relationships but I just don't see why someone would get married outside of religious reasons.

It just seems like you are setting yourself up for hassle if you the relationship goes sour while not really adding anything to the relationship if it works out.

Then there is damage to your bank balance if it goes tits up.
http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/2460/1276778988090.jpg

I've seen all sorts of things on the interwebs, but that link is fcuking disgusting

Dudess

TPD wrote: »

I believe that in Ireland at least, even a married father has no rights to his children.

He may have fuk all rights, but he's still more protected in that regard than he would be if he weren't married.

conorhal wrote: »

Are that actually that many people who at the very least don't mind dying anonymous in some hospital bed with little or nobody that will mourn them?

No? But if you don't meet anyone you want to marry, so be it. Getting married to someone you're only kinda into out of fear of dying alone is far more depressing an idea...

Mike 1972

conorhal wrote: »

I can't believe the sad and cynical attitude of so many people. Are we so selfish and and everything in our lives so transitory and disposible that this is now a common attitude? That nobody's intrested in building a life and a stable home and children with sombody?

Youre accusing people of being sad, cynical and selfish and yet you put lifelong partnership on the same level as ownership of a car ?

Dudess wrote: »

t. Getting married to someone you're only kinda into out of fear of dying alone is far more depressing an idea...

Not to mention being based on the rather dubious assumption that the other person is going to live longer than oneself

Carl Sagan

conorhal wrote: »

I can't believe the sad and cynical attitude of so many people. Are we so selfish and and everything in our lives so transitory and disposible that this is now a common attitude? That nobody's intrested in building a life and a stable home and children with sombody? Are that actually that many people who at the very least don't mind dying anonymous in some hospital bed with little or nobody that will mourn them?

At the very least it's a careless attitude.

Would you take a job without a legal contract?

Would you invest a couple of decades in a company and get made redundant from a whole life that defined who you are an not at least expect a severence package?

And ask your self, how well do you treat a rental car? :pac:

First you talk about being selfish about material things, and then finish expecting a severance package?

People can have kids, a life and a stable home with someone they love without being married, and it's ridiculous to think otherwise.

Coriolanus

StormWarrior wrote: »

Married men live longer than single men, it must be doing them some favours.

This is why I want polygamy legalised. A married man lives on average three years longer than an unmarried man. I figure five or six is probably the limit, after that the diminishing returns turn into negative feedback.
Personally, I think it should be enshrined in the ECHR that a man, where it can be shown that doing so has a good chance of extending his lifetime, should be allowed to marry more than one woman. Anything less is practically euthanasia. :mad:

Mike 1972

Nevore wrote: »

Personally, I think it should be enshrined in the ECHR that a man, where it can be shown that doing so has a good chance of extending his lifetime, should be allowed to marry more than one woman. Anything less is practically euthanasia. :mad:

What if he wants to marry more than one man or some combination of men and women :pac:

Mike 1972

Mike 1972 wrote: »

I was under the impression that it was the exact opposite and that it hadnt changed ????

Child allowance afaik was paid to men... back in the day when all the family finance belonged to the man...

Coriolanus

Mike 1972 wrote: »

What if he wants to marry more than one man or some combination of men and women :pac:

I don't have any statistics on whether gay men live longer than single men or a man in a het relationship, so can't really say.

peasant

Marriage is great actually.


It shuts up all those nagging parents, grandparents, aunties and other assorted distant relatives good and proper

Kiera

peasant wrote: »

Marriage is great actually.


It shuts up all those nagging parents, grandparents, aunties and other assorted distant relatives good and proper

My family have been told its never gonna happen so they shut up a long long time ago about all that

WaltKowalski

bluewolf wrote: »

Child allowance afaik was paid to men... back in the day when all the family finance belonged to the man...

I thought it was the opposite too. Child benefit was paid to mothers as a lot of fathers couldn't be depended upon to support their families.

WaltKowalski

WaltKowalski wrote: »

I thought it was the opposite too. Child benefit was paid to mothers as a lot of fathers couldn't be depended upon to support their families.

It took me the last 5 mins but here we go, from the "list of things women could not do in 1970":

5 Collect her children's allowance

The 1944 legislation that introduced the payment of children's allowances (now called child benefit) specified that they be paid to the father. The father could, if he chose, mandate his wife to collect the money, but she had no right to it.

How it changed

Responding to the report of the Commission on the Status of Women, the 1974 Social Welfare Act entitled mothers to collect the allowance.

http://www.irishtimes.com/indepth/sisters/changes-from-1970s.html

lynski

i never saw the point either until i met him. no piece of paper and all that stuff..
then one day i knew i had to marry him and i proposed and we did 6 weeks later.
no big wedding crap, just the 2 of us on a beach and a celebrant/witnesses.
You'll know when you know.

force majeure

The older I get the more I think marriage even if it were to take a bad turn is better than flopping back in my rocking chair a few years from now saying to myself 'what if I did'.
Regret is ok as long as one tries.

Mike 1972

peasant wrote: »

It shuts up all those nagging parents, grandparents, aunties and other assorted distant relatives good and proper

Hardly

It just gives them other stuff to nag about

geeky

force majeure wrote: »

The older I get the more I think marriage even if it were to take a bad turn is better than flopping fapping back in my rocking chair a few years from now saying to myself 'what if I did'.
Regret is ok as long as one tries.

FYP. :cool:

Lux23

No if he is very wealthy and likely to cheat. Then its a great idea.

stovelid

Lux23 wrote: »

No if he is very wealthy and likely to cheat. Then its a great idea.

Who says romance is dead?

Giselle

If you're thick enough to marry some money obsessed, selfish, lazy, greedy, out for themselves golddigger (female or male) then you probably will pay for it in a million ways before you have to sort out a divorce settlement.

Luckily most people are a bit more discerning.

SarahBM

force majeure wrote: »

The older I get the more I think marriage even if it were to take a bad turn is better than flopping back in my rocking chair a few years from now saying to myself 'what if I did'.
Regret is ok as long as one tries.

But if you are with the person you love then you never will think what if. You will only think "what if" if you let that person get away. surely you dont need a marriage certificate to hold on to them.
I dont know. I just dont see why its such a big deal. being together should be enough.
I am a hopeless romantic though.

epgc3fyqirnbsx

You should really know the person you are marrying, brief engagements are a very bad idea imo.
If you're engaged for a few years, have done the whole holidays thing and living together thing you really get to know a person
And if that person is a materialistic greedy f*ckwit then there's every chance you'll get stung on marriage

Not pushed on getting married myself (I'm 27 and dont even want a gf ffs) but I would like to think that if I did I would take my sweet time about it, it's the most important contract you will ever sign. And potentially the most devastating

Romance is dead :pac:

Abi

peasant wrote: »

Marriage is great actually.


It shuts up all those nagging parents, grandparents, aunties and other assorted distant relatives good and proper

Best. Reason. Ever.



Not. Take it from me.

Lux23 wrote: »

No if he is very wealthy and likely to cheat. Then its a great idea.

Oh no you di-int.


Bad form lady. I've respect for any self-sufficient woman. The leeches, I do not. wouldn't you feel dead inside living off a man?



Self-respecting women make their own way in life.

SarahBM

Abigayle wrote: »

Self-respecting women make their own way in life.

Amen sister!!! I never want to depend on a man for anything!! why should I

minister poxbottle

Elessar wrote: »

I think relationships in general are a bad idea.

i'm guessing here yer single no kids and sitting yer junior cert covered with spots and never had a partner. am i right?

DeVore

I'm 40 and I have never married... the idea of compromise doesnt sit well with me.

I think the idea that everyone finds someone who is their "other half" is bonkers. Far far too many people simply sleepwalk into marriage and then regret at leisure or go through horrible breakups and devastate kids.


Of course while my folks understand my point of view, my "distant" relatives seem to have concluded that I'm "selfish".... (hence they remain "distant").

The only defensible reason to ever marry someone is if you love each other and want to make a pronouncement of your intention to stay together forever.

DeV.

Sharpshooter

DeVore wrote: »

I think the idea that everyone finds someone who is their "other half" is bonkers. Far far too many people simply sleepwalk into marriage and then regret at leisure or go through horrible breakups and devastate kids.

But tbh, that can happen at any stage in a marriage, there are no guarantees.:pac:

DeVore wrote: »

Of course while my folks understand my point of view, my "distant" relatives seem to have concluded that I'm "selfish".... (hence they remain "distant").

That's their opinion, your opinion on what is right for you is what counts.

DeVore wrote: »

The only defensible reason to ever marry someone is if you love each other and want to make a pronouncement of your intention to stay together forever.

DeV.

Shame it doesn't always work out that way, no matter what the good intentions are.

Heckler

Got married last saturday. Am posting from my honeymoon. New wife is asleep in bed.

We were going out 5 years( living together for three) and it was the most natural thing in the world for me to ask her to marry me. She said yes and its the mutts nuts.

Had a small ceremony that didn't cost a fortune. Only people that meant something to us were there. Had a fantastic day and now am enjoying a couple of weeks before reality sets in !

fufureida

No. If you love someone. marry them. Why wait arous ' getting to know someone ' for 5-6-7-8 years? Or even 3? you won't know someow until your tied down for good.

I'm gettin married soon and I'm only 20. couldn't be happier.

KingLoser

if you liked it, then you shoulda put a ring on it.

fufureida

KingLoser wrote: »

if you liked it, then you shoulda put a ring on it.

Exactly.

minister poxbottle

Heckler wrote: »

Got married last saturday. Am posting from my honeymoon. New wife is asleep in bed.

We were going out 5 years( living together for three) and it was the most natural thing in the world for me to ask her to marry me. She said yes and its the mutts nuts.

Had a small ceremony that didn't cost a fortune. Only people that meant something to us were there. Had a fantastic day and now am enjoying a couple of weeks before reality sets in !

congrats man dont mind the cynical bastards. my wife and i lived together for 20 years before we got married 7 years ago thats 27 years together our young lad is 11 next week, and life couldn't be better

DeVore

SS, thats correct, for me I dont feel its right, it might be for others. Good for them, I genuinely wish them well. My parents are still very much in love 47 years later.

My point is that its not an inevitability.... imho it should be a LOT rarer then it is.

DeV.

minidazzler

DeVore wrote: »

I think the idea that everyone finds someone who is their "other half" is bonkers. Far far too many people simply sleepwalk into marriage and then regret at leisure or go through horrible breakups and devastate kids.

DeV.

I agree with this mostly.

Plato had a theory that basically said we all used to have 4 arms, 4 legs and 2 heads but shared the same body, but one of the pantheon got jealous or something and decided to separate us so that we spend our lives wandering around looking for our literal other halfs.

I call bull on that for many reasons, not least of all that it's insane.

But also because I believe there are thousands of women in this world, and who knows a couple of men, I'm straight, but still for the sake of arguement, that I could happily live out my life living with and loving.

None of these is my one true love, because I don't believe that there can be just one person out there for me to be totally happy with.

Alot of people who marry their "one true love" have it very conveinient I think, how nice that their "one true love" lived 5 miles down the road from them their whole lives and they met them when they were 20 and knew straight away.

I call bull on that because the chances of someone's one true love living so close their whole lives is improbable at best.

I am not saying they can't love this person, jsut that the idea that there is only one person in the world for everyone is total non-sense.

I dunno if I will ever get married, if I do then I would want to be sure I am actually in love with this one more than any I have ever been. I have only one demand in my head for if I ever do get married....open bar for all my guests. It's a party right? Well, I will be partying.

That said, at the moment, at 21, marriage is not in my future methinks!

DeVore

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gaid72fqzNE

minidazzler i think you might find that funny!! (and most other people.... mostly the single ones )


DeV.

Reganio 2

Marriage is a terrible idea, sure if you get her pregnant just leg it.

I am joking of course.



Kind of.

AskMyChocolate

liah wrote: »

Visa marriage. :cool:

Otherwise, no point really. It's a nice way to show you love the other person but the consequences are too great if things to belly up. I'd prefer a very long engagement, I reckon![/QUOTE]

So would the UDA, but they'd never be able to introduce your Mum to a "real IRA man".:p:)

Tar.Aldarion

No marriage thanks, fiancée is way cooler sounding. So that indefinitely.

AskMyChocolate

minidazzler wrote: »

Ah, so that's how you are living here without being kicked out yet!

The only part f marriage that appeals to me is a massive party with Open Bar. None of the rest of it seems fun really.

Is there not a Bi-lateral agreement between Ireland and Canada on pretty much everything?

You can break your toe in Montreal and be treated in Dublin afaik, and vice-versa.

We can be lazy/objectionable ex-colonies when we choose.:)

AskMyChocolate

Abigayle wrote: »

Post smells of Biggins!



:pac:

You're such a cynic Abi. Get sum luv inta ya!

KittyeeTrix

Me and my hubby were engaged for almost 11 years before we got married. In that time we had 4 children. We didn't feel the absolute need to be married but decided to as we felt it would be better from a legal standpoint with the children and all that.............
Love being married and have been now for the past 6 years with no change to everyday life but I suppose we were well settled into our relationship and so any problems would have surfaced in the 1st 11 years of our relationship rather than during the marriage...

billy the squid

The thread reminded me of this story from a day or two ago

http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/migrant-worker-faces-deportation-after-marrying-in-israel-1.296588

marriage turned out to be a bad idea for those two.

Wibbs

StormWarrior wrote: »

Then why do couples who don't want and never have children get married?

All sorts of reasons. Security, legal reasons, tradition.

And why is it usually men who do the asking if marriage is so terrible for them?

Again tradition. Men may do the asking but in a lot of cases they're pushed into it. Try going out with a woman for say 6 years without the marriage thing coming up from her side. Not all thankfully, but more women think on the subject of marriage than men. They definitely think more on the wedding day. I think if you look on it objectively, on the wedding day the man is just a prop.

Plus many men buy into the idea that they have a limited enough choice. Its a subconscious thing, so if they do meet and kick off a relationship, they think this is as good as it gets and want to secure it.

Married men live longer than single men, it must be doing them some favours.

That's a dubious enough stat. Ive read others where they looked at the numbers within the numbers and men who had successful enough serial relationships but didnt "settle down" lived the longest of all.

I think when it works it's a brilliant idea. The problem is it doesnt work to the degree many think. The fact is over a lifetime, the majority of relationships you may have fail. Fail in the sense that they split up, both may learn and grow from the time together. That's non marriage relationships where the notion of together forever legally wasnt reached. If it gets to the point where marriage is considered a good thing, you would think they would be less likely to fail.

The bald stats seem to be that where divorce is relatively straightforward, up to 40% of marriages go belly up. In Sweden(AFAIR) its nearly 60%. Of the others that stay together, how many are healthy relationships? How many stay together because of the kids, or fear of leaving, rather than a mutually beneficial nurturing and healthy partnership? So I reckon the actual figure for good marriages is actually low enough. Throw in different expectations nowadays and different pressures and that figure shrinks even more IMHO.

So then if and when it fails? The dissolution of the contract is not equal. Men get the short end of the stick across the board. Some women do too, but its rarer. We've often been bs'd about how divorce is harder on the woman. Men are two and a half times more likely to commit suicide after a divorce. Two and half times. http://www.articlesbase.com/divorce-articles/why-are-men-more-likely-to-commit-suicide-after-divorce-383186.html They lose a lot of access to their children, lose their homes, lose their emotional and financial security. Long list.

Given IME women way more than men are the ones to leave longtermers,the ones to do the splitting up, then added to the potential fallout from such a split, I personally think for men the decision to get married is an unwise one. Even moreso as people, both men and women usually make daft choices in partners in the first place.

TL;DR? The answer to the OP's question is a general yes from me.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

I think if you look on it objectively, on the wedding day the man is just a prop.

Ah come on wibbs.

Abi

AskMyChocolate wrote: »

You're such a cynic Abi. Get sum luv inta ya!

Why complicate things?. No tyvm! =P

consultech

The way I see it (and didn't always mind you) is that in this day and age, if a woman is willing to give up a career, mother your children and raise them, and often mother you to an extent aswell - then she should have some guarantees on the off-chance you have a mid life crisis and shack up with some 25 year old.

Wibbs

bluewolf wrote: »

Ah come on wibbs.

For a helluva lot of wedding days he is. The day itself while being for the couple is much more aimed at the bride. It's "her" day. A lot more women fantasise from early on about their wedding days than men ever do. They think on it more. Look at the traditional type dress code. The primary males are all dressed identically. The bride is the one in the fancy gear, so outrageously fancy that no female guest could possibly upstage her. Then the collection of bridesmaids and their specialised fancy gear.

http://www.m2review.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/weddingparty1.jpg

That's what I mean by "prop". I dont mean it in a negative way, though with some it can be, like anything really. Too many IMHO think about the engagement, the plans for the wedding and the wedding itself, rather than the marriage.