Having the 'marriage and kids' talk.

lazygal

There's a thread over in TLL about women leaving it too late to have children. I, and friends of mine, have all had experience of men not wanting to have the chat or getting cold feet/doing a runner if the subject of marriage and/or kids comes up.


So, gentlemen, does that talk freak you out? And given that women have a finite amount of time to get pregnant the 'natural' way, does that time limit have any bearing on your relationships? Do you feel there's a window for men being a father or are you happy enough to wait a little longer?

Given that I've heard stories from my female friends about their experiences with men, I'd love to hear the other side of the story.

LegacyUser

I'm female, but here's my experience.
Dated guy for 5 years, everything going swimmingly...until "the talk"....other than minor quibbles, this was literally the only thing we had every properly fought over.
He wanted to wait another 5 years before getting engaged/married (had no issues with the marriage as whole otherwise), I didn't want to wait (both of us were late 20's at the time).He based a lot of his argument on his older brothers' relationship, who was 31 at the time but dating a girl my age- they apparently had no interest whatsoever in the whole marriage thing themselves, happy being happy& all that jazz, so what was my problem? Long story short, we split up, following which, his brother& gf got engaged& married within 18 months.....

Otherwise, amongst my sample size of 8 weddings in the last year, in all cases, it was the brides who spearheaded "the talk" first; there was no spontaneous/surprise proposal coming from the grooms' side- admittedly they all went through with the proposal& wedding however, and afaik are all happy.

The Corinthian

lazygal wrote: »

So, gentlemen, does that talk freak you out? And given that women have a finite amount of time to get pregnant the 'natural' way, does that time limit have any bearing on your relationships? Do you feel there's a window for men being a father or are you happy enough to wait a little longer?

Biologically men can in theory have children at 80. In practical terms our 'window' is dictated indirectly by our ability to attract a woman who can still have children.

Fortunately for us (be it a mixture of biology, social convention or whatever) younger women will still tend to be attracted to older men on average, which means that we should be able to settle down with one who is anything between five and twenty years our junior if we wanted; depending upon our own attractiveness - physical, personality and, let's be blunt about this, financial.

As such, there's very little pressure on men to settle down until much later; many of us don't even vaguely consider it at all before our late twenties / early thirties - and I mean vaguely.

Secondly there is the very real consequences of marriage not working out. Two thirds of divorces are initiated by the woman and if it does happen it's the man who's going to get screwed in the settlement. Full stop.

Sure, maybe you're in love and everything's hunky dory now, but so was everything for that couple who's wedding you attended seven years ago and who's recently split; with the guy having to hand over the keys to the house, continue paying the mortgage, spousal and child maintenance and thus forced to move back in with his ageing parents. The older you get the more you see this and it's chilling because the older you get, the more you also consider your old age and whether you'll have enough to survive in it.

The odds might only be 1-in-6 in Ireland of a marriage failing, but interestingly those are the same odds as losing a game of Russian Roulette - and how many people want to play that?

So this too is a factor for many men; at the very least it'll make you think twice, thrice or more before you take the leap, if not dispel the notion altogether (an increasingly common phenomenon known as the Marriage Strike).

So, in summation, and while there are other factors at play, the two principle ones in my mind are that:

• There's no rush for us; we can easily wait until our late thirties, if not forties before starting a family.
• We have to be a lot more certain of the person we're going to marry than women need be, because the potential consequences are so much greater.

seamus

I think to a certain extent part of it is that in many cases marriage is seen as an achievement for a woman, but an inevitability for a man. This is probably cultural moreso than anything else.

So men have no particular great drive to get married, it's not a measure of success in the eyes of their peers in the same way that it can be for women.

You also have the "don't rock the boat" point of view where marriage is perceived to change a relationship (though in reality it doesn't), and if a man is happy with his relationship then he may see no point in getting married and potentially risking what he has. For men, marriage is often painted as making the relationship worse, not better, so the fear of marriage isn't a fear of commitment or whatever, it's often just a fear that it will ruin the good relationship that they have going.

The children thing I think is actually a separate issue to marriage overall. I don't think men consider any "window" for children, or at least haven't been told that one exists. Many men only realise that a window exists when they reach their forties and find they don't have the energy they used to have and the idea of chasing after a child sounds exhausting. Up until their mid-30's, men generally still think they're invincible and virile, so it's not until they start having knees that ache in the cold or having to see a physio about their back that they realise they are in fact getting old. It's only then that the concept of any kind of "window" for children might come into focus.

Even then, I believe a lot of mens' attitudes towards children comes from their own upbringing, so the desire to be a father will often be heavily influenced by their own father's involvement/attitude in upbringing, as well as their overall experience as a child.
I had a great childhood, no complaints to be had, it's all good memories. So although I've never been mad about other people's children, I knew from my mid-twenties that I would love to bring a child up to have the same or similar experiences that I had. I was probably 95% there and then when my brothers started having kids and I saw how awesome they were, that pretty much sealed it for me.

However, I can see how a man who may have had a cold or non-existent father, or otherwise just not a great experience growing up, would be reluctant to go through that again from the parental side. Women who had poor childhoods obviously can and do feel this way too, but there's such a cultural and biological push for them that it's harder to fight it.

Corinth does make a good point about "marriage strike". For men, you could liken a marriage to signing up to a very punitive mortgage. When everything is good, you're warm and comfortable and happy and chances are it will work out in the end. But there's a chance taht if things go wrong, you will end up losing everything.
However, I'm not sure if it's a common thought for men. Fear of divorce is not something I have ever heard any men mention outside of an internet forum.

The Corinthian

seamus wrote: »

Corinth does make a good point about "marriage strike". For men, you could liken a marriage to signing up to a very punitive mortgage. When everything is good, you're warm and comfortable and happy and chances are it will work out in the end. But there's a chance taht if things go wrong, you will end up losing everything.
However, I'm not sure if it's a common thought for men. Fear of divorce is not something I have ever heard any men mention outside of an internet forum.

Personally I feel that men who reject marriage altogether on this basis (the "marriage strike") are still a small minority, albeit a growing one.

However I would be pretty certain that the potential consequences are a consideration - a man would have to be an idiot to ignore them when faced with marriage.

That we don't discuss it openly, even with male friends, is not surprising though; if in a relationship, even voicing such a concern could be seen as an admission that you don't fully trust or have doubts in the woman you're with and many men would shy away from this. And if single or if marriage is not on the horizon, then we're probably not even thinking about it.

Pembily

The Corinthian wrote: »

We have to be a lot more certain of the person we're going to marry than women need be, because the potential consequences are so much greater.

How so? Have you evidence to back this up?

seamus wrote: »

I think to a certain extent part of it is that in many cases marriage is seen as an achievement for a woman, but an inevitability for a man. This is probably cultural moreso than anything else.

+1, that is very true, it really is seen as an "achievement" more for women than men.

seamus wrote: »

You also have the "don't rock the boat" point of view where marriage is perceived to change a relationship (though in reality it doesn't), and if a man is happy with his relationship then he may see no point in getting married and potentially risking what he has. For men, marriage is often painted as making the relationship worse, not better, so the fear of marriage isn't a fear of commitment or whatever, it's often just a fear that it will ruin the good relationship that they have going.

I think that again is a cultural thing... I don't understand it at all.

seamus wrote: »

However, I'm not sure if it's a common thought for men. Fear of divorce is not something I have ever heard any men mention outside of an internet forum.

I am a girl but I have many male friends and divorce is never their reason for being afraid to get married. It's actually my female friends who are afraid of divorce and not the guys.

The Corinthian

Pembily wrote: »

How so? Have you evidence to back this up?

http://blog.divorce-online.co.uk/?p=1386

Pembily

The Corinthian wrote: »

http://blog.divorce-online.co.uk/?p=1386

That states that they lose the family home, who says the man paid for it? I have seen a number of female family members and friends being the one "screwed" by divorce!

Zulu

Excellent points by TC & seamus. But it's worth considering/food for thought...

Perhaps most men don't balk at the talk of marriage when they are in the right relationship?

Consider the infamous "friend zone" for men. A situation were the girl gets all the emotional support & trappings of a relationship, but isn't physically intimate with a boy who seeks more. Eventually, when the boy declares his intentions, he's knocked back as there was never a chance from the start. Now, consider the opposite. A man gets all the trappings of a relationship physical & emotional with a woman he can. Eventually, the woman presses the point of marriage, and the man exit's as he has no intention of growing old with her.

The Corinthian

Pembily wrote: »

That states that they lose the family home, who says the man paid for it?

You might actually want to read beyond the first sentence of the article.

I have seen a number of female family members and friends being the one "screwed" by divorce!

Whatever, I'm not terribly interested in arguing the point, especially if all you've got to offer is anecdotal evidence bases upon what you consider to be 'screwed'.

All I've said is this is one of the reasons that men are more hesitant about marriage and believe that there is good reason for this (as the non-anecdotal evidence tends to demonstrate).

seamus

Pembily wrote: »

I think that again is a cultural thing... I don't understand it at all.

It's most definitely cultural in this country anyway, probably in the US and UK too.
The woman is generally seen as being the one in charge of the marriage. So a common slag after a man has gotten married is about whether or not he can get a "free pass" to go out on the booze with his mates, or about being "under orders" and having to get home before a curfew.

So in many cases getting married is perceived by men as swapping your girlfriend/partner for a "Mammy" and the loss of freedoms that such a thing entails. Some men prefer this idea, most don't and may see marriage as the death of a good relationship.

Zulu

Pembily wrote: »

That states that they lose the family home, who says the man paid for it? I have seen a number of female family members and friends being the one "screwed" by divorce!

Well whether they did or didn't contribute they can rest assured they aren't going to come out on top. Access to children determined by her. House goes to her... I'm surprised you are questing this frankly.

The Corinthian

Zulu wrote: »

A man gets all the trappings of a relationship physical & emotional with a woman he can. Eventually, the woman presses the point of marriage, and the man exit's as he has no intention of growing old with her.

The "if you're not with the one you love, love the one you're with" syndrome.

Aye, that also happens, especially where the woman is driving the relationship (she was the one who pushed for cohabitation, for example) and the guy is really just going with the flow. Probably more common than many of us would care to admit.

eviltwin

lazygal wrote: »

There's a thread over in TLL about women leaving it too late to have children. I, and friends of mine, have all had experience of men not wanting to have the chat or getting cold feet/doing a runner if the subject of marriage and/or kids comes up.


So, gentlemen, does that talk freak you out? And given that women have a finite amount of time to get pregnant the 'natural' way, does that time limit have any bearing on your relationships? Do you feel there's a window for men being a father or are you happy enough to wait a little longer?

Given that I've heard stories from my female friends about their experiences with men, I'd love to hear the other side of the story.

I've asked this to my friends both male and female - we're all mid to late 30's and so far beside me all are child free.

I would have thought the notion of a biological clock was almost exclusively female but all my male friends would have one. Obviously its not as pressing because there is the security in knowing they can have children whenever but they have a cut off in their own heads beyond which they don't want children.

I have the same thing here in my own house. My 40 yr old husband would love another baby but feels it has to happen in the next year or two or he will be too old. He wants to be young enough to enjoy them and wants to be here long enough to meet our grandkids. As he says himself there is no joy in looking forward to being a father of a young child in your 50's / 60's.

The marriage thing I can't really comment on, we were living together for years with our kids and marriage was never really that much of a big deal for us. For some people they seem to go hand in hand though.

Honey-ec

The Corinthian wrote: »

Secondly there is the very real consequences of marriage not working out. Two thirds of divorces are initiated by the woman and if it does happen it's the man who's going to get screwed in the settlement. Full stop.

Sorry, but this is patently not true. My marriage ended last year. I moved out of the marital home to my parents. I'm not receiving a penny from my ex, nor would I expect to. I work, why would he pay me just because the marriage ended? All I expect from him is fair recompense for the money I put into the house over the seven years we were together. After that, he's free and single.

It may not be the "norm", but not all marriages ending result in the man being "screwed".

Zulu

Honey-ec wrote: »

It may not be the "norm", but not all marriages ending result in the man being "screwed".

Ok, so 99.9% 79.9% of them do. The point is the "norm" is that the man does get screwed...
What the hell, you're contradicting yourself.

Maguined

Honey-ec wrote: »

Sorry, but this is patently not true. My marriage ended last year. I moved out of the marital home to my parents. I'm not receiving a penny from my ex, nor would I expect to. I work, why would he pay me just because the marriage ended? All I expect from him is fair recompense for the money I put into the house over the seven years we were together. After that, he's free and single.

It may not be the "norm", but not all marriages ending result in the man being "screwed".

Was you leaving the home done by your own choice or was it decided in court?

That article is for any cases that were contested in court. If you decided things for yourself then you are being a nice and fair person so fair play to you, however the article points out that if things get contested in court men will lose out 99% of the time.

The Corinthian

Honey-ec wrote: »

It may not be the "norm", but not all marriages ending result in the man being "screwed".

I'd wager you have no children from your ex-husband, in which case divorce tends to be far less punitive to men (although a man is still probably more likely to be paying maintenance than receiving it even then).

Once children are added to the mix, then that he'll lose out in a divorce is almost guaranteed. Child custody will go to the wife (well over 90% of the time) and with custody, the family home (as it is naturally the children's home). If the wife is a SAHM or works only part time, then she'll also be entitled to spousal maintenance, on top of child maintenance.

And let's be honest, if not for children, how many couples get married any more? Certainly some, but you'd have to be in complete denial if you thought this was anything but a small minority at this stage.

The facts are what they are and while you're always going to find anecdotal examples that contradict them, they're still only anecdotes that are demonstrably a minority and men do consider this where it comes to marriage, even if most keep silent about it. Attacking what I've said won't change that.

floggg

I honestly don't know if I will have kids or not, but regardless if I do or don't, I fully intend to get married/civil partnered.

There is so much more to it than kids - apart from the commitment aspect, it's important to establish your partner as next of kin if you are building a life long relationships.

You only have to look at some of the horror stories you hear about same sex partners being excluded from hospital visitations and decisions, inheritances, or even funerals.

LegacyUser

The predominant theme running through posts here seems to be FEAR.
What if it all goes pear shaped in a few years? What if the marriage breaks up? What if there are kids involved? What if the courts decide against me re finances/access?

Is it really the case that protecting ourselves against future emotional/financial ruin is the sole determinant in deciding to/not to get married?

Honey-ec

Zulu wrote: »

Ok, so 99.9% 79.9% of them do. The point is the "norm" is that the man does get screwed...
What the hell, you're contradicting yourself.

I'm not contradicting myself, I'm contradicting The Corinthian, who stated that the man gets screwed in divorce cases, and I quote, "end of". My point is that there are clearly cases where this doesn't happen, but I accepted that they are in the minority. They do exist, though.

The Corinthian wrote: »

I'd wager you have no children from your ex-husband, in which case divorce tends to be far less punitive to men... Once children are added to the mix, then that he'll lose out in a divorce is almost guaranteed.

Then perhaps you should qualify your original statement to clarify that you're referring to cases where there are children involved rather than making a blanket statement that clearly doesn't apply in all cases.

LegacyUser

The Corinthian wrote: »

[*]There's no rush for us; we can easily wait until our late thirties, if not forties before starting a family.
[/LIST]

Scientists in Iceland have found that 97% of genetic mutations were caused by the age of the father, whilst the age of the mother had no impact.
The child of a 40 year old father had 2.5 times as many potentially damaging mutations as that of a 20 year old, and the gap increased with every passing year.
The study was based on genetic screening of 78 families whose children were either on the autistic spectrum, or diagnosed with schizophrenia, the data was then compared to hundreds of other families with no link to either condition.
The risk from older mothers (Downs' syndrome, miscarriage) still far far outweighs the male risk obviously.

Also, how many men who choose to delay fatherhood, have their sperm count checked regularly? I'd wager none.

The Corinthian

Honey-ec wrote: »

Then perhaps you should qualify your original statement to clarify that you're referring to cases where there are children involved rather than making a blanket statement that clearly doesn't apply in all cases.

That's a fair enough point, and you're right it should be qualified in this manner. Accepted.

Given this, the majority of marriages do involve children and children are commonly cited as the major if not principle reason for marriage (even the OP cited this). As of 2006, only 30.4% of marriages were childless - including marriages where starting a family is planned, but not yet begun and late marriages where having children was no longer a realistic option.

Additionally, men have very little control over fertility - a vasectomy is pretty much all we can do if we don't want to have children. As such, even if children are not on the cards now, there's no reason that they won't be in the future even if man doesn't want any and his wife changes her mind.

Honestly, it's not like I'm saying anything particularly radical. It's really just common sense for any man who's considering such a commitment, given the likely consequences of it not working out (which incidentally does not include marriages that don't break up, because the husband decides that he cannot afford it or fears he'll lose his children - I know quite a few anecdotal examples of those, I can tell you).

who_me

Reminds me of that old adage "Women marry men hoping they'll change, and they never do. Men marry women hoping they'll never change, and they always do."

I think - for a lot of men - a long term relationship with the right girl is the "ideal"; yet often get married & have children as that's what their girlfriend wants. Obviously, that's a generalisation, but I think there's a lot of truth in it.

Malari

The Corinthian wrote: »

That's a fair enough point, and you're right it should be qualified in this manner. Accepted.

Given this, the majority of marriages do involve children and children are commonly cited as the major if not principle reason for marriage (even the OP cited this). As of 2006, only 30.4% of marriages were childless - including marriages where starting a family is planned, but not yet begun and late marriages where having children was no longer a realistic option.

Additionally, men have very little control over fertility - a vasectomy is pretty much all we can do if we don't want to have children. As such, even if children are not on the cards now, there's no reason that they won't be in the future even if man doesn't want any and his wife changes her mind.

Honestly, it's not like I'm saying anything particularly radical. It's really just common sense for any man who's considering such a commitment, given the likely consequences of it not working out (which incidentally does not include marriages that don't break up, because the husband decides that he cannot afford it or fears he'll lose his children - I know quite a few anecdotal examples of those, I can tell you).

Anecdotally I know several couples where children were the reason for marriage after the kids were born. The men in these cases were more eager than the woman to get married. I commented on it at a wedding fair I was at recently, where nearly every bride-to-be was pregnant or had kids with her

Personally we had the talk from the other angle, where we are not haviing kids. It can still be a little nervy bringing it up in case your partner does want them. I think by the time we talked about it we knew neither of us was keen on kids in general (I don't think babies are cute, he hates kids being noisy ). As for marriage, neither of us want it in the immediate future, but wouldn't rule it out. He's brought it up as often as I have...as in what way we would plan it.

Wibbs

seamus wrote: »

However, I'm not sure if it's a common thought for men. Fear of divorce is not something I have ever heard any men mention outside of an internet forum.

I certainly have among my mates, but they'd be ahead of you in age and have been more exposed to divorce/separation among their peers so maybe that's a large part of it?

Honey-ec wrote: »

It may not be the "norm", but not all marriages ending result in the man being "screwed".

True. I can think of two other relationships similar to your experience, in one case the woman ended up paying maintenance. All were childless. Generally though.. actually no generally about it, in the vast majority of cases divorce is worse for men than women.

Interesting findings from the US. Scarily when it gets to divorce divorced men have a 39% extra risk of suicide, whereas "Among women, differences in suicide risk among those who were married, divorced or widowed were statistically insignificant'.

The Corinthian wrote: »

which incidentally does not include marriages that don't break up, because the husband decides that he cannot afford it or fears he'll lose his children - I know quite a few anecdotal examples of those, I can tell you.

Ditto.

As such, even if children are not on the cards now, there's no reason that they won't be in the future even if man doesn't want any and his wife changes her mind.

Actually that bit would really concern me going on the experience of others. The amount of men I've known that didn't want more kids than they already had, only for the wife to fall pregnant while being on the pill etc. One extreme example was one guy who continued to wear condoms for safety and his wife went ape over this. He went along with her and within weeks she was pregnant again.

floggg

The Corinthian wrote: »

Additionally, men have very little control over fertility - a vasectomy is pretty much all we can do if we don't want to have children. As such, even if children are not on the cards now, there's no reason that they won't be in the future even if man doesn't want any and his wife changes her mind.

WTF?

Ever hear of condoms?

Or ****ing abstaining if your wife tells you she wants to have a baby even though you don't want one.

If you can't take that much responsibility for your self you have no business having sex. Somebody so helpless shouldn't risk having to be responsible for somebody else.

The Corinthian

floggg wrote: »

Ever hear of condoms?

Not full proof by any stretch of the imagination.

Or ****ing abstaining if your wife tells you she wants to have a baby even though you don't want one.

Well, I can imagine that many men would rush into marriage if that's what they have to look forward to.

If you can't take that much responsibility for your self you have no business having sex. Somebody so helpless shouldn't risk having to be responsible for somebody else.

Sure and when women have no choice but to go to term, keep and raise a child upon becoming pregnant, I'll take this sexist nonsense of yours seriously.

Wibbs

floggg wrote: »

Or ****ing abstaining if your wife tells you she wants to have a baby even though you don't want one.

Yea I can see that relationship going well...

howamidifferent

Honey-ec wrote: »

Sorry, but this is patently not true. My marriage ended last year. I moved out of the marital home to my parents. I'm not receiving a penny from my ex, nor would I expect to. I work, why would he pay me just because the marriage ended? All I expect from him is fair recompense for the money I put into the house over the seven years we were together. After that, he's free and single.

It may not be the "norm", but not all marriages ending result in the man being "screwed".

You are probably in the 1% of cases mentioned in the article linked above. :rolleyes:

The Corinthian

howamidifferent wrote: »

You are probably in the 1% of cases mentioned in the article linked above. :rolleyes:

In fairness the above article specifically discussed contested divorces. Also marriages that are childless (like hers) could not be considered to be overly punitive against men. Even I had to admit that I'd overgeneralised.

This thread was started by a female poster who asked why men are less enthusiastic about getting married and I, along with others, gave a number of reasons, of which the consequences of marital breakup was one and pretty much every man agreed that this is one reason, perhaps not for themselves, but for many.

Looking over this thread and who thanked what posts, I'm sorry to say that it seems to be dividing up on gender lines. When I first responded I really did not intend for this to happen or for the reaction I got to even suggesting that men may get the short end of the stick in divorce.

So, a male perspective was sought (I presume so given there's another discussion on this on tLL) and you got it. Don't get upset at us guys if you don't like the answer.