Do you intend to get married?

eviltwin

eviltwin wrote: »

That's very true and a big part of why I got married but you shouldn't have to get married to have those rights.

I disagree, you can't just be handed these things and I think it's only right that an official process is necessary to gain the additional rights or advantages.

r93kaey5p2izun

Nah. Can't see myself in a long term relationship so not going to happen. Nothing against marriage itself. Most weddings are a complete nightmare though.

Eugene Norman

eviltwin wrote: »

That's very true and a big part of why I got married but you shouldn't have to get married to have those rights.

Anything else would be subject to abuse.

eviltwin

Miriam Thousands Stake wrote: »

I disagree, you can't just be handed these things and I think it's only right that an official process is necessary to gain the additional rights or advantages.

Well I don't think you should just be granted those rights, obviously the couple would have to apply for them. I was with my partner 13 years before we married, we had a home and a family. That is a commitment. It angers me that we had no rights despite our long standing relationship and that two people who married in haste would have better protection than we did. There should be a civil partnership option available to all couples who want to be protected but don't want to marry.

eviltwin

eviltwin wrote: »

Well I don't think you should just be granted those rights, obviously the couple would have to apply for them. I was with my partner 13 years before we married, we had a home and a family. That is a commitment. It angers me that we had no rights despite our long standing relationship and that two people who married in haste would have better protection than we did. There should be a civil partnership option available to all couples who want to be protected but don't want to marry.

I don't see why we need another version of marriage either get married and get the rights that go with it or else don't and miss out on them.

Why do we need something to give the rights marriage gives when we already have marriage?

eviltwin

Miriam Thousands Stake wrote: »

I don't see why we need another version of marriage either get married and get the rights that go with it or else don't and miss out on them.

People shouldn't be pressured into marriage just to protect what is already theirs

NachoBusiness

Not without a pre nup, no as I have a few ideas knocking around the ole noggin that are right up there with the topsy turvy ponytail tool and I ain't risking losing the windfall they are gonna bring my way for a piece of skirt. No siree bob. I have yachts to be buying with that loot.

Not a NSA agent

eviltwin wrote: »

I'm not into fuss and big dos either but they are not compulsory. Its amazing the amount of people who are turned off marriage because they hate the idea of being the centre of attention. There is a big difference between a wedding and a marriage.

I think one of the problems is the families. They have their expectations and people just dont want to have to keep explaining why they dont want to have a huge wedding with hundreds of peoples and years of debt.

Gongoozler

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Once you have security, it seems inevitable that the amount of effort will subconsciously decline over time.

I think security and taking things for granted can be two different things.

I like to feel secure, but it absolutely doesn't mean I take things for granted.


I kind of feel that I would like to marry my boyfriend. I like the idea of being a unit and, not for either of us to feel that we can't get out, just more that it's a solid thing, that we both wanted to commit to. I've always been opposed to marriage, that is since I realised you don't have to get married, but that's because I saw a fair few miserable marriages in growing up, including my own parents. I have always thought of it as pointless, and in most ways I still do, unless you're concerned with money or children. I suppose I wouldn't be completely opposed to the feeling of security that it could bring. I do wish I didn't think that though, there's no real reason you should feel more secure, or a "unit" just because you're legally bonded. It just does seem like that though.

LivingDeadGirl

Definitely. I think it's a lovely way to show your commitment to someone and celebrate your love with friends and family. I would also prefer for all of the family to have the same last name if we were to have children.

I'm pretty indifferent about marriage. I would like to meet someone marriage-worthy at some point (as unlikely as that may be) but I don't think whether we actually got married or not would bother me too much.

OnTheCouch

To be honest I can't really see it. Certainly not at this moment in time anyway. Granted, the fact I'm currently single invariably doesn't help, plus I do acknowledge that there are tax and inheritance advantages involved, but my major issue is I still see marriage as a risk.

I think it's something like 15-20 percent of marriages that end in divorce in Ireland (I remember reading that somewhere but not sure of source). If true, obviously the chances are still reasonably high that things would work out, but the risk of failure is still too great for me.

Plus, without wanting to get into a sexist debate, I do feel that marriage is more often something men are not too bothered about and are kind of persuaded into by their other halves. Not always mind you, there are many men who do certainly want to get married. But I'm not one of them. Plus I think men have more to lose financially should things go wrong, which fills me with a certain amount of dread.

I have vaguely considered the prospect with two exes, but only vaguely. Luckily, neither of them were at the stage where they were coming under social and societal pressure to take the next step so it was never a realistic discussion.

But those two relationships ended, just like all my other ones and I suppose the main issue is that I am not convinced that living together for 30-50 years will be manageable or more importantly feasible, at least not with my personality and the women that I tend to be attracted to. This of course may be my issue as well.

However, should I meet someone incredibly special, who really wanted after a few years to get married more than anything, I would certainly give it some thought. I would like to have children and am aware that the standard nuclear family is most likely the best environment in which to raise them. But until that day I'd have to say 'Nah, probably not for me.'

melissak

Yes

jorex88 wrote: »

All very fine, but will your kids (or your family/friends) respect you?

Diamond Doll

LivingDeadGirl wrote: »

I would also prefer for all of the family to have the same last name if we were to have children.

That's one thing that really doesn't bother me at all. I was born with my surname and I'll die with it, even if I did get married my name won't change. Our son was given my surname rather than his dad's - some people find that unusual, but I happen to much prefer my surname to my partner's, and my partner wasn't too fussed either way - so we went with my surname. It hasn't caused us any hassle yet.

Eugene Norman

This little piggy wrote: »

That's one thing that really doesn't bother me at all. I was born with my surname and I'll die with it, even if I did get married my name won't change. Our son was given my surname rather than his dad's - some people find that unusual, but I happen to much prefer my surname to my partner's, and my partner wasn't too fussed either way - so we went with my surname. It hasn't caused us any hassle yet.

I've always thought that should alternate. First kid named after father, next after mother (or vice versa). Officialdom would have to come to terms with that of course.

Eugene Norman

eviltwin wrote: »

People shouldn't be pressured into marriage just to protect what is already theirs

What you are looking for perhaps is marriage ( which is a contract recognised by the state) named something else. I don't see the point.

Nor is the state going to second guess the nature of every lived in relationship in the country. Given that marriage isn't a man and a woman anymore and there are plenty of people living long term with their same sex friends ( and to a lesser extent with their opposite sex friends) without being in a relationship there is no way of knowing, not that there ever really was.

There are plenty of legal marriageable permutations when 2 males and 2 females live together ( all single, two hetro couples, two gay couples, one gay couple, one hetro couple) the state can't possibly tell. Given there are advantages to marrying in terms of tax etc, just do it. Al you need is two people to get married, two witness and a licenced registrar. The venue can be a pub.

Wibbs

When younger it was a vague notion in the back of my head of "one day quite likely", though I was never really one for longtermers TBH. Now with many more miles on the clock these days, no. It works for a great many people, but it wouldn't work with me.

If for no other reason than I have a real talent for spotting and being attracted to highly camouflaged(at first) neurotics. The all's well early on(especially if you're younger and haven't learned to read the cues of woe to come) but when they get comfortable the nuttiness floats to the surface. The lurching from one emotional "crisis" to the next types. They're attracted to me too. Insane wibbs seeking missiles

TBH I have found relationships taxing. Oddly as I have quite the few women friends and I really couldn't hope for better people in my life. But when naughty bits get involved… I have even seen that with a woman I know who is sound as a pound. Around me and other male friends. Her partners over the years have really worked I can tell you. You'd look on thinking "you poor bastard" and looking at her asking, "who the hell are you and what have you done with my mate?". I have theories why that goes on, but that's for another day.

I think good marriages are founded on two people who are naturally good at that kinda thing, but I'd not be among their number.

John_Rambo

For myself, I wanted to cement my already healthy relationship, to officially declare our love and commitment to each other in front of our loved ones and leave our aging parents with the security that we are happily committed to a life of putting effort in our relationship that will lead to family and happiness. Also, they have always been a fantastic way for all the family to reconnect.

I come from a long line of hard working, busy people scattered over Europe and the states. Weddings are sometimes the only way I get to see some of my family. None of us want to leave funerals for these type of meet ups.

Although, we wouldn't be traditionalists, and we didn't have a traditional Irish wedding, the wedding is an ancient celebration, celebrated across most cultures. Like most cultures we celebrated with exceptional food, exceptional surroundings and exceptional family and friends. Booze was a factor, but more quality than quantity.

Our family weddings are very much about family, food, the ambient surroundings, the outdoors, music, and fun. Not many church and hotel weddings, but all are enjoyably different to each others.

Our wedding was an informal memorable time with warmth, love and friendship.

Ulnar

Never thought I'd get married, it scared the crap out of me just thinking about

Married nearly 2 years and I wish I could turn the clock back.

InTheTrees

I also liked getting a divorce...

Wompa1

Yes, I'm engaged but neither of us are rushing to get married. Will likely even have kids before we even get married. The great thing is that she doesn't want a wedding. So, we can just go to a court whenever we feel like it and get the job done. We both have rings already. I don't wear mine, she wears hers. Being married won't change much for us, I feel. I guess it will help out with taxes and some legal stuff.

Wompa1

Wibbs wrote: »

If for no other reason than I have a real talent for spotting and being attracted to highly camouflaged(at first) neurotics. The all's well early on(especially if you're younger and haven't learned to read the cues of woe to come) but when they get comfortable the nuttiness floats to the surface. The lurching from one emotional "crisis" to the next types. They're attracted to me too. Insane wibbs seeking missiles

TBH I have found relationships taxing. Oddly as I have quite the few women friends and I really couldn't hope for better people in my life. But when naughty bits get involved… I have even seen that with a woman I know who is sound as a pound. Around me and other male friends. Her partners over the years have really worked I can tell you. You'd look on thinking "you poor bastard" and looking at her asking, "who the hell are you and what have you done with my mate?". I have theories why that goes on, but that's for another day.

Oddly that describes most relationships I had when I lived in Ireland.

edward2222

I'm still single, well,
its better to be with no one, than to be with the wrong one.

Wibbs

Wompa1 wrote: »

Oddly that describes most relationships I had when I lived in Ireland.

Then it must be something in the water W because well over half of my exes weren't Irish. Nope, nationality/culture has nothing to do with it, I'm just bad at picking them.

fanatics2014

sometimes.

The Corinthian

Wibbs wrote: »

If for no other reason than I have a real talent for spotting and being attracted to highly camouflaged(at first) neurotics.

Exactly the same here. I've resigned myself to being a borderline magnet.

Where I live, it makes little sense to marry anyway. You get taxed more, not less, as a married couple. Inheritance tax is very low anyway. The courts are notoriously biased in favour of the wife. There's no back-door, automatic marriage lite if you cohabit. And the divorce rate is over fifty percent.

TBH, marriage would be a more attractive option if it was forever. But it's not; it's a temporary institution masquerading as a permanent one and if you're unlucky enough to be born with a Y-chromosome too many, the financial effects of it failing are significantly more likely to be devastating. And the older you get the more you see these, not only in those marriages that fail among your peers but those that don't and you see more and more trapped in loveless marriages simply because they cannot afford to separate financially or because it would mean they would effectively lose their children.

So, until the law changes and catches up that marriage is no longer for life, it's simply not viable for me and I suspect an increasing number of people.

Wibbs

The Corinthian wrote: »

And the older you get the more you see these, not only in those marriages that fail among your peers but those that don't and you see more and more trapped in loveless marriages simply because they cannot afford to separate financially or because it would mean they would effectively lose their children.

Yea I've seen that quite a bit. Guys I know who really adore their kids, but if the wife upped sticks and left in the middle of the night it wouldn't be much if any an emotional loss for either of them. I'm generally not talking about stereotypical "bad marriages" here either. Outwardly, even inwardly they're pretty average, there's little or no rancour and they tick along, but there's also little depth to the relationship either. It's entirely for the kids, followed by convenience and shared experience down the years.

It's often more lonely for the men. Not exclusively of course, but I have noticed more of a trend for the husbands to become more isolated, more likely to drop their pre marriage friends and social interests, replacing them with more solitary pursuits(if they replace them at all). The wives I know tend to have much larger social circles. BTW I do not blame the wives for this male self imposed purdah. All too often women get it in the neck for somehow restricting their boyfriends/husbands. I blame the men TBH. At any point they could have easily said nope, but they don't. Indeed many seem to relish and encourage this detachment.

The Corinthian

Wibbs wrote: »

BTW I do not blame the wives for this male self imposed purdah.

Oh, I don't know about that... while naturally cases vary, I've noticed over the years, the tendency for some women to essentially, if not isolate, certainly cull many of their men's specifically single friends. Single female friends are frozen out almost immediately. Male single friends are first 'fixed up' by the woman and if they fail be become part of a couple are eventually dropped. Any reminder of single life is quietly and ruthlessly purged.

But, I'd agree in so far as the tendency for men to go along with it for a quiet life can only be blamed upon ourselves.

candy-gal1

Exactly, as has been said by a few people on here, how can anyone intend to get married really?!
If you meet that right person for you, that you love, is your soulmate and you cant see your life without them, you sign the prenuup , and they ask you or you ask them, then great, but thats just luck and right time etc isnt it?!

Cant really see how you can intend to marry, unless you dont mind who you marry, just once your married, I mean imho we could all do that, you may get married and you may not, you can hope and see but thats about it imho

candy-gal1

candy-gal1 wrote: »

Exactly, as has been said by a few people on here, how can anyone intend to get married really?!

The vast majority of people meet or expect to meet someone they will spend their life with though.

If you asked me when I was young, say 16, if I intended to get married my answer would be yes ( I wouldn't even say intend I would have said I will get married for sure in the future) as I would expect to meet someone, most likely sometime in my 20's who I would settle down with in the future. Its generally how things work.