Marriage: is it worth it?

Mad_maxx · 14-01-2021 1:41pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

The fact that a one spouse can cheat on the other, divorce them, take half the cash, the house, the kids AND go on to relieve aliamony is by any reasonable measure, immoral and unjust.

I just make sure i maintain my wealth at a minimum level to avoid unpleasantness

its called " gender equality "

accensi0n · 14-01-2021 1:46pm

mcsean2163 wrote: »

I'm not on great money, around €100k

:eek:

mcsean2163 · 14-01-2021 1:54pm

Thermo905 wrote: »

In your case the effort put into minding children would probably justify a significant proportion of the assets as you aren't rich, so that's not unreasonable.

There is a reason childminders don't get paid huge salaries, because ultimately they don't deserve huge salaries as they aren't providing scarce skills or expertise.

You also have to remember that stay at home parents aren't only minding the children for their spouse, they are minding the children for themselves too. It's not someone else's children they are minding and in doing so they strengthen their bond with their children and spend valuable time with their children that the working spouse doesn't get.

So who is going to compensate the working spouse for the time lost with their children?

The reason childminders don't get paid a lot is because the world is really ****ed up. Caring for children and ensuring the grow up feeling loved and supported is the most important job for any family.

Actually sickening listening to the amount of assholes here worrying about their money. The only thing that would worry me is the potential damage done to kids by a divorce.

Spring is coming, find your soul and maybe then you'll find a soulmate. Who cares what car you drive. Is that what you want on your headstone, here lies XXZ drove a BMW.

mcsean2163 · 14-01-2021 2:01pm

accensi0n wrote: »

:eek:

Professional fees, insurance, accountant and no pension, so maybe looks good on paper but not brilliant and definitely not a life changing amount. A civil servant on €70k is getting a pension worth about 30k on top of their wage with everything done for them. I'm senior in the industry and started off on a very low wage, so not a lot and totally fubar for retirement.

Wibbs · 14-01-2021 2:14pm

SeanW wrote: »

With all due respect, those statistics can be somewhat misleading. The statistics presented only deal with divorces per 1000 people per annum. There are two serious problems with that.
Even if it were useful, it would only indicate the chance of a person being involved in divorce per year. Not over the course of a marriage/lifetime.

The "per 1000" looks like it includes the entire population, not just married people. The problems with this should be obvious.

When you consider these faults in a country like the United States, the figure goes from 2.5 per 1000 (as per your link) to somewhere between 40 and 50%.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_in_the_United_States#Rates_of_divorce

One can accept that the rates of divorce in Ireland are radically less than those of the United States ... for now, but I would expect that as Ireland leaves behind its conservative Catholic traditions, that will change over time.

Good points Sean. Right so. Marriage: Bugger that. Avoid like the bloody plague.

Interestingly in the wiki link divorce rates appear to be falling in the US. Are they actually falling, or are more people not getting married in the first place, are still breaking up at the same rate, therefore not showing up in the divorce stats?

Strumms · 14-01-2021 2:25pm

dogbert27 wrote: »

To which she'd be entitled to half the profit if he ever decided to sell it.

So you could own the house, 10 years...going out with a girl the last 3, start of the fourth, you get married, she moves in or has moved in....

3 years later of cohabitation and marriage, the marriage in trouble... split likely, your solicitor tells you... “ Strumms, that gaff you own, if you ever sell it, half is hers ? ”... is that right ?

She could be entitled to say 300,000 because you permitted her to live rent free in you house for X duration ? If my understanding is correct, that’s nutsville.

Mad_maxx · 14-01-2021 2:48pm

Strumms wrote: »

So you could own the house, 10 years...going out with a girl the last 3, start of the fourth, you get married, she moves in or has moved in....

3 years later of cohabitation and marriage, the marriage in trouble... split likely, your solicitor tells you... “ Strumms, that gaff you own, if you ever sell it, half is hers ? ”... is that right ?

She could be entitled to say 300,000 because you permitted her to live rent free in you house for X duration ? If my understanding is correct, that’s nutsville.

you sound surprised ?

kildare lad · 14-01-2021 2:49pm

Bill Burr said it best

https://youtu.be/x0gaYyNk7QA

Strumms · 14-01-2021 2:51pm

Mad_maxx wrote: »

you sound surprised ?

I think anybody hearing that for the first time, would be.... :eek:

pgj2015 · 14-01-2021 2:53pm

Strumms wrote: »

So you could own the house, 10 years...going out with a girl the last 3, start of the fourth, you get married, she moves in or has moved in....

3 years later of cohabitation and marriage, the marriage in trouble... split likely, your solicitor tells you... “ Strumms, that gaff you own, if you ever sell it, half is hers ? ”... is that right ?

She could be entitled to say 300,000 because you permitted her to live rent free in you house for X duration ? If my understanding is correct, that’s nutsville.

There was a legal case I read about a few years ago in Ireland. a woman was left a 1 bed cottage from her granny. The woman lived with a boyfriend in the house for 3 or 5 years. They split up. He had a wealthy mother, she dies leaving him a mansion of a house worth 1 million + and money as well. He still goes after half the cottage out of pure badness. not sure if he won or not but I think he had grounds for his share of the 1 bed cottage.

FintanMcluskey · 14-01-2021 2:54pm

mcsean2163 wrote: »

Ok, as someone whose career has been completely derailed by kids and the lack of a support from a spouse, I 100% disagree. I'm not on great money, around €100k but if I could put time into my business I think there would be huge potential to earn more. I'd have no problems with 60% division if partner gave me opportunity to succeed.

That reminded me of one of the famous quotes

“ I get give or take, it works out at about with expenses 140,000 a year and I pay 30.3% tax on that, so it’s about a net 100,000 and out of that 100,000 I run a home in Dublin, Castlebar and Brussels. I wanna tell you something, try it sometime”

SEPT 23 1989 · 14-01-2021 3:01pm

mcsean2163 wrote: »

Ok, as someone whose career has been completely derailed by kids and the lack of a support from a spouse, I 100% disagree. I'm not on great money, around €100k but if I could put time into my business I think there would be huge potential to earn more. I'd have no problems with 60% division if partner gave me opportunity to succeed.

Work life balance is nearly impossible running your own business

you could earn much more but spend very time with your children

that's a mistake believe me

pgj2015 · 14-01-2021 3:04pm

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Work life balance is nearly impossible running your own business

you could earn much more but spend very time with your children

that's a mistake believe me

I agree. I don't even have the time to cook a dinner most days. if I worked the way I do as a dad or partner, the relationship wouldnt last long.

Mister Vain · 14-01-2021 3:49pm

mcsean2163 wrote: »

I'm not on great money, around €100k

€100k is not great money? Even half that would be great money to me.

14-01-2021 3:54pm

pwurple wrote: »

Lol

Anyone else read this and think, virgin? Keep inflating them thermo. Keep that novelty alive.

It is ok you know if men or indeed women don't want to get married or 'settle down' and instead enjoy casual encounters.

Thelonious Monk · 14-01-2021 4:05pm

Thermo905 wrote: »

And for a lot of people that is exactly what they should do as they aren't cut out for marriage and kids, which can lead to problems for the kids.

Is it not difficult to find women who aren't interested in anything serious? Not sure how old you are but certainly mid 30s plus pretty much every single one of them is looking for something serious, from my experience anyway.
I'm only single about 6 or 7 months so I'll be staying away from dating sites etc for a while yet, no point in meeting people if you're head's not in the right place and you're wasting their time, and your time.

Gmak2442 · 14-01-2021 4:10pm

I vote yes because it's a great thing of life. But I add that it depend on whom in my book. Also, luck an other factors are in the game for if it's worth it.

SoapMcTavish · 14-01-2021 4:18pm

People change, situations change over the years . I did it. And it ended after 23yrs. We exited fairly and relatively amicably. But wouldn't do it again.

Thelonious Monk · 14-01-2021 4:40pm

Thermo905 wrote: »

Obvously now it's difficult, but pre-covid I wouldn't say it was difficult. I'm 36 so I have a wide range of options, from about 23 to 42 is my age range. I think it's important to be upfront and honest and let them know that you'll be seeing other women. So I expect them to see other men too and not get attached to me.

Maybe I'm naïve but I would have thought that that wouldn't fly with the majority of people

pgj2015 · 14-01-2021 4:49pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Maybe I'm naïve but I would have thought that that wouldn't fly with the majority of people

Friends with benefits always leads to one (usually the woman) getting feelings for the other.

Mister Vain · 14-01-2021 4:54pm

I've only ever met one girl who was in an open relationship but she was as mad as a bag of nipples. She went through most of the lads in my job. It's a pity I was transferred to a different department not long after she started.

Mad_maxx · 14-01-2021 4:56pm

pgj2015 wrote: »

I agree. I don't even have the time to cook a dinner most days. if I worked the way I do as a dad or partner, the relationship wouldnt last long.

some women are supportive of a ninety hour week partner , most arent

Thelonious Monk · 14-01-2021 4:57pm

pgj2015 wrote: »

Friends with benefits always leads to one (usually the woman) getting feelings for the other.

I could never do this myself, unless I really like them I don't want to be sleeping with them in the first place. Maybe I should have been a woman.

Strumms · 14-01-2021 6:18pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I could never do this myself, unless I really like them I don't want to be sleeping with them in the first place. Maybe I should have been a woman.

Jaysus, you’d never get out of bed.

bertiebomber · 14-01-2021 7:38pm

i would be supportive of a man working 200 hours a week once he lodged his check into our joint account !!

kildare lad · 14-01-2021 7:52pm

Mad_maxx wrote: »

some women are supportive of a ninety hour week partner , most arent

My old boss used to work 6 days a week because his missus wanted to keep up with the Jones although she didn't want to contribute to it . He couldn't stand her anymore and decided to get a divorce , she ended up getting a big house , paid for by him while he moved back to his parents at nearly 50 years of age. And for spite , she reported him to the tax man for doing jobs for cash at the weekends , he was only doing the jobs to pay for the big house and fancy car she wanted. Marriage ?? No thanks

chrissb8 · 14-01-2021 10:29pm

I always get the shtick of when you get older you won't want to be alone, I would happily live on my own and have friends who will probably never get married either. In general, I think a lot of people are questioning the idea of life partnerships as being a general one size fits all approach. Not a healthy mindset to have or an expectation you should feel obliged to aim for unless it is something you want and I mean really, really want.

I think a partner for the long term would be nice and if we got to a point in our lives where we knew that we were together for the long haul I would happily get married. I don't really believe in as big as a commitment as marriage being something you have to go into after X amount of years. For what? We could be completely different people in another 10 years.

Heck, I can't wrap my head having to change my ways for one person and wouldn't want to.

2lazytogetup · 14-01-2021 10:34pm

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

That reminded me of one of the famous quotes

“ I get give or take, it works out at about with expenses 140,000 a year and I pay 30.3% tax on that, so it’s about a net 100,000 and out of that 100,000 I run a home in Dublin, Castlebar and Brussels. I wanna tell you something, try it sometime”

id say this quote is made on average once a day on boards.ie in completely different contexts. it is a great quote and well delivered on the Late Late.

2lazytogetup · 14-01-2021 10:36pm

chrissb8 wrote: »

I always get the shtick of when you get older you won't want to be alone, I would happily live on my own and have friends who will probably never get married either. In general, I think a lot of people are questioning the idea of life partnerships as being a general one size fits all approach. Not a healthy mindset to have or an expectation you should feel obliged to aim for unless it is something you want and I mean really, really want.

I think a partner for the long term would be nice and if we got to a point in our lives where we knew that we were together for the long haul I would happily get married. I don't really believe in as big as a commitment as marriage being something you have to go into after X amount of years. For what? We could be completely different people in another 10 years.

Heck, I can't wrap my head having to change my ways for one person and wouldn't want to.

my perception is that older couples spend less time together. there are less trips bringing the kids to the zoo. and they develop separate interests.

plus you need to have a big house, cause unwritten rule with older couples that they have their own rooms or spaces. and you cant stray into them.

Loafing Oaf · 15-01-2021 1:42pm

Stan27 wrote: »

Is it worth it anymore?
Looking at it from mans point of view, but is there any real benefit for it, which is essentially an expensive party.
I know if things go bad and divorce happens, the men seem to get the bad end of the stick.
Obviously there are are a good lot of great marriages out there so it still suits a lot of people.

Larry King once asked the comedian/presenter Bill Maher why he had never married, even though he'd had many relationships over the years. Maher replied, "Larry, marriage suits a lot of people. They're called 'women'":p

Bobblehats · 15-01-2021 2:30pm

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Larry King once asked the comedian/presenter Bill Maher why he had never married, even though he'd had many relationships over the years. Maher replied, "Larry, marriage suits a lot of people. They're called 'women'":p

Tell me about it my girl is a Christian diehard there’s no way we were staying together without marriage. The one thing she won’t do however is have children because she doesn’t want mixed race she spoke purity of love; heart, people and from thereon I knew she was talking my language. At which point marriage seemed like the perfect idea and so I just rolled with it? Haven’t looked back since...

fryup · 15-01-2021 2:35pm

Bobblehats wrote: »

The one thing she won’t do however is have children because she doesn’t want mixed race .

and you married her?

Bobblehats · 15-01-2021 2:40pm

fryup wrote: »

and you married her?

Damn straight... Well she married me :pac:

hey we married earth other. Love is!

Loafing Oaf · 15-01-2021 2:43pm

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

But a lot of people want to get married as an expression of their love.

I don't get this mindset at all. Okay maybe marriage as a religious/ceremonial occasion, but civil marriage, signing up to a binding legal contract? Can't see anything romantic about that at all.

15-01-2021 2:49pm

While who said the comment (as in what colour they are & was it the man or woman) shouldnt matter (its equally bad imo) but it probably does in reality.

If a white guy said that, he'd be lambasted and rightly so,
I think less so if it was a white woman,

and probably not at all if anyone else.

Having kids isn't the only reason to get married, but it is a big reason (and sometimes an excuse, sometimes the only excuse/purpose)

But if someone said anything to me based around racial purity, It wouldnt be my thing to marry someone like that, each to their own.
My only guess is this person isn't white?? because I dont know anyone stupid enough that believes that and would also dare to say it.

Maybe Im interpreting it wrong?? but it sounds like it reads to me

15-01-2021 2:53pm

Married my best friend. He's got my back, I got his. I'm just helping him get over a bout of covid and on his worst day I wasn't able to think or sleep or eat for the knowledge that he was on his own dealing with it, and I couldn't bring him a drink or change the bed or just look after him like he needed. Horrible experience. He says I'm the prize of his life and the feelings mutual.

Bad relationships make bad marriages, good ones can make great ones. I could have lived without marriage, but we got married almost a year ago. I was seven months pregnant and we were moving the next day. It wasn't a 'wedding', it was just the two of us and it's all we wanted. A wedding isn't marriage, you don't need bells and whistles. It's been a tough year between moving, new parenthood and a pandemic, but it's still managed to be a good one at the same time, because we have each other.

If you think of marriage as a division of assets and a splitting of services, don't get married. It's a mutual endeavour built on much more than shared mortgages and mutual suspicion, and will involve compromise and living with the knowledge that sometimes, in fact a lot of the time, you will not be the main focus of the moment and you won't always be the most important thing in your own life. In my experience, it's totally worth it.

15-01-2021 3:06pm

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I don't get this mindset at all. Okay maybe marriage as a religious/ceremonial occasion, but civil marriage, signing up to a binding legal contract? Can't see anything romantic about that at all.

A religious ceremony only means something to someone religious OR if one or both of the people want a nice venue even if they have no religious participation or even follow their religion, the part that matters in those ceremonies is STILL the legal part, so in effect there is no difference between a civil marriage and a religious marriage other than the venue.

Saying signing up to a civil marriage and that it is a legally binding contract and there being nothing Romantic about it but not realising that it is the exact same thing as a Religious wedding, which I agree (there is nothing romantic about it either). It is just a nice venue.

Im sure many people who get married in religious ceremonies follow their religion to some extent or believe they do, imo, most just want the venue.

I cant find it anywhere, but I saw it in a Simpsons episode once and cant find it since, Homer J Simpson makes a Sarcy commentary on marriage, it was along the lines, him referring to the spontaneity of love and "there is nothing more romantic than a state approved legal contract"

Bobblehats · 15-01-2021 3:07pm

1874 wrote: »

My only guess is this person isn't white?? because I dont know anyone stupid enough that believes that and would also dare to say it.

Maybe Im interpreting it wrong?? but it sounds like it reads to me

The only thing you’re interpreting wrong is the woman’s intelligence nobody said it; per say we came to that conclusion over time. She’s of a remote territory of hills who spent their history under siege from all directions forging / retaining their own identity and we would like to keep it that way.

15-01-2021 3:22pm

Bobblehats wrote: »

Tell me about it my girl is a Christian diehard there’s no way we were staying together without marriage. The one thing she won’t do however is have children because she doesn’t want mixed race she spoke purity of love; heart, people and from thereon I knew she was talking my language. At which point marriage seemed like the perfect idea and so I just rolled with it? Haven’t looked back since...

Bobblehats wrote: »

The only thing you’re interpreting wrong is the woman’s intelligence nobody said it; per say we came to that conclusion over time. She’s of a remote territory of hills who spent their history under siege from all directions forging / retaining their own identity and we would like to keep it that way.

Excuse me? I never referred to her intelligence, you basically quoted your own partners opinion on what appears to be a fairly dated (and imo a disgusting racial opinion) how you could have known that without speaking of it, I don't know. Now if you're happy to marry someone knowing that, thats your business, I can only assume you're of a like mind.
People can be otherwise intelligent and still have questionable opinions as far as Im concerned, it might be based on their experiences or what they learned when they grew up, but imo, as long as any person acts reasonably, it doesn't and shouldnt matter what colour or race they are.

Based on what you have written in your latter post, you appear to be back pedalling and accuse me of questioning her intelligence? and now saying she never said it?? Whatever the last sentence is, looks like utter nonsense to me, face it, you're back pedalling

Not going off topic further, imo marriage is skewed based on the outcome when it doesnt work and thats why I was originally replying in this thread.

Loafing Oaf · 15-01-2021 3:28pm

1874 wrote: »

A religious ceremony only means something to someone religious OR if one or both of the people want a nice venue even if they have no religious participation or even follow their religion, the part that matters in those ceremonies is STILL the legal part, so in effect there is no difference between a civil marriage and a religious marriage other than the venue.

Saying signing up to a civil marriage and that it is a legally binding contract and there being nothing Romantic about it but not realising that it is the exact same thing as a Religious wedding, which I agree (there is nothing romantic about it either). It is just a nice venue.

Im sure many people who get married in religious ceremonies follow their religion to some extent or believe they do, imo, most just want the venue.

I cant find it anywhere, but I saw it in a Simpsons episode once and cant find it since, Homer J Simpson makes a Sarcy commentary on marriage, it was along the lines, him referring to the spontaneity of love and "there is nothing more romantic than a state approved legal contract"

What's to stop people defining marriage whatever way they want though? IMO a couple they don't want to get involved with the legal/civil bit but want to get together with their friends in a Hindu temple or whatever and declare their love for each other they're entitled to call that marriage.

Re Homer's bon mot, I remember Al Pacino saying something similar when discussing why he'd never been hitched: "If I'm in a relationship with a woman, and things are going well, why am I getting the government involved?"

Ultrflat · 15-01-2021 3:41pm

So I'm on the legal separation stage of a marriage break up.

Marriage is an honorable decision, I don't really feel it important to go into the nuances, of the ending of my marriage, but it was amicable.
The thing about marriage when things are tough there's a lot more social pressure based on the very fact your married you almost feel like its you're duty to under go the hard times to show your dedicated to the wo/man your married to. Even tho your miserable.

In the end, I'd had enough. I was asked would I ever get married again the other night. My answer is pretty simple no, I will never sign a paper or form again in the name of marriage. What I feel I could do is offer a vow to the right lady and maybe share a union that is not overseen by the state.

Marriage is not needed in this day and age.

KaneToad · 15-01-2021 3:42pm

Thermo905 wrote: »

The interruption to the non earning spouse's career and that sacrifice should indeed be taken into account when allocating the distribution of assets. But if the non earning spouse quit a job on 30k per year selling shoes and never had any likelihood of earning the 1 million per year that earning spouse takes home, then in my opinion they are not entitled to huge settlements that they never would have even come close to earning if they stayed in their job.

The high earning spouse could easily pay for childcare if the non earning spouse really wanted to have a career so badly. But in such situations they're perfectly content not to work.

But the argument is that the non earning spouse creates/maintains the environment for the high earner to continue to do so.

Who is to say that the shoe seller would not have become store manager...area manager...regional manager...global manager... majority shareholder and discovered instant shoes in a can...

It's the potential opportunity forgone that is hard to quantify.

seenitall · 15-01-2021 4:32pm

It’s not worth the hassle of trying to get out of it once things go belly up. And I had a pretty amicable divorce, all in all. It’s a No from me.

Now, there’s another saying which goes “Never say never”, but I can hand on heart say that for me to sign on the dotted line again, the man would have to be someone absolutely amazing, would have to adore me, pursue me and convince me to marry him, with all the stars aligned just so. The chances of that ever happening were always remote and are diminishing by the day - the older I get, the less new people I meet I find even interesting, let alone fascinating or lovable, and the more I prefer my own company and freedom.

Church on Tuesday · 15-01-2021 6:39pm

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I don't get this mindset at all. Okay maybe marriage as a religious/ceremonial occasion, but civil marriage, signing up to a binding legal contract? Can't see anything romantic about that at all.

Because for some people it's a sign of commitment.

Church on Tuesday · 15-01-2021 8:44pm

Thermo905 wrote: »

Why is commmiting to someone a good thing? Why would you waste time in a relationship that makes you miserable?

Why would you stay in a relationship that makes you miserable in the first place?

beggars_bush · 15-01-2021 9:31pm

Ultrflat wrote: »

So I'm on the legal separation stage of a marriage break up.

Marriage is an honorable decision, I don't really feel it important to go into the nuances, of the ending of my marriage, but it was amicable.
The thing about marriage when things are tough there's a lot more social pressure based on the very fact your married you almost feel like its you're duty to under go the hard times to show your dedicated to the wo/man your married to. Even tho your miserable.

In the end, I'd had enough. I was asked would I ever get married again the other night. My answer is pretty simple no, I will never sign a paper or form again in the name of marriage. What I feel I could do is offer a vow to the right lady and maybe share a union that is not overseen by the state.

Marriage is not needed in this day and age.

It is, in the legal sense

Church on Tuesday · 15-01-2021 9:53pm

Thermo905 wrote: »

I wouldn't, but if you commit to someone that means you would stay in the relationship, otherwise it's not really commitment.

Naturally you should only marry someone who actually makes you happy, so obviously it follows that if you're not even happy in a relationship you clearly are not going to be much happier actually married to the person.

Some people get married because they are happy and fulfilled with that person and want to stay with them, so will therefore commit themselves to that person with marriage, it's not exactly a difficult concept to fathom.

Pwindedd · 15-01-2021 11:03pm

Tried it once. Thought it was what I wanted. Had a pivotal moment and realised I was not cut out for it. With no mortgage or kids to consider, leaving was still the hardest thing I’ve ever had to do.

I can see why a lot of people in unhappy marriages, who have ties to each other, like property and children, just push on through and hope it will improve.

But my mum and dad loved being married to each other. And it showed! So I’m not that jaded, that I don’t think it’s a wonderful thing to do if you find the right person.

Church on Tuesday · 15-01-2021 11:05pm

Thermo905 wrote: »

Someone might make you happy now, but they might make you miserable in ten years time. If you commit, that means you'll stay in the relationship regardless, otherwise it was never truly commitment. That is why commitment is stupid.

Not really, you commit to the person you fell in love with, if the person changes over a period of time that's different and for that we have divorce, if there's problems in the marriage often marriage counselling can solve the issues at hand, that's if both parties want to make the marriage work enough.

It's a leap of faith at the end of the day. Even a steady relationship is a leap of faith to some extent. If some people want to go get married and make their love for each other official let them at it, again, it's not a concept which is illogical and is fairly understandable by itself. As cliché as it sounds, that's love for you.

Loafing Oaf · 15-01-2021 11:45pm

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

Some people get married because they are happy and fulfilled with that person and want to stay with them, so will therefore commit themselves to that person with marriage, it's not exactly a difficult concept to fathom.

But why not just make that 'commitment' a private undertaking between the two of you? As Al Pacino said, why get the government involved? It just seems like you're bringing needless hassle and restriction into your life.

Marriage: is it worth it?

Comments