Or if they do finally get married, she's built it up too much and it isn't perfect...etc etc etc.

This is why the movie "About Last Night" should be required viewing for every college freshman. Without the happy ending.

And He's Just Not That Into You should be required reading.

It's not just men that will move in with someone and but don't want to get married, either, and it's not just women who "want the ring" and freak out when they don't get one.

If both members of the couple are in the same place at the same time, it can work out. The issue is that they consistently need to be in the same place. It's tricky.

The only time I'm like "gah I want to get married" is when KSUViolet posts wedding dress porn on GC. I'm also sure marriage will be just as boring as living together is now (not much would change for us, prior to having kids).

I'm in love with this post.


















I hope it asks me to move in and then proposes to me...

The only time I want to be married is when I refer to my boyfriend in a professional kind of situation. Like, talking about post-grad-school employment prospects with my professors, it sounds ridiculous to be like "oh, I have to consider where my boyfriend can do residency" instead of "where my husband can do residency".

But that's not so much about being married as it is having some kind of word that signifies "committed living together boyfriend".

Sorry for being idyllic...

Guess I was born in the wrong era, because I'm of the school of thought that says you should be able to give your husband something special...somthing that you've given no one else. And if you've already moved in with (whether it means buying or leasing), had sex, started a family, or etc. then why even get married? I mean, just for the wedding? REALLY? If that's the case, then I'd advise against it, because you'll certainly lose out on the marriage penalty tax thing...

Maybe we just need to re-evaluate the reason for marrige.

I use the word "partner" for things like that.

Posts only want one thing, and it sure as hell ain't marriage.

You made it sound like all there was to marriage was moving in together, and once you've done that with someone, the magic is over.

It's fine if you think moving in shouldn't happen before marriage, but implying that it's pointless to get married if you do is kind of ridiculous.

I always used "significant other" or "partner." Here's why:

1) I think post-college people are too old and too accomplished (or on their way) to have boyfriends and girlfriends. Or, at least to use that terminology in professional settings. It's about as silly as saying "my man" around people who aren't family, friends, or personal acquaintances.

2) Using "boyfriend" and "girlfriend" is very gendered when it tends to be unnecessary.

3) Using "boyfriend" and "girlfriend" is very sexual orientationed when it tends to be unnecessary.

Depending on the context and what you are saying, some people will wonder the gender of the "significant other" (or "life partner") and whether you are married. But, unless they are being nosey as hell, those details tend not to matter for a simple comment like "I have to consider where my significant other can do his residency." Using "his" would calm the gender and sexual orientation curiosities of some people. It still doesn't divulge the actual status of the relationship except that he's significant enough to be your significant other.

I may be wrong but I seriously doubt someone named "GreekGirley" was born in a different era than the rest of us.

Well, they might not want it NOW.. but one day.. they'll come around..

But they won't subscribe to the thread if they just click the thread.

Of course not. I even said that in my situation, I was the one who didn't want the relationship to go any further. I've just seen a lot of cohabiting relationships implode lately and the majority of the cases were like I mentioned above.

I had a MAJOR crush on Rob Lowe when that movie came out (yes, do the math). It wasn't until I was older that I actually watched it. :o

http://officialbirthdayblog.com/wp-c...3/rob-lowe.jpg

Rob Lowe is crushable.

I was 5!

I was ignoring that and focusing on Rob Lowe.

So, you get married, have kids, spouse dies and there's no point in a second marriage because you've already given "everything" to someone else?

The "point" of marriage is commitment -- mutual, unreserved and loving commitment.

And just to make sure I'm clear, I'm not saying that a strong, mutual, unreserved and loving commitment is only found in marriage. It can certainly be found in couples that choose, for whatever reason, not to get married (or are not able to marry). Nor am I suggesting that all marriages live up to the ideal or that divorce isn't sometimes the best option.

But if you're talking about the "point" of marriage, it's not sharing something with that special someone that you've never shared with anyone else. Not at all. It's commitment. Pretty much everything else is icing.

LOL. I think I had pretty good taste for a kindergartener.

Idyllic? Marrige? Aaaah my eyes they bleed.

WOW, what a coincidence...

I just noticed that my ex posted as his Facebook status earlier today: "Officially has an apt with his beautiful girlfriend!!!"

He just graduated from college. She's going to be a junior next year. The only difference is that they've only been together for 5 months.

Yea...

lol
Hilarious!

You are giving him something you haven't given anyone else. You're giving him a legal assurance that you will be with him forever and you are declaring this to society at large.

You need to watch "The Day The Universe Changed" and enlighten yourself about customs/rituals/rites etc. Here, I'll even give you a link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LEIl...E4467071FD0EFD

I liked "lifemate" the first time I heard it...however, the only problem w/ those or "life partner" can half feel like you're jinxing yourself (i.e. the "life" part won't pan out).

I think this research is far from conclusive. In fact, the only research from Waters and Ressler was about the economics of cohabitation. Svarer actually concluded that in Denmark, at least, cohabitation DECREASED the risk of divorce.

Of course not - you KNOW the point I was trying to make. And it has nothing to do with the death of a spouse!! The point I'm making is that so many couples now choose to do EVERYTHING married couples do without getting married...they even have "house warming" showers instead of wedding showers. So, if they're already committed to sharing everything else in life, what is going to change with a piece of paper? (**I'm using absurdity to illustrate what I believe to be absurd!**)

Marriage should be distinct and different than any other union in life. But when we engage in activities that are really set apart for married couples, we take away most of the special aspects of marriage by prematurely engaging in everything that married couples do.

Like just try watching some junior high and elementary school kids these days... I mean, it's like these kids now want to experience EVERYTHING we did - but 10-15 yrs earlier. They're all in a rush to 'grow up' - and for what?? So they can 'experience' things? That's what LIFE is for. It's made up of experiences. And once that 'thrill' of doing something new is gone, what's next??

I'm just saying - what's the rush? Where's the fire?

"We?"
Sorry is someone forcing you into a situation or relationship in which you're uncomfortable? Or are you just here to tell everyone else how they're ruining their potential for a happy married life by waking up next to each other without a license?

If the commitment of marriage, or a similar union, handfasting or partnership isn't a reason for one to get married (or unionized, or partnered or handfasted) then one is probably not going to get married, etc.

I'm also amused that in your scenario a wife has to give her husband something, but no mention of the husband giving the wife something he's given to NO OTHER WOMAN.

Oh and btw, let me know when you're going to give me permission to marry more than one person so I can GIVE SOMETHING SPECIAL to the partners who I'm clearly slighting now.

And when will the damn kids get off your lawn!

Because kids have just recently started to be in a hurry to grow up. No one lied about their age during the Civil War era to get married or go to war, oh wait. Darn 15 year olds, always sneaking into the military. Kids these days!

I liked that episode of M*A*S*H where Richie Cunningham said he was 18 to get into the military and in reality he was like 2.

And I hate to break it to GG, but single people buy houses and have housewarming showers.

You assume I (and others) "know" the point you are trying to make. You assume incorrectly. I'm just going with what you're actually saying, and the absurdity did not come through to me as intentional.

Like I (and 33girl) said, the distinctive of marriage is the promise of lifetime commitment. As someone who has been married for over 20 years, I can say that your examples of saving something (like living together or whatever else) for that someone special that you didn't do with anyone else, or else what's the point of marriage, stuck me as totally missing the point. Sorry, but that's how it came across to me.

That's why there are thousands of studies.

And I know what the studies that I cited found.

One of the best episodes ever.

Those single people are missing out on the most dramatic amazing moment of their lives. Ever. You save something special to give to your husband and if you don't get married you give it to your house full of cats. It's just not the same.
To clarify, in her words a woman should save something special for her HUSBAND. This is not something so egalitarian as that of which you speak.

Ah. Point taken.

Geez. Apparently, I cannot make a post on here about any subject without getting ripped a new one because someone disagrees with me. Regardless, I've posted what I believe and will stand by it. And, while I'm at it, I'll respond to one last thing...

DROLEFILLE - you mention that I only spoke of what the woman would give to the man (in the convo about 'saving' something special for him and ONLY him), but that I didn't make mention that he would have to give her ANYTHING...and seemed bothered by that. Well, I'll offer 2 points:
1. I am not a man, and was speaking from a woman's point of view.
2. When a man marries a women, he offers his name (surname) to her - which states to the whole world that he wants to be known as her husband. I think that's a pretty big deal.

LOL

Why do folks get upset when people DISCUSS things on a DISCUSSION board?

Discussion is fine. Ragging on a belief system is not.

Yes it is, because not everyone is going to agree.

If you don't want to discuss it, don't post about it.

A man can also take his wife's name (hyphenated or otherwise) if she "offers" it to him. Just ask this guy.

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g9...-C10006402.jpg

I deleted my post in which I agreed with GreekGirley because I read the rest of her posts. Yikes.

What belief system are you talking about?

If you are paying attention, most of the people typing to you are not fans of cohabitation.

*swoon*

That is my only contribution to this thread.

Serious question: What if she decides not to take his last name and instead keeps her own surname? Is she stating to the whole world that she doesn't want to be known as his wife?

LOL. This thread is also about GreekGirley learning the history and different meanings behind women taking men's surnames. I respect people who choose to take their spouse's surnames. But, as for me and my house, it's all about hyphens. :)

I'm a big fan of hyphenated last names; couples swapping last names; and people keeping their own last name. None of those reduce the bonds of marriage just because they aren't considered traditional.

SPECIAL THINGS MY SIGNIFICANT OTHER WILL RECEIVE ON OR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING OUR WEDDING DAY:

1 - Access to my pogs, which have been meticulously kept and curated, and certainly will retain their value well into our 70s.

2 - Sweet, sweet cake directly into her maw then around the facial area, because that is ALWAYS funny, no matter how lame the couple.

3 - 50% of a rapidly-declining 401k.

4 - A lifetime spent staring down a super-annoying estate she'll have to break up and distribute among family she barely likes, because I will assuredly die before her.

5 - A 42% chance of divorce! (STATS ARE STATS)

6 - The admiration of most of her peers, the jealousy of quite a few, and the astonishment of the rest, because how on Earth can she put up with his shit?

7 - Cocktails. Many.

8 - A moderate sexual performance, because my ass will be exhausted, and GOTTA WAKE UP TO OPEN BLENDERS JEEEEEEZ.

9 - Biannual flowers, probably with a pithy card (typed, because handwriting is for children), delivered to her office - once at exorbitant made-up-holiday prices, and again at 70% off for a larger and more attractive bouquet on the more important date anyway.

10 - Condescension when I'm tired and she's acting like an asshole, then a rapid return to normal in the morning, likely with applicable makeup actions.

11 - Partial ownership of one (1) semi-dirty car. Comes with many miles, and an excellent set of golf clubs in the trunk.

12 - A new, warm body on her health insurance, because mine is ludicrously expensive even though I've basically never used it.

13 - 40 years of awesome, with approx. 2 years of trouble mixed in (this will be non-consecutive, but I'm assuming about 5% will be less-than-smooth sailing in some way).

CONGRATS! Good thing we didn't do these things beforehand, GOD marriage wouldn't be special.