Moving in with BF! I need advice.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

I think she’s just confused in general.

lol
Hilarious!

[33girl]

Originally Posted by GreekGirley

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...something 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.

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

Originally Posted by DrPhil

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 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).

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Life is complex enough for there to be more than one reason why couples who live together are more likely to divorce; and why divorce rates increase, in general.

Including personal experiences and opinions, there are thousands of qualitative and quantitative studies about cohabitation and divorce around the world, including those conducted by Melissa S. Waters and Rand Westler; Michael Svarer; and John Zhao and David Hall. People who are interested can check these and other studies out and see how these different explanations mesh with their humble (personal) opinions.

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.

[GreekGirley]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

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?.

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?

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by GreekGirley

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.

"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.

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?

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!

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

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.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by GreekGirley

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!**)

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.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

I think this research is far from conclusive.

That's why there are thousands of studies.

And I know what the studies that I cited found.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by 33girl

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.

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.

Originally Posted by MysticCat

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.

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.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

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.

[GreekGirley]

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.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by GreekGirley

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...

LOL

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

[GreekGirley]

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

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by GreekGirley

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.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by GreekGirley

2. When a man marries a woman, 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.

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