NationStates Jolt Archive

Going to the dentist has very few perks, but one of them is that I get to read magazine articles that I normally would not ever see.

This time, I read an article about the "trade-offs" of marriage.

Examples:

House work--Marriage may mean that somebody else is helping you keep house, so you have more free time, or it could mean there's somebody adding messes to your life which you have to clean up.

Child care--Marriage could mean that you have additional help rearing kids, or it could mean you take on the responsibility of raising somebody else's kids.

Status--Marriage could raise (or lower) your status in your culture/society.

Income--Marriage could bring another paycheck into your life, or could mean that you have somebody new who you have to support.

Health--Studies have found that married men tend to reap positive health benefits from getting married, while married women do not (on average). It is possible that having somebody else looking after your health will help you stay fit or will help you catch medical problems earlier. Maybe it's just handy to have somebody remind you to get a physical every so often.

So here's my question.

Set aside, for a moment, the issue of your feelings for your partner (or future partner). Set aside, for a moment, your love or your emotional desire to be with that person. For the moment, look only at the practical considerations of marriage, independent from how you may feel about the individual person you would marry (or have married).

IS MARRIAGE A GOOD DEAL FOR YOU?

*Remember, it's quite possible for somebody to say that they don't think marriage is a very good deal for them, but they intend to do it anyhow (or have already done it) because there's an emotional factor that outweighs the "practical" trade-offs.*

*It's also possible for marriage to be a good deal for some people, but not for you in particular.*

Yes!

Practical side only, marriage has been pretty good for me, I have been sick in recent years and without my husband to support me I probably would have died. My medicine is expensive, my surgeries ect. not to mention that I am often times unable to work, if I was still out on my own I am pretty sure I would be homeless again.

I have recovered from drug addiction and cut ties with my disfunctional family so on that end the marriage has made my life better also.

I suppose my kids are better off since I am married because I can stay home with them and homeschool them, although since I have been married since before they were born it's pure speculation.

Id say yes for me because I have some disastrous character flaws which can be covered by the right woman. Im terrible with money in general and also a slob if left to my own devices. Which isnt to say Im worthless in all aspects. I can cover a few of someone's weak points with my stronger points. So with the right partner, emotional aspects aside I could be married to someone and we would each be better off together than either of us seperately.

The answer is, Yes.

Comments about specifics; The women not doing better in a marriage when men are better off health wise I think is going to become out-dated. Most of the women who are old enough to be measured did not come from a dual working family. Today, there should be much less difference between men and women in the marriage (across the scales, not talking about specifics) AND there will be more working women who are NOT married and working and eating junk food in their office and stressed out, etc., to show up negatively against the married women who work...

And you mentioned the benefits of marriage in regards children rearing, but really that should be emphasized. The children, as well as the parents, seem to benefit when children are raised in a home with both of their parents in it and marriage (even with it's astronomically high divorce rates in the western societies) are still statistically more stable for the family unit than simply co-habitating couples in similar circumstances.

House work--Marriage may mean that somebody else is helping you keep house, so you have more free time, or it could mean there's somebody adding messes to your life which you have to clean up.

You don't need to be married to get help in the housework.

Child care--Marriage could mean that you have additional help rearing kids, or it could mean you take on the responsibility of raising somebody else's kids.

My parents is not married and have still helepd each other to take care of me and my brother. No need for marriage here either.

Status--Marriage could raise (or lower) your status in your culture/society.

This might be true in some cultures. Not in sweden though.

Income--Marriage could bring another paycheck into your life, or could mean that you have somebody new who you have to support.

This is also true in any other relationship were the partners live together.

Health--Studies have found that married men tend to reap positive health benefits from getting married, while married women do not (on average). It is possible that having somebody else looking after your health will help you stay fit or will help you catch medical problems earlier. Maybe it's just handy to have somebody remind you to get a physical every so often.

This might be true, but why should there be a difference between a married man and a man living in a stable relationship?

So here's my question.

Set aside, for a moment, the issue of your feelings for your partner (or future partner). Set aside, for a moment, your love or your emotional desire to be with that person. For the moment, look only at the practical considerations of marriage, independent from how you may feel about the individual person you would marry (or have married).

IS MARRIAGE A GOOD DEAL FOR YOU?



For me, it makes no difference wether I am married or not, but for someone living a culture where a couple need to be married to be accepted (e.g. not living in "sin") marriage is a benefit.

Also, if there is a economical benefit (if I am not misstaken you pay lower tax in some cases inUS if you are married?) it is also a good deal.

For me, it makes no difference wether I am married or not, but for someone living a culture where a couple need to be married to be accepted (e.g. not living in "sin") marriage is a benefit.

Also, if there is a economical benefit (if I am not misstaken you pay lower tax in some cases inUS if you are married?) it is also a good deal.
Good points, all.

Particularly the point about how these benefits are largely culture-dependent. In some societies, it is "bad" for two people to live together and rear children together if they are not also married. In other societies, this is considered normal and unremarkable. In some societies, marriage is viewed as carrying certain responsibilities which other long-term relationships do not. Some countries provide substantial benefits to married couples as opposed to non-married couples, while other countries do not.

If I could have, I'd have made the poll much more comprehensive. I'd have included something about country of origin. I'd also have put in something about sexual orientation; since a gay man probably would be getting married to another man, will he feel different about marriage than a man who is probably going to marry a woman?

I've settled down considerably since getting married. If I hadn't, I probably would have earned a Darwin Award by now. :p

Practical side only, marriage has been pretty good for me, I have been sick in recent years and without my husband to support me I probably would have died. My medicine is expensive, my surgeries ect. not to mention that I am often times unable to work, if I was still out on my own I am pretty sure I would be homeless again.

Another good point! It also reminds me...

I don't know about other countries, but I know that in the US your spouse becomes your "next of kin" from a legal point of view. This means that you get to pick the person who will be making crucial medical decisions for you if you become incapacitated. That could be a big benefit, for some people.

I've settled down considerably since getting married. If I hadn't, I probably would have earned a Darwin Award by now. :pDon't worry, there's stilll plenty of time.

Another good point! It also reminds me...

I don't know about other countries, but I know that in the US your spouse becomes your "next of kin" from a legal point of view. This means that you get to pick the person who will be making crucial medical decisions for you if you become incapacitated. That could be a big benefit, for some people.
oh, yeah, people like me, I wouldn't trust my family to make that type of decision, they don't agree with me, they would do what they want, which would leave me in the worst position possible.

It seems rather circumstantial to me. A particular partner is a certain circumstance may be 'a better deal' than another in a different circumstance. For instance, I would consider a partner who would share housework with me to be a comparatively good deal- considering only that attribute. A partner that wouldn't would be a bad deal.
Marriage isn't intrinsically good or bad to me

I've settled down considerably since getting married. If I hadn't, I probably would have earned a Darwin Award by now. :p
Heh!

Out of curiosity: what about the marriage, in particular, settled you down? Do you think you would have settled down this way if you had been with your current spouse but had not gotten married?

Don't worry, there's stilll plenty of time.

Yes, but at least I got a chance to breed first. :p

Heh!

Out of curiosity: what about the marriage, in particular, settled you down? Do you think you would have settled down this way if you had been with your current spouse but had not gotten married?

I think my son settled me down more than my wife did. She has always been very supportive of my lunacy. Generally speaking, I engage in a kind of 'physical stream of consciousness' when I'm around other people. When I'm around her, these tend to more erotic expressions rather than mischievous ones. :)

marriage has been a very good deal for me. having 2 like minded adults in one home makes all aspects of life easier.

the problem is that its only a good deal as long as it is a good deal. things change, people change, circumstances change.

my sister just passed her 37th anniversary and she is probably going to have to divorce her husband soon. her husband has become so irresponsible with money that she cant afford to be chained to his spending habits at this time of her life.

good deal can change to bad deal very quickly.

It seems rather circumstantial to me. A particular partner is a certain circumstance may be 'a better deal' than another in a different circumstance. For instance, I would consider a partner who would share housework with me to be a comparatively good deal- considering only that attribute. A partner that wouldn't would be a bad deal.
Marriage isn't intrinsically good or bad to me
One point that a (male) friend of mine raised was the issue of expectations in your culture. He pointed out that a lot of men in our culture (Northern USA) are brought up assuming that their wife will do most of the cooking, cleaning, and childcare. Or, at least, they are brought up in homes where cooking, cleaning, and childcare simply "get done" without a lot of male participation, so the guys don't give much thought to the fact that they might one day have to do those things. Girl's toys often include vaccuum cleaners, little kitchen sets, and dollies with diapers, so a lot of girls grow up knowing that these things will be a part of their lives; boys grow up knowing that cars and guns and Ninja Turtles will be a part of their lives.

My own father had never done his own laundry until after he moved in with my mother. He had never opperated a Hoover, or changed a baby's diaper, or scrubbed a toilet. And my father is a very smart, thoughtful, progressive man. It's not like he consciously thought that these tasks were "woman's work," it's just that he'd never been expected to do them...and nobody wants to spend their free time scrubbing toilets and wiping baby's butts, so pretty much nobody is going to do those things if they aren't expected to. That's perfectly reasonable!

I don't think most guys are lazy jerks or are out to exploit their wives. I think a lot of guys (and girls!) unthinkingly put additional pressure on their partner because of some cultural assumptions we participate in unconsciously.

The problem with marriage in my culture is that it tends to magnify and intensify these assumptions. Instead of building an individual marriage with their individual partner, a lot of people have this vision of marriage in their mind and they then try to plug their partner into that vision. And a lot of times, their partner doesn't fit quite right.

No.

Because, in time, there are three possibilities:

1) Divorce.
2) Both parties hate each other, but remain married.
3) Everyone lives happily ever after.

2 is obviously worst , but 1 is very expensive. Hoping for 3 seems... Unwise, especially as it seems rare, especially in a first marriage.

If you're in a good relationship, why risk breaking it with marriage? And, obviously, if you're in a bad relationship...

I'm not in the position of, say, my father, who's incapable of looking after himself (he required help a few weeks ago to cook a frozen pizza), and my culture doesn't consider sexual relationships outside of marriage "sinful" (not that I base my decisions on others' opinions of me if I can help it) and I have no desire for children, so I have nothing to gain, but plenty to lose.

One point that a (male) friend of mine raised was the issue of expectations in your culture. He pointed out that a lot of men in our culture (Northern USA) are brought up assuming that their wife will do most of the cooking, cleaning, and childcare. Or, at least, they are brought up in homes where cooking, cleaning, and childcare simply "get done" without a lot of male participation, so the guys don't give much thought to the fact that they might one day have to do those things. Girl's toys often include vaccuum cleaners, little kitchen sets, and dollies with diapers, so a lot of girls grow up knowing that these things will be a part of their lives; boys grow up knowing that cars and guns and Ninja Turtles will be a part of their lives.

My own father had never done his own laundry until after he moved in with my mother. He had never opperated a Hoover, or changed a baby's diaper, or scrubbed a toilet. And my father is a very smart, thoughtful, progressive man. It's not like he consciously thought that these tasks were "woman's work," it's just that he'd never been expected to do them...and nobody wants to spend their free time scrubbing toilets and wiping baby's butts, so pretty much nobody is going to do those things if they aren't expected to. That's perfectly reasonable!

I don't think most guys are lazy jerks or are out to exploit their wives. I think a lot of guys (and girls!) unthinkingly put additional pressure on their partner because of some cultural assumptions we participate in unconsciously.

I agree with you, but in my experience (limited though it is) it's very hard to change that pattern of behaviour in a person. Even with my expectations clearly announced, some will shirk that expectation as much as possible.

Good points, all.

Particularly the point about how these benefits are largely culture-dependent. In some societies, it is "bad" for two people to live together and rear children together if they are not also married. In other societies, this is considered normal and unremarkable. In some societies, marriage is viewed as carrying certain responsibilities which other long-term relationships do not. Some countries provide substantial benefits to married couples as opposed to non-married couples, while other countries do not.



Since I make my reference to the Swedish culture and system I think I may have a different perspective then people from USA. Our socity gives you no added benefit (by law or a normal persons though) to a married couple. After you have lived together for a couple of years (can't remember how many) you will also inherit from your partner if she/he dies.

My picture from USA (which I know is a bit influenced by movies and TV shows) girls seems to have great ideas about there weddings (and have that as a goal in life) and have started to plan there wedding in details early in their life. This is not something I have ever come across in Sweden. Infact, it is seen as a bit strange to marry someone at early age(18-20), and to not have lived together (and have had physical relationship ;) ) before you get married.

I agree with you, but in my experience (limited though it is) it's very hard to change that pattern of behaviour in a person. Even with my expectations clearly announced, some will shirk that expectation as much as possible.
Exactly! And, thus, that is a practical consideration that some people must add to their list when considering if marriage is a good deal or not.

In some societies, even the nicest and smartest and kindest men (or women) will have been so innundated with certain expectations that they probably will never be completely free of them. If you get married to such a person, you risk having to put up with those assumptions for the rest of your life. Or you face the possibility of having to expend time and energy to get them to let go of those assumptions. And you face the question of whether it is even right for you to try to do this; should you really marry somebody if you know that you're going to be setting out to "change" them? Is that a realistic or healthy element to your relationship?

I'm single, but my guess is, it would be a mixed bag. There's a big gap between what I earn and what my current GF earns, so I'd probably see a slight decrease in my finances. OTOH, I'm a bigger slob than she is, so our house would probably be neater than my house is, though the trade-off is that I'd probably have to get off my lazy butt more often to do my part of the household chores instead of letting them slide.

Since I make my reference to the Swedish culture and system I think I may have a different perspective then people from USA. Our socity gives you no added benefit (by law or a normal persons though) to a married couple. After you have lived together for a couple of years (can't remember how many) you will also inherit from your partner if she/he dies.

Wow, that's very different from where I live. There are "common-law marriages" in many places, but most people don't even know about them or know how they work.


My picture from USA (which I know is a bit influenced by movies and TV shows) girls seems to have great ideas about there weddings (and have that as a goal in life) and have started to plan there wedding in details early in their life. This is not something I have ever come across in Sweden. Infact, it is seen as a bit strange to marry someone at early age(18-20), and to not have lived together (and have had physical relationship ;) ) before you get married.
Whew, and that is VERY different from where I live! Even among educated and progressive people, bridal porn becomes ubiquitous when you hit a certain age. It seems like every time you turn around there is another young woman with a bridal magazine, or another young woman spending herself into debt for a dress she will wear only one time in her life.

It means locking someone in with me, so that when I become old and ugly and they want to run away, I can just treat them wonderfully and they'll be obliged to stay.

No.

Because, in time, there are three possibilities:

1) Divorce.
2) Both parties hate each other, but remain married.
3) Everyone lives happily ever after.

2 is obviously worst , but 1 is very expensive.
That's another element I would have loved to add to the poll: pre-existing income level or economic class.

One of the main talking points against feminism these days is that working women are more likely to divorce their husbands than non-working women. To some, this says that working women are less committed to marriage, or are less loving, or something like that. To me, it suggests that people who have the means to leave a bad marriage are more likely to do so than people who don't have the means to leave (or to support themselves after they do leave).

I have my own career and income, and I intend to maintain my career whether or not I marry. This (obviously) will alter my perception of the financial risks and rewards of marriage. I feel that maintaining my own independent source of income reduces a lot of the potential risks or costs of getting married.

I know it's very early in the thread, but I have to say that I am very surprised by the results of the poll so far. I was expecting that the majority of people would feel that marriage is a good deal for them. I wasn't expecting so many negative or neutral responses.

Nothing at all wrong with that, just surprising to me.

I think marriage is a great deal both from a practical and emotional stand point.

Exactly! And, thus, that is a practical consideration that some people must add to their list when considering if marriage is a good deal or not.

In some societies, even the nicest and smartest and kindest men (or women) will have been so innundated with certain expectations that they probably will never be completely free of them. If you get married to such a person, you risk having to put up with those assumptions for the rest of your life. Or you face the possibility of having to expend time and energy to get them to let go of those assumptions. And you face the question of whether it is even right for you to try to do this; should you really marry somebody if you know that you're going to be setting out to "change" them? Is that a realistic or healthy element to your relationship?

I don't think you can really change a person who has been ingrained with those sorts of opinions, as soon as you stop 'reminding' them of their share of the work, they will more than likely stop doing it. That's not to say that there are no people that will change, but even then there is the chance they will resent you for effectively forcing them to do so.

I don't think you can really change a person who has been ingrained with those sorts of opinions, as soon as you stop 'reminding' them of their share of the work, they will more than likely stop doing it. That's not to say that there are no people that will change, but even then there is the chance they will resent you for effectively forcing them to do so.
I just can't think of a way to go about "changing" somebody like that without creating huge amounts of resentment on both sides.

There are few benefits that marriage brings that cannot be had by simply living with someone.

I can think of two offhand:

Tax advantage
Next of Kin.


Getting married is decidedly not for me, I know few enough people who are happily married, and many who are miserable/divorced multiple times.

I think marriage is a great deal both from a practical and emotional stand point.
Do you think it is a great deal for everybody, or just for you in particular?

my sister just passed her 37th anniversary and she is probably going to have to divorce her husband soon. her husband has become so irresponsible with money that she cant afford to be chained to his spending habits at this time of her life.

Hmm, and that's the flip side to the whole "next of kin" thing.

Advantage: you get to pick the person who is going to be your closest "next of kin."

Disadvantage: you might make a lousy choice. Or you might make a choice which is good at the time you made it, but then the person in question changes. Or you change. Or something else changes. And suddenly the choice you made isn't really turning out to be a good one after all.

I just can't think of a way to go about "changing" somebody like that without creating huge amounts of resentment on both sides.

I basically agree, but I also think that some people are more accommodating, and might be more willing to 'change' to please you, at least at the beginning of a relationship.

It means locking someone in with me, so that when I become old and ugly and they want to run away, I can just treat them wonderfully and they'll be obliged to stay.

No. Bonds of obligation like that work just fine without the piece of paper saying you're married. Perhaps even better, since your partner has had to justify your relationship to others in a lot more words than just "we're married."

Marriage is a religious institution, adopted into law by states. States have no modesty, no respect for your emotional welfare (I'm not saying religious governors do either.) They promote marriage because it reduces the personal choices of both partners, and simplifies governance by making of two people one legal entity. Legal advantages to marriage are few. Marriage is, as it has always been, a voluntary abrogation of options.

That's another element I would have loved to add to the poll: pre-existing income level or economic class.

One of the main talking points against feminism these days is that working women are more likely to divorce their husbands than non-working women. To some, this says that working women are less committed to marriage, or are less loving, or something like that. To me, it suggests that people who have the means to leave a bad marriage are more likely to do so than people who don't have the means to leave (or to support themselves after they do leave).
In Britain nowadays there's not really much choice in the matter; if you wish to buy a house rather than rent you will need two incomes (unless you're very rich). As far as I know there's no tax advantage for married couples here.

But yes, I'd agree with your assessment of the situation. There will, of course, be situations when both partners hate each other, but consider divorce too risky (not purely for financial reasons) so remain together.

I basically agree, but I also think that some people are more accommodating, and might be more willing to 'change' to please you, at least at the beginning of a relationship.
I certainly believe that people change over the course of relationships. And I know that people will often change out of a desire to be a better partner. I certainly don't think this is always unhealthy. It's just that it has such tremendous potential to be unhealthy that I don't think it is wise to count on it happening. If you can't see yourself being with your partner as he/she is, then you shouldn't marry them with the assumption that you're going to be able to change them to fit your expectations.

Yes. End of story.

Speaking only for me, marriage is neither good nor bad. It would have both good points and bad points, which I think would even each other out. My partner, while not a slob, is not the neatest person in the world. We live together, and the only household tasks I ask him to do on a regular basis are to clean the bathroom, and wash the dishes. He's pretty good about the dishes, but most of the time I have to light a fire under his ass to get the bathroom clean. I do most of the other housework. I clean up after myself much better than he does, so if we didn't get married AND didn't live together, I'd probably have fewer chores to do.

I'm pretty neutral on the childcare issue, since I expect that my spouse will share equally in the childrearing responsibilities, and I won't marry someone who feels differently. In terms of status, marriage would probably be beneficial for me in my current situation. I say this because both my parents and my boyfriend's parents are devout Catholics, and while they have accepted our living situation, I know they would all be happier if we were married.

As for income, marriage would probably be beneficial to my financial status, but only inasmuch as it would bring in some extra money. At the moment, my partner's salary is considerably higher than mine is, but after I'm done with school we think our positions will reverse. I fully intend to pursue my own career regardless of whether or not I'm married.

Do you think it is a great deal for everybody, or just for you in particular?
Marriage most likely isnt for everyone, however for me I think I would be happiest married.

It's horrible, sickening to me to consider marriage as a legal and economic matter.

Marriage is a mutual vow, a contract between two people. A vow to submit to each other before any other. It is the swearing of loyalty to each other, in the clear knowledge that this is difficult, and in honesty impossible, but excluding disloyalty in preferring another, or one's personal interest.
Perhaps it is not impossible, but there: I am not for marrying. I don't believe it is possible for two people to swear allegiance to each other, and so will not marry.

Marriage is a vow not lightly taken. It is a vow which church and state ought to respect by taking no part in, beyond recording it if so requested, celebrating it if suitably paid, and asserting laws for the protection of the the individual therein.

Its been a good deal for me in all the ways you mention. We are more stable financially, healthwise we look out for each other and encourage each other - we both keep our environment clean and pleasant

it's funny because I always said I wouldnt get married. WHen I met my woman I only wanted to be sex friends and resisted becomming a "couple" for a long time... then we sorta got couple status but I still refused marriage... then I figured that maybe in a few years we'd get married... then we had the chance to buy a house together so we did and about a year after that I gave up my reluctance to get married and it's been great so far.

do you have to do this poll segregation thing.

do you have to do this poll segregation thing.
Of course I do not have to do it. In this case, I decided to segregate the poll by gender because I was curious about the results. If you don't like it, make your own poll. :D

Yes, but according to the results, most people disagree with me. And also according to the results, more guys play Nationstates.

It's horrible, sickening to me to consider marriage as a legal and economic matter.

I have to say, I'm a little surprised at the strength of your feeling on this subject.

As I understand it, marriage is intended to be a joining of two lives. You and your partner are committing to build a life together, and to share in the responsibilities and rewards that may come from this.

Legal and economic matters are part of life. It does not seem strange to me that people should include such concerns when they decide to marry their life to another's.


Marriage is a mutual vow, a contract between two people. A vow to submit to each other before any other.

*Shudder* Not for all people. Never for me. I would never make such a vow, nor would I accept one from another human being. Indeed, such a vow would make marriage (as I conceive it) totally impossible.


It is the swearing of loyalty to each other, in the clear knowledge that this is difficult, and in honesty impossible, but excluding disloyalty in preferring another, or one's personal interest.
Perhaps it is not impossible, but there: I am not for marrying. I don't believe it is possible for two people to swear allegiance to each other, and so will not marry.

I certainly would never try to argue that marriage must be good for you. I know it's probably not good for me. But I won't put it past my fellow humans to be able to swear their loyalty as you describe. I've seen some people do it, and make a passing fair job of keeping the oath as well.


Marriage is a vow not lightly taken. It is a vow which church and state ought to respect by taking no part in, beyond recording it if so requested, celebrating it if suitably paid, and asserting laws for the protection of the the individual therein.
No argument here! :)

Yes, but according to the results, most people disagree with me.

Not at all. The poll asks, "Is marriage good for you." If you say that it is good for you, that's fine. Other people may answer that it is not good for them, but that doesn't mean they're disagreeing that marriage is good for you.


And also according to the results, more guys play Nationstates.
Or, at least, more guys respond to polls about marriage. ;)

But yes, I believe that all the polls that have been done so far indicate a higher percentage of males than females on NS General.

*Shudder* Not for all people. Never for me. I would never make such a vow, nor would I accept one from another human being. Indeed, such a vow would make marriage (as I conceive it) totally impossible.
I couldn't imagine a marriage working out if both were not willing to submit to eachother and put the relationship above all others. In fact I have seen marriages without that commitment, they didn't last long and while they did both parties were quite unhappy.

Going to the dentist has very few perks, but one of them is that I get to read magazine articles that I normally would not ever see.

This time, I read an article about the "trade-offs" of marriage.

Examples:

House work--Marriage may mean that somebody else is helping you keep house, so you have more free time, or it could mean there's somebody adding messes to your life which you have to clean up.

Child care--Marriage could mean that you have additional help rearing kids, or it could mean you take on the responsibility of raising somebody else's kids.

Status--Marriage could raise (or lower) your status in your culture/society.

Income--Marriage could bring another paycheck into your life, or could mean that you have somebody new who you have to support.

Health--Studies have found that married men tend to reap positive health benefits from getting married, while married women do not (on average). It is possible that having somebody else looking after your health will help you stay fit or will help you catch medical problems earlier. Maybe it's just handy to have somebody remind you to get a physical every so often.

So here's my question.

Set aside, for a moment, the issue of your feelings for your partner (or future partner). Set aside, for a moment, your love or your emotional desire to be with that person. For the moment, look only at the practical considerations of marriage, independent from how you may feel about the individual person you would marry (or have married).

IS MARRIAGE A GOOD DEAL FOR YOU?

*Remember, it's quite possible for somebody to say that they don't think marriage is a very good deal for them, but they intend to do it anyhow (or have already done it) because there's an emotional factor that outweighs the "practical" trade-offs.*

*It's also possible for marriage to be a good deal for some people, but not for you in particular.*can't say. Never been married, so I don't really know.

I couldn't imagine a marriage working out if both were not willing to submit to eachother and put the relationship above all others. In fact I have seen marriages without that commitment, they didn't last long and while they did both parties were quite unhappy.

First - one can place a certain relationship over all others without any of this 'must submit' content. We've discussed this before... and, while you are clearly with how 'submission' works for you... you can, I am sure, see that yours might not define every case.

Second - as a Christian... surely you place your marriage below at the very least, ONE other relationship?

First - one can place a certain relationship over all others without any of this 'must submit' content. We've discussed this before... and, while you are clearly with how 'submission' works for you... you can, I am sure, see that yours might not define every case.
true.

Second - as a Christian... surely you place your marriage below at the very least, ONE other relationship?
and also true. Surely you know I was talking about earthly relationships though;)

true.


and also true. Surely you know I was talking about earthly relationships though;)

Oh, of course I know... I was just making sure everything was 'transparent'.

:)

Oh, of course I know... I was just making sure everything was 'transparent'.

:)
sure you were.:p

sure you were.:p

Maybe it is myself that is proved transparent? ;)

Since I want to do a lot of world travelling once I've got the money and I want to be able to pack up and move whenever a new (higher-paying hopefully) job opportunity is available I don't think marriage would be good for me. I just don't want to have my freedom restricted by the pressures of marriage or raising kids...maybe short term relationships, but no marriage for me.

Married people live longer:

http://www.cbs.nl/NR/rdonlyres/1CB06A22-519B-4BC1-9E5A-A41BD09E99F6/0/0980g1.gif

The Case for Marriage: Why Married People Are Happier, Healthier, and Better off Financially

http://www.psychpage.com/family/library/brwaitgalligher.html

If you can't see yourself being with your partner as he/she is, then you shouldn't marry them with the assumption that you're going to be able to change them to fit your expectations.

I whole-heartedly agree with this. Every instance of, "I'll change him/her," I've seen has ended in disaster. And why would you marry someone with the intention of changing them anyways?


On the main topic, I do think that marriage is a good deal for us on a practical level, for several reasons. First of all, we've already merged our finances to the point that neither of us is sure of the official status of some belongings or which of us spends the most money, etc. We've taken steps to make sure that the larger financial burdens are shared, but you can only do so much there. Being legally married will make our financial situation in the event of something bad happening (major injury, property damage, untimely death, you name it) much more secure.

Being legally married will also be good for me on the health side of things, mostly because I'll be able to afford better health insurance that way. I'm a grad student, so I have easy access (and can afford) student insurance, which really doesn't cover all that much. He, on the other hand, works for a company in the health industry and gets access to much better insurance at a good price. His company is currently looking into offering partnership benefits, but does not yet. Marriage will open up his health insurance to me.

I do think that the emotional concerns are much more important, but I also don't think you need to be legally or religiously (officially) married to reap those benefits. My fiance and I made a lifelong committment to each other long before we were even engaged. Actually getting officially married really boils down to the practical issues and the social idea of involving our family and friends in our decision.

Edit: Another concern. He and I do want to have at least one child (and probably adopt a second) at some point in our lives. Being married will make childrearing, from a legal standpoint, much easier. There will be no question as to the legal relationship of either of us to the children. No extra paperwork will be necessary for either of us to include them on insurance or be seen as a full legal guardian with all of the rights and responsibilities therein. This could be accomplished without marriage, but will be easier with it.

Going to the dentist has very few perks, but one of them is that I get to read magazine articles that I normally would not ever see.

This time, I read an article about the "trade-offs" of marriage.

Examples:

House work--Marriage may mean that somebody else is helping you keep house, so you have more free time, or it could mean there's somebody adding messes to your life which you have to clean up.

Child care--Marriage could mean that you have additional help rearing kids, or it could mean you take on the responsibility of raising somebody else's kids.

Status--Marriage could raise (or lower) your status in your culture/society.

Income--Marriage could bring another paycheck into your life, or could mean that you have somebody new who you have to support.

Health--Studies have found that married men tend to reap positive health benefits from getting married, while married women do not (on average). It is possible that having somebody else looking after your health will help you stay fit or will help you catch medical problems earlier. Maybe it's just handy to have somebody remind you to get a physical every so often.

So here's my question.

Set aside, for a moment, the issue of your feelings for your partner (or future partner). Set aside, for a moment, your love or your emotional desire to be with that person. For the moment, look only at the practical considerations of marriage, independent from how you may feel about the individual person you would marry (or have married).

IS MARRIAGE A GOOD DEAL FOR YOU?

*Remember, it's quite possible for somebody to say that they don't think marriage is a very good deal for them, but they intend to do it anyhow (or have already done it) because there's an emotional factor that outweighs the "practical" trade-offs.*

*It's also possible for marriage to be a good deal for some people, but not for you in particular.*
But you can't set all that aside! There's no reason for marriage without that. It doesn't make any sense. Of course, that depends on how you define marriage, too....

I agree with you, but in my experience (limited though it is) it's very hard to change that pattern of behaviour in a person. Even with my expectations clearly announced, some will shirk that expectation as much as possible.
It's unreasonable to expect someone to change. Of course it's also unreasonable to be unwilling to change.....

Exactly! And, thus, that is a practical consideration that some people must add to their list when considering if marriage is a good deal or not.

In some societies, even the nicest and smartest and kindest men (or women) will have been so innundated with certain expectations that they probably will never be completely free of them. If you get married to such a person, you risk having to put up with those assumptions for the rest of your life. Or you face the possibility of having to expend time and energy to get them to let go of those assumptions. And you face the question of whether it is even right for you to try to do this; should you really marry somebody if you know that you're going to be setting out to "change" them? Is that a realistic or healthy element to your relationship?
And that's where all that subjective, emotional stuff you threw out comes in. If someone is truly in love, it shouldn't matter that much. Both people should be willing, if not eager, to at least try to accomodate the other. And both should be understanding and compassionate toward the others' efforts.

I just can't think of a way to go about "changing" somebody like that without creating huge amounts of resentment on both sides.
You can't. It isn't possible. But it isn't up to you to change someone. It's up to him or her to change himself or herself respectively.

Married people live longer [..snip..]
Yeah, that's definately an often-overlooked downside of marriage.

No. Bonds of obligation like that work just fine without the piece of paper saying you're married. Perhaps even better, since your partner has had to justify your relationship to others in a lot more words than just "we're married."

Marriage is a religious institution, adopted into law by states. States have no modesty, no respect for your emotional welfare (I'm not saying religious governors do either.) They promote marriage because it reduces the personal choices of both partners, and simplifies governance by making of two people one legal entity. Legal advantages to marriage are few. Marriage is, as it has always been, a voluntary abrogation of options.
Well, that's one definition of marriage. That's the official, commonly accepted one. I prefer the one that's really an understood bond and commitment between two people. No legal document required. Same term to define different things....I think we place too much importance on the material significance of marriage and long-term relationships resembling marriage that should otherwise be spent on the person him- or herself. It's more about the affections two people have for each other than signing a piece of paper that says you're bound together. Nothing should be more important than that other person. And no one person or group of people should be able to dictate the bounds of such a relationship, legally or otherwise. If they ask for such interevention; in the event a relationship goes awry, for example; then you still have to deal with courts and lawyers and the like, but....wait...I think at this point if I continue I'll be assuming most people aren't going to be selfishly spiteful at this point.....

Legal and economic matters are part of life. It does not seem strange to me that people should include such concerns when they decide to marry their life to another's.
No, they are a part of society, not life. But we live in society (well, most of you probably do:p), so it is still relevant to consider, but I don't think it should be given much thought. Realistically, those things restrict too much. The thing about true love is that it can always find a way. You must simply seek after it with unparalleled temerity and passion. Never settle for anything less than you desire, your legal and economic issue be damned.

I whole-heartedly agree with this. Every instance of, "I'll change him/her," I've seen has ended in disaster. And why would you marry someone with the intention of changing them anyways?


On the main topic, I do think that marriage is a good deal for us on a practical level, for several reasons. First of all, we've already merged our finances to the point that neither of us is sure of the official status of some belongings or which of us spends the most money, etc. We've taken steps to make sure that the larger financial burdens are shared, but you can only do so much there. Being legally married will make our financial situation in the event of something bad happening (major injury, property damage, untimely death, you name it) much more secure.

Being legally married will also be good for me on the health side of things, mostly because I'll be able to afford better health insurance that way. I'm a grad student, so I have easy access (and can afford) student insurance, which really doesn't cover all that much. He, on the other hand, works for a company in the health industry and gets access to much better insurance at a good price. His company is currently looking into offering partnership benefits, but does not yet. Marriage will open up his health insurance to me.

I do think that the emotional concerns are much more important, but I also don't think you need to be legally or religiously (officially) married to reap those benefits. My fiance and I made a lifelong committment to each other long before we were even engaged. Actually getting officially married really boils down to the practical issues and the social idea of involving our family and friends in our decision.

Edit: Another concern. He and I do want to have at least one child (and probably adopt a second) at some point in our lives. Being married will make childrearing, from a legal standpoint, much easier. There will be no question as to the legal relationship of either of us to the children. No extra paperwork will be necessary for either of us to include them on insurance or be seen as a full legal guardian with all of the rights and responsibilities therein. This could be accomplished without marriage, but will be easier with it.
Precisely. I don't think it should be the primary concern. After you've been completely smitten (or however else it happens to you) is the time to worry about finances and insurance, etc. It's just a sidenote to the relationship.

It's unreasonable to expect someone to change. Of course it's also unreasonable to be unwilling to change.....

On the other hand, it's unreasonable to expect your partner to do all the housework, to use my earlier example (particularly if you both work full time).

No, they are a part of society, not life. But we live in society (well, most of you probably do:p), so it is still relevant to consider, but I don't think it should be given much thought. Realistically, those things restrict too much. The thing about true love is that it can always find a way. You must simply seek after it with unparalleled temerity and passion. Never settle for anything less than you desire, your legal and economic issue be damned.

I don't believe in this so-called true love. And there are many other factors to consider. For some people, familial duty, for example, comes before love. This alleged "true love" will not always find a way.

Set aside, for a moment, the issue of your feelings for your partner (or future partner). Set aside, for a moment, your love or your emotional desire to be with that person. For the moment, look only at the practical considerations of marriage, independent from how you may feel about the individual person you would marry (or have married).
For me, it's not a good deal. My girlfriend and I both earn the same amount of money, and singly, we're in a lower tax bracket. We don't own a home or have any significant deductions (I get my daughter when she lives with me), so from a tax point of view, we'd get hit harder by getting married. We'd jump into a significantly higher bracket and lose a little bit on the deduction front. Currently, we mingle our resources anyway, so it's not like that would change any, and neither of us has any desire to get married again.

Personally, I think everyone ought to get married once, just to get it out of their systems. A few are going to like it, some are going to wind up with stalkers, and the rest of us can shake it off and get back to being single or just living with someone in unmarried bliss. My girlfriend and I are coming up on 6 years together, which is about as long as my marriage lasted, and this has been significantly better.

For the wife, yes.
For the husband, no.

On the other hand, it's unreasonable to expect your partner to do all the housework, to use my earlier example (particularly if you both work full time).
And that's where being reasonable and willing to change comes in. Both expectations and static habits are unreasonable, except where the former apply to oneself and not the other. The real trick is finding a means of cooperation that benefits both. That may take a little trial and error, but it's worth it, and will seem as nothing. It isn't about either one of them, but both of them and how they can best function together.

I don't believe in this so-called true love. And there are many other factors to consider. For some people, familial duty, for example, comes before love. This alleged "true love" will not always find a way.
Maybe it does exist. Maybe it doesn't. But in my experience, there's definitely a love that cannot be conquered by any but the two who share the bond. Something about it is irrevocably absolute. You may not believe it exists, but that doesn't mean it doesn't. It might not. Or maybe you just haven't felt it yet. Either way, one cannot simply dismiss the possibility out of hand.

Love comes in many forms. Love of family is one form, and if you read carefully, I said true love can find a way, not that it will. And frankly, I wouldn't want to be part of a family that didn't support that love. There's nothing familial about interfering in matters of the heart. Some things are just too fragile. If they are more than whispered, they are in danger of blowing away in a gentle breeze. Other factors are minor obstacles to be sidestepped and overcome, nothing more. Some things simply should not be lived without. There is no purpose, no life, to life without them.

Yeah I think it is a positive thing in my life. Of course I found a woman that compliments my personality. So it works well I believe. But I would caution anyone thinking of getting married to make sure as much as you can that you are with the right one.