Why doesn't he want to marry me?

bugslet

newcook wrote: »

Eternity rings are a symbol of commitment, which from the sounds of it is what OP wants – commitment.
This way, he is showing his commitment without having to get married therefore they both get what they want.





I didnt realize that love and commitment had to come with a price tag

I got one after the affair and very pretty it is. Didn't ask for it, he just wanted to buy something sparkly and who am I to say no;)

bugslet

Dunroamin wrote: »

I think your example illustrates perfectly what some of us are saying about marriage showing a greater commitment than co habitation.

Client of mine, same age as me, both him and his cureent wife are on the third marriage.

That's not my definition of commitment.

PS I don't ahve anything against marraige, if people want to, well good for them, no problem. I just never wanted to. Maybe having a mother that was very unhappy in her marriage but for financial reasons unable to leave, is part of it. Maybe it's because I'm ferociously independent and don't like belonging to things.

Not saying this to do any bit of one upmanship stakes , but commitment at the moment for me is visiting Mr Bugs pretty much every day, even though he hasn't got much idea of who I am, of ensuring that he has the best care that I can give and get for him. Before anyone says commitment is nursing at home, he's way beyond that stage now.

TeamLowe

Errata wrote: »

Eternity rings are a De Beers marketing ploy and intended for married men to give to their wives on the birth of their first child. It's a load of twaddle.

Please don't tell my husband this, I quite fancy one

seven-day-weekend

newcook wrote: »

Eternity rings are a symbol of commitment, which from the sounds of it is what OP wants – commitment.
This way, he is showing his commitment without having to get married therefore they both get what they want.





I didnt realize that love and commitment had to come with a price tag

No they don't. I was not referring to the price, I was commenting on anyone thinking a ring or any other gift was comparable to the legal commitment of marriage. I don't think a ring does show commitment, anyone can buy a ring.

cats2012

I'm afraid I haven't read all 17 pages, but the first couple made me think of something a lady colleague at work said to me last year.

She has been with her partner 10 years, they have two children together, but still got married last year. She said, although not word for word, "i knew we were both 100% committed to the kids, so we didn't do it for them, we did it for us". i thought that was lovely. she went on to say how it wasn't about kids, life, money etc - it was just about their love for each other.

I thought that was lovely, and really rings true for me.

lutzi1

jetplane wrote: »

I have a whole brain, a clever and educated brain and have fallen pregnant twice while taking the contraceptive pill over a period of over 10 years.

Snap!

Many different factors and medical conditions can affect your body's ability to absorb the pill on different occasions. The bottom line is, if you're not prepared to have a child by him don't rely solely on the Pill.

runningwoman

Dunroamin wrote: »

When used correctly, the combined pill has a failure rate of 0.2% so, on your figures, one might expect 70 women per year to become pregnant - unfortunately they all seem to post on MSE.;)

(Obviously the failure rate of the mini pill is higher.)

What's that about lies, damn lies,and statistics?

Fancy some maths for a lunchtime?! (no you probably don't, no-one does, but still I'll enjoy it )

Ok. That probability I quoted was calculated using a sample of women on the Pill.

So ....who would this group include?

It would include women like me: I'm on the Pill. Technically I'm sexually active and healthy and fertile and have a partner who is the same.

But I'm in a LDR most of the time, so I'd be on the list of women who are on the Pill and say it's been infallible for them but have a lower than average sex life.

It would also include the students at a university I know who were told there was the option of going on the Pill during exam periods so they could avoid PMT issues. Some are virgins due to cultural/religious reasons.

Now, women who are on the Pill WHILST having a lower than average amount of sex are "reducing the overall calculated probability".

So to just apply it as a "straight probability" the way you have WITHOUT taking into account the OTHER things that can increase the chances of pregnancy is meaningless I'm afraid?

I'd postulate most of the "accidental" pregnancies are occurring when you have a couple living together or at least seeing each other regularly so having regular (so more than average) sex? Their risk factors are higher.

I think the reason that "probability" is often given/quoted in a family planning context to try to give the patient a more informed choice. It's more of a "vague indication" of how safe it is compared to other techniques.

Medical staff aren't gods. They're just trying to present things in a relatively easy to explain format, but it isn't always the most technically accurate one, just the best they can do for a wide audience?

If there was just "one straight path to manage our health" we'd all be a nation of Jess Ennis's, but sadly not! Of course I hope everyone is managing our health as well as we can, but there are no guarantees!

Another Example:

Take the calculated "chance of flying and having to make a sudden, slightly dangerous, evasive move"? Based on ALL the flights that are taken in the world, it's very, very low.

But you could easily find a sample of pilots who have a higher than average rate of having to make "sudden, slightly dangerous, evasive moves".

And then say "oh well THEY'RE obviously crap pilots and deliberately doing stupid things".

WITHOUT taking into account this group is mainly composed of RAF pilots flying out of Afghanistan? That might be increasing their chances a bit, no?

HTH

PS Sorry OP ruining your nice thread with digression!

Oakie

OP; you said your partner said to you to be patient. Could this mean he is planning on proposal . Maybe he is waiting to surprise you at Christmas or Valentines Day.
I would recommend going quiet on the subject for a while.Maybe it needs to appear to be his idea.
Otherwise if you are hinting at marriage and he does propose,you may then end up wondering if he was talked into it. iyswim.

OP; do you and your other half get much time to yourselves?.Can you get grannies and aunties to look after the children.so the two of you can have some quality time together .

Lunar_Eclipse

paulineb wrote: »

Its possible to love someone and want to grow old with them without getting married.

Absolutely. (I just don't agree that someone should marry someone else because they have children together, which is what my post was answering. Love should only ever be the reason, ideally.)

To the OP: we all have no idea why your partner doesn't want to get married. It's hard to know what to advise if it's so important to you. All I will say is that it doesn't necessarily mean he isn't incredibly committed to you, loves you deeply and that you aren't the one. You could have an incredibly happy and long lasting relationship without getting married. If everything else is good in the relationship, I'd try to count your blessings and consciously try to be a happy and loving partner getting on enjoying life and see how the next few years go. I would definitely stop mentioning it too.

catkins

paulineb wrote: »

Also, some people who have been together for 4 years arent talking marriage at that stage, take the kids out of the equation and it doesnt necessarily mean that if you are in a long term relationship, marriage would necessarily be on the cards. Some people get married in a few months, some get married after 10 years

My brother is living with someone, been together 8 years, not married and happy. It is possible to be in a relationship that lasts the distance without the wedding.

I wouldn't go out with someone for years and not at least be intending to get married. Me and OH got married 5 months after meeting (didn't live together first) as we both knew we had met the right one and wanted to be married.

paulineb wrote: »

One of my friends is getting married next year, hes 40 and shes a few years younger, theyve been together 15 years and living together for 10, I actually think its good theyve decided in their own time to get wed and not be pressured into it by people who expected them to do it sooner.

There is no way I would go out with someone for 15 years and not be married in that time.

poet123 wrote: »

What it would come down to for me is that if we couldn't agree on such a fundamental issue then we would lack compatibility. I couldn't be with someone who had such different views on marriage.

I totally agree with this but the problem is the OP had a baby very quickly and so I guess they never had a talk about each others views on marriage. Luckily OH had the same strong views on marriage as me