Why do people think less of a couple who aren't married?

Georgiegirl256

Soleil_lune wrote: »

It always amazes me how people seem to regard their non-married status as the same as being married. It's not and never will be. I have known straight couples whining and moaning because they can't have a civil partnership. A civil partnership has always been marriage for gay people. All it is is marriage. So get married.

When I see couples who have been together for many years and never married, I do wonder why. What is stopping them? Not sure enough about their relationship?

How judgemental! :eek: Maybe some people just don't want to get married, it's not for everyone, and they should be allowed to exercise that choice without being judged.

You are right in the fact that a non married status isn't the same as a married one in the eyes of the law. However, as this thread is about people's relationships being deemed not as committed, you are wrong. Because what it boils down to is how can anyone say otherwise? Do you know the ins and outs of someone's relationship? No. People aren't automatically more committed just because they're married. More protected by the law yes, but more committed....hardly! If all of a sudden you're more committed just because of a marriage ceremony, well to me, it doesn't say much about your relationship before.

missbiggles1

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

How judgemental! :eek: Maybe some people just don't want to get married, it's not for everyone, and they should be allowed to exercise that choice without being judged.

You are right in the fact that a non married status isn't the same as a married one in the eyes of the law. However, as this thread is about people's relationships being deemed not as committed, you are wrong. Because what it boils down to is how can anyone say otherwise? Do you know the ins and outs of someone's relationship? No. People aren't automatically more committed just because they're married. More protected by the law yes, but more committed....hardly! If all of a sudden you're more committed just because of a marriage ceremony, well to me, it doesn't say much about your relationship before.

You're getting that the wrong way round, I'm afraid.

Soleil_lune

missbiggles1 wrote: »

But a married couple who got hitched the day before will, quite correctly, have rights that someone who moved his toothbrush in yesterday, won't.

Like I said Miss Biggles, some people seem to be under the impression that they have all the same rights as a married couple when they are not married.

Fact us, it's simply not true.

It's actually rather worrying. People are leaving themselves wide open to a very insecure and shaky future, should their relationship break down.

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

How judgemental! :eek: Maybe some people just don't want to get married, it's not for everyone, and they should be allowed to exercise that choice without being judged.

You are right in the fact that a non married status isn't the same as a married one in the eyes of the law. However, as this thread is about people's relationships being deemed not as committed, you are wrong. Because what it boils down to is how can anyone say otherwise? Do you know the ins and outs of someone's relationship? No. People aren't automatically more committed just because they're married. More protected by the law yes, but more committed....hardly! If all of a sudden you're more committed just because of a marriage ceremony, well to me, it doesn't say much about your relationship before.

Oh stop it Georgie! I am not being 'judgemental,' I am merely stating my opinion. Why do you always jump on people, and personally attack them, when they simply have a different opinion to you?!

And your last paragraph makes you come across as terribly disingenuous. Or are you just trying to make a point?

I have no time for histrionics. I was just stating how I feel, that is all.

Good day to you. :wave:

Georgiegirl256

missbiggles1 wrote: »

You're getting that the wrong way round, I'm afraid.

How so?

Soleil_lune wrote: »

Oh stop it Georgie! I am not being 'judgemental,' I am merely stating my opinion. Why do you always jump on people, and personally attack them, when they simply have a different opinion to you?!

And your last paragraph makes you come across as terribly disingenuous. Or are you just trying to make a point?

Sorry? What do you mean "am I just trying to make a point"?

I'm not jumping on anyone, I'm simply stating my opinion as you are yours, and yes, to me it does come across as extremely judgmental, purely because how can anyone judge that one couples relationship is more committed than another's just because of a wedding certificate?

A friend of mine has been with her OH for over 20 years (got together when they were teenagers) and haven't married and have no intention of getting married. They've taken care of all legal things, so why would their relationship be any less committed than someone who's married? Serious question here, as I'm curious to know why people think that.

Buzzybee90

missbiggles1 wrote: »

Of course you don't automatically get this.

As I, and several other people here, have shown many organisations only offer paid compassionate leave for the death of a spouse, child, sibling or parent, with a set number of days allocated in each category.

"Compassionate leave may be granted to employees as follows;

Up to a maximum of three working days may be granted on the death of an immediate relative, or in exceptional circumstances on the death of a more distant relative (e.g. where the employee has to take charge of funeral arrangements or has lived in the same house as the deceased.
An immediate relative means a father, mother, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, child or spouse.
On the death of a spouse or child, the maximum number of days may be increased to five.
Extra days may also be allowed where an immediate relative dies abroad and the employee has to go abroad to take charge of the funeral arrangements."

http://www.hse.ie/eng/staff/Benefits_Services/Timeoff/Compassionate_Leave.html

I'm not saying that some other organisations don't offer this more widely but it would be a mistake to think that this is always the case.

How backward.

I would never work for a company with a backward policy, though I doubt they'd refuse the leave in real life (if they did there would most certainly have been news stories about it)

I love how father in law comes before spouse.

Mojisola

Soleil_lune wrote: »

Like I said Miss Biggles, some people seem to be under the impression that they have all the same rights as a married couple when they are not married.

Fact us, it's simply not true.

It's actually rather worrying. People are leaving themselves wide open to a very insecure and shaky future, should their relationship break down.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/relationships/living-together-marriage-and-civil-partnership/living-together-and-marriage-legal-differences/

While unmarried couples can cover some of the legal issues with wills, next-of-kin declarations, etc, they will never become entitled to benefits limited to spouses/civil partners or the IHT transfer between spouses.

If couples choose to stay unmarried after assessing all the issues, that's their decision. Unfortunately, as you say, many just assume that they will be treated as spouses because they are living together.

lulu_92

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

How judgemental! :eek: Maybe some people just don't want to get married, it's not for everyone, and they should be allowed to exercise that choice without being judged.

You are right in the fact that a non married status isn't the same as a married one in the eyes of the law. However, as this thread is about people's relationships being deemed not as committed, you are wrong. Because what it boils down to is how can anyone say otherwise? Do you know the ins and outs of someone's relationship? No. People aren't automatically more committed just because they're married. More protected by the law yes, but more committed....hardly! If all of a sudden you're more committed just because of a marriage ceremony, well to me, it doesn't say much about your relationship before.

We were having this conversation yesterday and my OH made the point that there are married couples we know/known who crumble at any difficulty and refuse to try to make it work.

Marriage might test your commitment and your relationship but you certainly don't need to be married to have everything thrown at you and come out stronger on the other side. It doesn't necessarily make you a stronger, more committed couple. It covers you legally.

I agree that marriage shouldn't make you more committed to each other and it doesn't necessarily.

lulu_92

Buzzybee90 wrote: »

How backward.

I would never work for a company with a backward policy, though I doubt they'd refuse the leave in real life (if they did there would most certainly have been news stories about it)

I love how father in law comes before spouse.

At my work it's 3 days leave but it covers anyone, I think. I got offered it when my dog died, and I was told to take as much time off as I wanted after my miscarriage, not just for the physical part of it. A lot of it is at my manager's discretion, but as we are a close-knit team it's easier for him to determine these things.

onlyroz

Mojisola wrote: »

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/relationships/living-together-marriage-and-civil-partnership/living-together-and-marriage-legal-differences/

While unmarried couples can cover some of the legal issues with wills, next-of-kin declarations, etc, they will never become entitled to benefits limited to spouses/civil partners or the IHT transfer between spouses.

If couples choose to stay unmarried after assessing all the issues, that's their decision. Unfortunately, as you say, many just assume that they will be treated as spouses because they are living together.

Interesting thing in that link about how unmarried fathers only have parental responsibility for their children if they are present when the birth is registered. Married fathers automatically have parental responsibility.

There's another thing at the end about how you can't be forced to testify against your spouse, but you can be forced to testify against your cohabiting partner.

Piggywiggy

I struggle to see how getting married simply for financial reasons would make you more committed. If anything it can mean you stay with someone who you don't love because you will lose so much in a divorce.