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

cyantist

lulu_92 wrote: »

That is really presumptuous considering you don't know me.

We want a wedding and share our day with a lot of friends and family. Weddings cost money and we would rather spend our savings on a new house and starting our family.

Engagement is in OHs hands but I don't lose sleep over not having a ring on my finger.

We tried to get pregnant for 8 months when I got pregnant and I miscarried 5 weeks ago. I don't care whether I'm married or not when I have kids so the two don't go hand in hand for me. Whether we get married now or in 20 years, I don't care as long as he's in my life and still madly in love with me

I thought you were saying I was presumptuous, and I got confused (it happens a lot).

I'm really sorry about your MC and trying to start a family sooner rather than later, regardless of whether you have a ring or not, makes a lot of sense in some ways.

fairy_lights

j.e.j. wrote: »

He doesn't want to get engaged.. so it's reasonable to assume that he doesn't actually want marriage.

He hasn't proposed with a ring - that doesn't mean he doesn't want to get married. Surely the fact that they've both agreed they want to get married when they can afford it means they are engaged, ring or not?

lulu_92

cyantist wrote: »

I thought you were saying I was presumptuous, and I got confused (it happens a lot).

I'm really sorry about your MC and trying to start a family sooner rather than later, regardless of whether you have a ring or not, makes a lot of sense in some ways.

Sorry I should have quoted j.e.j's post. I had computer issues when I initially replied so rushed it on my phone.

Thanks cyantist, we're trying our best. People tend to think I'm stupid because I'm "only" 23 next week, although OH is 31 and pretty set on what he wants, which includes me as his wife and mother to his kids. I just wish we could afford to do everything! Kids is the priority, one of my fears is finding out I left it too late.

Jagraf

Relationships are subjective so its nonsense to believe that a couple love each other, or are committed to each other more, because they are married.

In many although not all cases, people marry because they want something to communicate about for the two years prior to a wedding.

It took me ages to marry I was too busy enjoying the more important things in life.

I alas think sometimes people feel this if parents aren't married. It's a blast from the past. If you want to marry great (I'm married), if ou don't, don't. It doesn't make your life less valuable.

j.e.j.

gabriel1980 wrote: »

It's one of my bugbears when people assume that because my girlfriend and I aren't married means we're not that serious about each other. We've been together longer than all the other married couples we know and lived together for much of that time. The married guys with little kids I know look miserable. Neither my girlfriend and I really fancy getting married or having kids. The freedom would be too hard to give up.

To be honest, what is marriage? You have a big expensive party, maybe a holiday, and then go back to just doing what you did before, sitting on the couch and back to normal life.

It's a commitment to each other, for the rest of your lives. The big fat gypsy wedding and the ridiculously expensive hen and stag weekends are a total nonsense, and a relatively new phenomenon.

You don't want to commit to your girlfriend and would rather keep your options open, that's your decision. But to say married people all look miserable seems a bit of a sweeping statement!

Jagraf

j.e.j. wrote: »

It's a commitment to each other, for the rest of your lives. The big fat gypsy wedding and the ridiculously expensive hen and stag weekends are a total nonsense, and a relatively new phenomenon.

You don't want to commit to your girlfriend and would rather keep your options open, that's your decision. But to say married people all look miserable seems a bit of a sweeping statement!

But marriage doesn't mean you commit nowadays. In fact, unless you are having a marriage in the eyes of god, a civil wedding is little more than a financial contract, outside of that you can promise wht you like (not saying a religious ceremony is more important, just saying that you actually commit to something else in a religious ceremony).

Everyone's idea of commitment is different, so I'm not sure why you can't have that outside of a wedding day.

j.e.j.

lulu_92 wrote: »

That is really presumptuous considering you don't know me.

We want a wedding and share our day with a lot of friends and family. Weddings cost money and we would rather spend our savings on a new house and starting our family.

Engagement is in OHs hands but I don't lose sleep over not having a ring on my finger.

We tried to get pregnant for 8 months when I got pregnant and I miscarried 5 weeks ago. I don't care whether I'm married or not when I have kids so the two don't go hand in hand for me. Whether we get married now or in 20 years, I don't care as long as he's in my life and still madly in love with me

What I am getting from your post is that you want the commitment that goes with marriage, and rightly so, if you're going to have children together.

By the looks of things he doesn't, or he would agree to an engagement.

(Btw you are young, - very young to be worrying about leaving it 'too late'!)

But yes, of course we can only go by a few paragraphs you've written on a forum, so we're not judging, just saying your plans seem to fit the pattern described in a few of the earlier posts on this thread: drop a sprog or two, keep waiting for the right time to get married (it won't ever come.. there'll be even less money to spare once a child comes along), get sick of waiting, and just resign yourself to the fact that he's not interested in marriage, never was.. he just wants you.

j.e.j.

Jagraf wrote: »

But marriage doesn't mean you commit nowadays.

Sad but true....

But commitment for the rest of your lives is what a marriage is meant for, even if it's now just become a commercialised spendfest, followed by a quickie divorce once reality sets in :rotfl:

jackieblack

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

Good point actually. Forgot about that. Before I read that on here once, I just always assumed that things like Pensions and Death in Service payouts were payable to common law spouses as well, as my husbands does and I was named and would have received both should the worst have happened.

There is no such thing as common law spouses in the UK
That is a common misconception.

onlyroz

Jagraf wrote: »

But marriage doesn't mean you commit nowadays. In fact, unless you are having a marriage in the eyes of god, a civil wedding is little more than a financial contract, outside of that you can promise wht you like (not saying a religious ceremony is more important, just saying that you actually commit to something else in a religious ceremony).

Everyone's idea of commitment is different, so I'm not sure why you can't have that outside of a wedding day.

So having a civil wedding doesn't mean you're committed? :rotfl:
You're still making a lifetime promise to your partner. The only difference is that you don't include a higher being in that promise.