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

NoGoodNamesLeft

I don't think unmarried couples are necessarily less serious about each other - my OH and I were together for 16 years before we married.
But getting married tells other people that you are commited. It makes the statement that you are a unit. Non-married couples can be just as close, but unless they explicitly say so it's not immediately obvious.

missbiggles1

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.

That's not marriage - that's the wedding!

lulu_92

missbiggles1 wrote: »

You may not choose to (and that's your choice) but surely wanting to be married before having a baby can't be that alien a concept to you?

No it isn't an alien concept. This is what I said to my friend was saying she "couldn't" have kids until she was married. Physically it wouldn't stop her and it wouldn't destroy her world if it happened before marriage anyway but I respect her choice.

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

To be fair, the above sounds exactly like what PasturesNew was describing.

I'm sad to say, but I always get this overwhelming feeling that you're a lot more keen to do things than your OH whenever I read any of your posts.

Not sure how it was exactly as neither of us are looking over the other's shoulder to see what else is available and we both want the same things. Just because we are making decisions based on our finances does not mean that my OH does not want any of these things. He has had a rough time in the past which has affected him more than he thought they would. For him to tell me he wanted to start trying for children was a massive step in my eyes. In fact, I think it would be a bigger step than if he proposed.

I don't really hold back when I talk about something, but OH does so sometimes it's difficult to gauge whether we both agree to the same extent but we make it clear to each other and, at the end of the day, that's all that matters.

I've said it before and I've said it again: I'm not a naive little girl so if I wasn't getting what I wanted from this relationship I would have walked away a long time ago and we would not have lasted the four years we have so far. Patience is a virtue.

pinkandblueshoe

I think its a bit odd that a couple could make a decision to have a child which lets face it is a massive commitment but in the months of trying, the man doesn't have a spare five minutes to go and buy an engagement ring. That makes it sound like the female of the partnership has no say in the ring or the decision, I dont mean it like that. But if you both want a child and you know your partner wants to marry you and hes 31 years old, also assume you've been together a few years, what on earth is stopping him proposing. If you live together, you want a child together, you love one another and you want the same thing, that is marriage, what's keeping him from proposing?

If someone was vague about getting engaged but wanted to have a child and lives with their partner, Id have a few alarm bells ringing. Vague really isn't good.

Nothing wrong with living together, having kids or not and never getting married, but if you do, he does, then what's stopping him? Unless he feels under pressure to and it might ruin the surprise or whatever.

barnaclebill

Just watch the Barclaycard advert where it gets to the end and he say's in the song "today's the day I might finally commit " as he is driven away from the church with two children chasing the car and I always think as that ad plays, finally commit and he's already got the two kids.

lulu_92

pinkandblueshoe wrote: »

I think its a bit odd that a couple could make a decision to have a child which lets face it is a massive commitment but in the months of trying, the man doesn't have a spare five minutes to go and buy an engagement ring. That makes it sound like the female of the partnership has no say in the ring or the decision, I dont mean it like that. But if you both want a child and you know your partner wants to marry you and hes 31 years old, also assume you've been together a few years, what on earth is stopping him proposing. If you live together, you want a child together, you love one another and you want the same thing, that is marriage, what's keeping him from proposing?

If someone was vague about getting engaged but wanted to have a child and lives with their partner, Id have a few alarm bells ringing. Vague really isn't good.

Nothing wrong with living together, having kids or not and never getting married, but if you do, he does, then what's stopping him? Unless he feels under pressure to and it might ruin the surprise or whatever.

He's vague about it as he's not exactly going to tell me the details of him wanting to propose, is he?

He has the "spare time" to buy a ring but he is deciding to save all of his extra money so when we have a child they can have nice things. Plus he might be getting a better job but with less money (more career progression) so that's a factor.

missbiggles1

lulu_92 wrote: »

He's vague about it as he's not exactly going to tell me the details of him wanting to propose, is he?

He has the "spare time" to buy a ring but he is deciding to save all of his extra money so when we have a child they can have nice things. Plus he might be getting a better job but with less money (more career progression) so that's a factor.

Sorry to seem thick but I have no idea what you mean by that.

jackieblack

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

Co habitating couple are quite often known as common law spouses. What is a common misconception though is that they have the same rights as a married couple.

Yes, exactly, people can call themselves what they like, boyfriend/girlfriend, partners, common law spouses, whatever, they're all equally meaningless legally

FBaby

I wanted to be married, but I really would never judge a long term couple as to whether they are married or not. I have discovered that a few friends/colleagues in long term relationships were not married and I was very surprised as they certainly 'acted' as such! By that I mean that discuss their relationship/partner with the same natural approach to commitment as you normally expect of married people.

Saying that, I do find it very odd to refer to your long term partner as 'girlfriend/boyfriend'. I know it means nothing, these are just words and what matters is what it means to the person using it, but I still think it's a strange choice of word to call your long term loving partner!

missbiggles1

FBaby wrote: »

I wanted to be married, but I really would never judge a long term couple as to whether they are married or not. I have discovered that a few friends/colleagues in long term relationships were not married and I was very surprised as they certainly 'acted' as such! By that I mean that discuss their relationship/partner with the same natural approach to commitment as you normally expect of married people.

Saying that, I do find it very odd to refer to your long term partner as 'girlfriend/boyfriend'. I know it means nothing, these are just words and what matters is what it means to the person using it, but I still think it's a strange choice of word to call your long term loving partner!

But equally, or even more, odd to call the boyfriend you've been going out with for a few weeks or months, your "partner", don't you think?