You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
We got married so my Mrs could show off a bit and we could have a big fancy do. It was amazeballs. Cheers.
It's my 5th wedding anniversary next month, which seems a bit wierd as we've been together for 24 years.
We were never bothered about getting married, we spoke about it from time to time but always found something else to do. After kids though we liked the idea of all having the same name and the legal aspects with financies should anything happen.
I did propose and managed to make it a surprise, even though we were going to buy an engagement ring together.
Now I love being married and feel we should have done it a long time before. We always knew we were together forever. We just couldn't do with the fuss.
Wedding was very low key and a great party which loads of people say it was the best they'd been to.
Newrobdob - you cannot have a civil partnership unless you are gay- otherwise thats what we would probably do to make inheritance and wills easier
My commitment to Mrs TJ does not need anyone else to validate. I know it and she knows it and thats all we need.
they go and have a religious wedding where they say things they don’t believe just to have nicer wedding photos in a pretty church.
I know, the bastards, it's like they have minds of their own and do what they like...the heartless beasts
My commitment to Mrs TJ does not need anyone else to validate. I know it and she knows it and thats all we need.
In which case I suggest you don't bother getting married....
Similar to many on here: 30 years in, of utter bliss, obviously, married for 20ish. **** me. Seemed a way to formalise things re kids, house etc., and have a paaaarty. And as my wife romantically said, as we decided to go through with it, who was then stuck at home with small kids: if you're going to leave a bloke you may as well be married to him...
elshalimo
Some of the crap being spouted on this thread is a measure of the individuals concerned and their bad experiences and not the concept of marriage. Marriage works for some but not others. Simple.
If it doesn’t work for you then fine but don’t judge others you sancitmonious gits.
+1. No shortage of bitter, miserable people on this forum. Neither my wife or I are religious or overly traditional but we're happily married. We were together for 10 years before getting married and did so because we decided to have children, something we didn't take lightly. For us, having children was/is an agreement to stay together for them and that's not negotiable. Both of our parents are still together and we both feel lucky in that respect having seen what happens to children when parents separate.
Some of crap being spouted on here is but those who thinks marriage is wonderful as they’ve never been divorced or in a bad marriage. That said neither have I but still think its a totally outdated concept.
Newrobdob – you cannot have a civil partnership unless you are gay- otherwise thats what we would probably do to make inheritance and wills easier
Apparently that’s just his opinion though not fact he got wrong.
Newrobdob – you cannot have a civil partnership unless you are gay
I actually didn’t know that. Now that IS daft. Seems like it would suit a lot of people on here much more than a wedding.
Never got married and although currently single, no intention to ever in future. I had never wanted children and frankly see no advantage to me whatsover in getting married. Seen it destroy too many of my male relatives and friends, the same ones who would always get on at me for not being married. Funny enough, they mostly agree I had called it correct, but too late for them now.
Were you thinking a civil marriage Newrobdob?
thecaptain
Member
dp
I always imagined that DP's the sort of thing that needs to be negotiated within the first three dates. I was a bit slack on the prenups and never really figured out how to broach the subject once things settled into a routine.
i've been married twice, first time was due to pressure from the church, (if we didn't marry, literally nobody at our church would be allowed to talk to us)
2nd time, we just felt like it was the right thing to do, it made our parents happy. was a good day, I'm not religious at all, but we had a minister marry us, the guy was a mutual friend of ours. everything went smoothly.
but, i will say this, our relationship took a serious dip after it, for maybe about 18 months, it had been quite stressful planning it, and it cost plenty of money which we didn't really have.
we are through it now, and our relationship has gone from strength to strength, but i certainly wouldn't do it again. this is, in no way, a reflection on my wife, she says the same thing, but if i was single again i wouldn't be looking for marriage.
i’ve been married twice, first time was due to pressure from the church, (if we didn’t marry, literally nobody at our church would be allowed to talk to us)
**** ‘em?
I think the posters on this thread fall into these categories:
A - I'm angry with the world and it 's everyone else that is wrong - 'cos I'm never wrong, she may have left me but I'm still right. Ha, ha - I showed her!!
B - I'm happy with what I have irrespective of the relationship status
C - My relationship broke down and I'm not happy
D - Romantic buggers getting married for tax/will/revenue reasons
E - General sancitmonious gits (part-time casuists)
So just you're average STW thread then
@hols2 😉
You should have had E as A and then B see above it’ll saved a lot of work.
It is a typical STW thread yes..
Everyone’s entitled to an opinion, whether you agree or not.
Marriage is OK as long as you are happy with a potential 50/50 split of everything you currently have in the future if the relatonship breaks down, which chances are it will.
I came in to mine with a 3 bed house and luckily escaped with a 3 bed house, although it took a lot more money to make it habitable...
I doubt I will be getting married again, unless it is on my death bed. My new partner works in palliative care anyway so that should make it easier. In the meantime we will make some financial plans for her future.
The point is marriage is a commitment to a relationship. It's a contract of mutual support through thick and thin.
Sometimes it doesn't work, fair enough, but that doesn't negate the value of marriage.
For a relationship to work you have to see and feel the benefits and work to ensure your partner side feels the same way. Sometimes that involves giving way, shutting your mouth, grinning and bearing it. It helps if you are empathic enough to realise when your partner is doing the same.
The benefits of having a trustworthy live in friend exceed the disadvantages IMO.
As for all the faff about the ceremonial process of getting married, that's another story.
The point is marriage is a commitment to a relationship.
Any relationship involves commitment.
Been married 29 years this September with three years before! Back in the 80's a lot of rights only existed if you married. It made life a lot easier. So from a practical point of view getting married made sense. There was also the very public commitment to each other in view of everyone else. (Of course in those days it was a lot cheaper - my stag weekend was held in a stone hut in the Lake District - the tinnies chilled in the local stream). It was right for us.
But any relationship, married or not, has its ups and downs. It requires both parties to work at it.
Any relationship involves commitment.
I have relatives but I make no effort with them, does that count?
😉
The point is marriage is a commitment to a relationship. It’s a contract of mutual support through thick and thin.
There's more to it than that though, as people going through a divorce find out.
Been happily not married for about 15 years now with a 7 year old kid...cant see the point. Its a load of pseudo religious bollocks.
It was funny a year or so ago when boy came home from school and told me he knew how babies were made. Oh right hows that then I asked? Well when a mummy and daddy get married...let me stop you there son......
More recently halfway through a documentary about elephants he turned to me and said you mated mummy didnt you? Yes son I did!!
Sometimes it doesn’t work, fair enough, but that doesn’t negate the value of marriage.
What is the value of maariage, all the things you state just seem like a relationship to me, marriage is not needed.
drac, eventually, thats what they were told.
it took years to break free, but was the best thing i ever did.
What is the value of maariage, all the things you state just seem like a relationship to me, marriage is not needed.
Sure, but some of us want it and like it. I don't judge anyone else who doesn't wish to be married, so it wouldn't be unreasonable for those people to extend me the same courtesy.
so it wouldn’t be unreasonable for those people to extend me the same courtesy.
You'll be waiting a long time to get that on STW.
Sure, but some of us want it and like it.
Good as that really is quite incredible.
Sure, but some of us want it and like it. I don’t judge anyone else who doesn’t wish to be married, so it wouldn’t be unreaonable for those people to extend me the same courtesy.
Indeed. I would suggest those of us who dont value its intangible benefits are more discriminated against by society though.
@Drac - it's only incredible from your perspective, which is based on your life experience to date. We're not all the same and we've not had the same experiences. Just accept that and stop trying to devalue the opinion of those who disagree with you. Your comments make it appear that you genuinely have an issue with others being happy within a marriage. That's just weird
I can respect your views on marriage whilst not agreeing with them but I'm not going to tell you that you're wrong.
Some folks seem anti marriage for no other reason than their own poor choice, I'm cool with that, but then it's not marriage per se that is the issue, is it?.
Well thanks for that ElShamio maybe you should actually read the thread to see what I was referring to. The point is that Marty felt obliged to get married so people from church would not give them the cold shoulder but no you have a pop at me for saying how incredible that is that would happen.
@Drac - fair enough, it just looked like you were taking the piss. That's the problem with the written word versus the spoken word
PS apologies
Turnerguy - I am happy that should we ever split everything is divided 50/50 - that being the fair way in a partnership of equals. I don't need a marriage certificate to tell me thats fair and right
But 50/50 isn't always fair and the divorce system will protect the interests of the weakest party.
Well thanks for that ElShamio maybe you should actually read the thread to see what I was referring to. The point is that Marty felt obliged to get married so people from church would not give them the cold shoulder but no you have a pop at me for saying how incredible that is that would happen.
Thats because you quoted ransos, before your comment, which I presume was intended to be a reply to martymac.
Pretty easy to get the “wrong end of the stick” when you quoted the wrong thing and replied directly to it.
But 50/50 isn’t always fair and the divorce system will protect the interests of the weakest party.
Interesting point so the the main benefit of marriage is for what happens when you split!
Edukator - you will have to go a long way to convince me. Maybe if one person brought a lot of assets into the marriage then they should get some ( but not all) that back first before the 50 / 50 split of assets and of course future income should remain 50/50. Childcare costs go into the mix as well - so that comes off the top of the income then whats left goes 50 / 50
In my case my parents have given us around £15000 over the 38 years. Her mother made us a lot of really nice cakes and helped us in non money ways
Its the only fair and right thing. I would never expect that to be taken into account. some years she earned more than me, some years I earned more than her. Over the 38 years she will have earned more than me I am sure but I have the better pension.
childcare costs off the top of future income divided according to how much childcare each parent does. assets and future income 50/50
so nope - 50/50 should be the rule apart from those two factors and its the only right and fair way to do it.
Good as that really is quite incredible.
Liking my marriage is incredible?
An example I've followed TJ, A doctor I know came out with somewhat less than 50% whichever way you measured it and whatever you took into account. His wife had health issues that meant sh'd never work again and her needs would be higher, so the legal system reasonably attributed her more than 50%.
Oh so I did.
No wonder there so much confusion sorry folks. 😳
I got a CP for a number of reasons. Apart from love I was scared to death that if something happened to one of us the other would lose the house and all of the joint possessions. I've seen this happen to a mate who's boyfriend died and his family turned up and demanded *everything* he had owned even though they had disowned him well before he died. And refused his long-term partner access to the funeral. There is no hole deep enough for those kind of people. 🙁
We'll most probably transfer it into a marriage one of these days, if only to really wind up the swivel-eyed lot. I often get strange looks when I mention "my husband". 🙂 In reality though I reckon that civil partnerships should be phased out and there be just "marriage". People who believe in God/Allah/Buddha/Flying Spaghetti Monster whatevs can have a ceremony for their beliefs and people who don't believe can have a nice do with a bit of cake. At some point a contract is signed by both parties which is the same thing.
-
so nope – 50/50 should be the rule apart from those two factors and its the only right and fair way to do it.
But deciding what the '50/50' actually is sometimes isn't that simple & needs outside arbitration.
TJ it's easy for you to say that in your current situation. I bet youd change your tune if you found out she'd gambled her way into tens of thousands of debt or shagged the local rugby team.
I’d never had an ox before.
Coming round here, flaunting your livestock.
I can’t help myself , I’m an oxhibitionist. 😉
thestabiuliser I really hope not. We did just have a we chat about it and altho I might well behave badly in other ways on money I am clear - its 50/50 or else I wouldn't be true to myself
Bloody hell, I hope you didn't quote me! (I guess not or you'd be in A&E getting a saucepan removed from your head)
Oops – MrTJ is from south yorks working class stock. I’d have been lucky to get a ferret
But she might have married you for your whippet. Or possibly your pigeon loft!
I can’t help myself , I’m an oxhibitionist.
Boom, and quite possibly, tish!
Perchy wins the Internet for today. Again. 😄
But she might have married you for your whippet
I reckon he's sex on two legs in a flat cap! (Knowing TJ a dog would not feature in the dowry).
[i]gobuchul wrote:[/i]
Good legal definition of the relationship?
This. It’s a contract. Although things can messy when you disagree with someone you have a written contract with, it’s even worse if you didn’t write the agreement down.
I'm inclined to disagree there. I'm sure el would love to categorise me, but I can state quite certainly that I'm glad I never got married to the mother of my kids. I can't see any way in which it would provide an advantage to either of us now.
Strangely enough I'd actually quite like to get married now, in a way I'd never seen the attraction of before - just need to find the right woman first! I suppose the idea of having the sort of relationship some others in this thread have is quite appealing (but then it's been a long, long time since I could have described our relationship in those terms).
From this thread i have taken.
Married couple who relationship breaks down - marriage is bad
Married couple who's relationship last - good relationship nothing to do with marriage as lots of unmarried couples have strong relationships.
Marriage to me is a declaration that I have stopped searching, I am content with my lot and dedicating my energy into this relationship lasting and decisions here on in being about what is best for us rather than just me. It is a message of security to your partner. Everyone likes a bit of security. And I guess that's why infidelity and break up is so devastating - a promise of security broken.
The 50/50 asset separation on breakup is interesting. I have a friend who married for the 2nd time in his early 50s. A humanaholic he brought, wealth, a comfortable home, a huge collection of friends and human warmth and an energy to make a happy home to the relationship. She brought the clothes on her back mainly due to short term lifestyle choices and her general attitude to the concept of paid work. He works, she does not. He does way more than 50% around the home. Her contribution seems to be companionship and providing him someone to care for. They seem very happy and long may that last but if they do split up she would seemed to have done very well if she walks away with 50% of the assets he brought to the relationship. It's the choice you make I guess when electing to get married. I met Mrs C when young and we both had nothing. An even split if the worst was to happen would seem completely appropriate irrespective of how it were to happen.
@convert, but in many cases, the man doesn't get an even split, especially if there are young children involved and he loses the family home.
I live near a marina full of narrowboats and I'd estimate about half of the occupants are divorced men in such a situation.
Marriage means a lot of things to different people. <span style="font-size: 12.8px;">Marriage can be a small legal event with two witnesses from the street, or it can be a big public committment with a party, a promise made before God, etc. Those are all social constructs.</span>
What marriage very clearly is, is a legal and financial committment that goes beyond cohabiting. Many, but not all, of those committments can be made outside of marriage.
Mostly, they apply when something goes bad. So when TJ or his other half change their mind about 50:50 (perhaps "50:50 but not my pension, or not my house" - they seem to be quite common). They also apply when someone dies. Some relationships split up, those don't generally involve someone dying. In most cases, this is all dealt with amicably. In the rest, marriage gives the spouse better protections than if they were simply a partner.
They seem very happy and long may that last but if they do split up she would seemed to have done very well if she walks away with 50% of the assets he brought to the relationship.
Even as a marriage skeptic to such a degree that I started this topic, I'd like to point out that it's not inclusive of assets brought into the relationship - it's assets that are of the relationship. e.g. if I were to remarry tomorrow (which would be tricky with current laws about bigamy) they would not own half my stuff (or be responsible for half my debt) if we split up the next day, but if we married and one of us won the lottery, the other would be entitled to half of that. Unless a legal argument to the contrary can be found (e.g. one partner working far more, or having far higher needs).
I think the legal framework is probably quite an important part of marriage, and to be honest anything that simplifies disentangling my life from my kids' mum's life is welcome and much needed.
Interesting.
One marriage for 25 years. Including 20 pretty decent ones.
just because a relationship or a marriage ended doesn’t mean it was a total failure
I’m lying next to the woman I’m going to marry in 2 months. Neither of us get any financial benefit from doing this. We just both want to. We are better together. We don’t need to be married. And we’ll still be living together only 5 days a week. We aren’t religious, or naive. But we are going to stand up in front of some friends and say this stuff. Probably using some vows nicked off ? Cougar, for which many thanks. And we aren’t changing names.
If you don’t want to do it, don’t do it. But for some of us it means something.
Even as a marriage skeptic to such a degree that I started this topic, I’d like to point out that it’s not inclusive of assets brought into the relationship – it’s assets that are of the relationship
Wrong.
After 5 years it starts to get inclusive of all your assets, and 15 years is deemed as 'long-term' - which might also include time together before the marriage according to the judge - and then it becomes a 50/50 split.
Not so great if you get married later in life after you've built up some reasonable assets and then silver-surfer syndrome hits and you split up and then you are left with a lot less, and half your pension, into old age.
It should be a split from when you get married and couples should be more aware of this and plan for it - pension planning, etc. I think there might be less break-ups if both partners felt financially 'independant' throughput the relationship, takes one less factor out of the equation of things that can lead to problems - a feeling of financial dependence.