Posted on 11/15/2009 1:22:56 PM PST by SeekAndFind
| Marriage |
Cohabitation |
| formally "defined" and publicly acknowledged commitment |
private, informal, undefined, uncertain "arrangement" |
| pact with legal standing, privileges, obligations, and responsibilities |
limited, ambiguous commitment, without clear, binding obligations |
| all-encompassing, total commitment of fidelity and complete sharing |
tenuous, transient conditional "understanding" with partial sharing |
| two interdependent individuals in an exclusive bond |
two independent individuals jointly occupying space |
Great post.
Please add “Commitment” under Marriage and “Convenience” under Cohabitation.
As my son says: “Seems that the only folks who want to get married are the gays!’
Easy - cohabitation includes sex.
Cohabitation has devastated Scandinavia, et. al., but the courts have been influenced by feminism in no small way —men are the enemy, and “protection” of women is an act of liberation.
So men see a failed marriage as not only involving a loss of face and romance, but a good way to ruin’s one’s whole life.
So while women are protected, are they really happy?
I love when Judge Judy gets a couple fighting over stuff and they aren't married...she tells them I didn't go to law school to figure out who paid what....If you want the court to settle this for you get married first...then you have a legal contract and the courts can get involved.....:O)
LOL!
Sometimes couples choose to live together as a substitute for marriage even though they profess love for each other and want a permanent relationship. They explain that if the relationship goes sour, they want to avoid the trouble, expense, and emotional trauma of a divorce. The couple does not understand that without the commitment of marriage, there is little incentive or likelihood that they will work through their problems or that they will maintain the relationship under pressure. It is more likely that one or the other will "cut and run" when conflict arises, since each person's individuality is more likely stronger than their relationship together.
Basically, it is impossible to keep a committment which is never made.
That is the very thought I have had but wasn't able to put into words. I remember reading somewhere in a book long ago that women "sabotage" themselves by living with a man prior to marriage, then wondering why they aren't married. Women have nothing to gain from this arrangement whatsoever but it gets easier to repeat this habit after doing it once. I still remember calling it what it was: shacking up. That phrase denotes it as being impermanent, which is exactly what cohabitation amounts to: not lasting; fleeting; temporary living arrangement. It cheapens those who practice it and devalues what should be highly prized. It is an American travesty and a shame on our society. Just seems as if no one is bothered these days.
I'll tell you costs too high ... divorce!
As a guy, you felt like you were raped, robbed, and kicked in the fact with glass covered boots.
When everything you worked for and built for 17 years gets cut down the middle + 30% (for her side) ... cohabitation looks damn good to me.
Think what you want, but that little marriage license means she has you by the short and curlies and she makes the rules (with the government's backing) when she wants out.
I think you need ADAM - American Divorce Association for Men, I think makes the acronym.
all I have to say on the subject is:
Why buy the cow, if you can get the milk for free.
Because it's worth it.
Right on! I f you have a set of nuts in the US, you are the enemy. You have to rights...and people thought that slavery was repealed! Any man with a career and or assets knows that if and when he says I Do, he will end up saying “ I did what”...in front of a judge as he is stripped down to his ankles.
That's the male perspective. The female version is
You don't have to buy the whole pig, if all you want is a little sausage.
As a female, I agree with you....the guy always gets it in the end...don’t know why any man would want to marry in todays world. I’ll put on my flame suit also...:O)
“As a female, I agree with you....the guy always gets it in the end...don’t know why any man would want to marry in todays world. I’ll put on my flame suit also...:O)”
Yes, in general. But there are good women to marry...they just happen not to be born in this country. Instead they are born and raised in a society where divorce is still rare and looked at as a failure by their family (regardless of the particular circumstances).
“No-fault” divorce was a revenue enhancer for bottom-feeding lawyers which also means that there’s no enforceable marriage contract anyway. When a person decides they’re getting a divorce, it’s going to happen. If the other party objects, the threat of a contested divorce and its expense, stress and often false allegations, makes those objections go away. I don’t blame a man especially for avoiding marriage.
Why buy the cow, if you can get the milk for free.
That’s the male perspective.
The female version is
You don’t have to buy the whole pig, if all you want is a little sausage.
___________________________________________________________
You have summarized the state of romance today. Well done.
For every action there is a reaction;
Marriage laws were designed to provide estate inheritance protection for women and children.
Divorce laws were designed to provide the same protection if the marriage died before the husband or the wife.
With the sexual revolution, birth control etc., men rutted without reservation and women followed suit.
Decades later, marriage is a necessity only for trophy wives and boy toys, who want security post mortem.
Reality for couples of similar ages; Divorce often costs more and consumes more time than most marriages.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.