WlknCntrdiction: To me your post screamed "insecure", I'm not here to flame you but please let me explain how I read your post.
Wow. That is one term no one has ever used to describe me. So, I'm thinking you are perhaps misunderstanding my statements. I shall respond to your points.
We're agreed on weddings. That's a start.
WlknCntrdiction: From Wikipedia: Marriage is an institution in which interpersonal relationships (usually intimate and sexual) are sanctioned with governmental, social, or religious recognition. It is often created by a contract or through civil processes.
I never knew love could be so difficult, all these forms to fill out before you "actually" love someone. And why does the vow have to be in front of everyone? Can you and your partner not make a vow to yourselves? "Dear (insert fiances name here), I promise to love you until the end of my days and that we shall spend the rest of our lives together". See? It doesn't need to be announced for the world to hear, I think they practically already know you're in for the long haul since you're getting married but I see this "vow" thing as conforming to the masses.
You are using marriage and love interchangably. They are not. Marriage is, from the point of secularity, a legal binding of two people. That is not love. And though the above definition mentions social and religious recognition, the second sentence where it mentions "contract" and "civil process" makes marriage sound like it's only legal. Again, there are many legal contracts completed every day that have nothing to do with love, including marriage.
I don't see it as only secular, but that's my personal feeling. Taking a vow in front of people can be very meaningful. It's not necessarily a "now i'm really serious" statement, which could I suppose cause some thoughts of insecurity in others, though that feels a little judgmental. Taking that vow in front of people can be a statement of "This is my chosen One. Having one partner through everything can be hard at times. Will you, our friends and family, become part of our decision to be together forever, and support us?"
As for your notion of the vow having to be in front of people, I never said that at all. In fact, I said, "vow in front of friends/family/god/each other." Those slashes were meant to = and/or. If it's just in front of each other and no family, OK. That's fine. To get the legal benefits of marriage, however, it has to be a legal contract, meaning a legally appointed or sanctioned person has to preside. As to conforming to the masses, I'm sure for some people, that's all it is - simply going through some motions. It is not that for everyone.
WlknCntrdiction: Yes, I know I'm going to be called out for "non conforming just to conform" but for me it goes without saying that if I meet someone who I want to spend the rest of my life with then I will tell her and her only, it's no one elses business. I know that me and my girlfriend will last, we don't need "confirmation" of a vow to tell us that.
I'm not calling you out at all, as I see no reason to do so. What you ahve is special and you have chosen how you wish to define it together. That's wonderful and I'm happy for you. Why do you choose to look down your nose at how I and some others might care to define our relationships? Why do you assume I'm looking for confirmation? I've no idea what sort of confirmation one should look for in marriage...
WlknCntrdiction: Sense of security? And here I was thinking that having a loving, caring, respectable family looking after you gave kids a sense of security, the fact that they can talk to their parents about anything should give them the sense of security, not whether their parents are married or not.
Yes, those things will give them a sense of security, and they are by far the most important things to giving them that sense. But when they are younger, kids don't fully understand abstract concepts - you can act it, but talking about them is tough. All it could take is one other child in their class or on the playground to say something about like "your parents aren't married..." (children can be very direct) to make a child wonder. They are deeply inured to societal pressures, they haven't thought about the abstract ramifications of such things. Things are or are not.
WlknCntrdiction: This line just about confirms it for me. Official? Why does your love have to be official? And it's a nice thing? It's a nice thing to have your love be made official? Or do you mean it's nice to tell everybody that you two are madly, deeply in love? I'm going to go with the latter. You and him are in it forever? Then why get married?
Most people can say they love their partner, but obviously because it's not official they can't then be in love can they? Or they clearly aren't as in love as you two are, how could they be? Their love isn't official, they aren't married. What does that mean for the couple in my example in my other post? Does it mean their 20 years of "false" love can't possibly compete with your love because you're getting married?
Again, there's a lot of swapping in love for marriage. Not the same. I'm not putting any doubt on your love. I never said anything at all comparing mine to yours - how could I? I don't know you!
By official, I mean what I described above, going and telling our friends and family we are together, forever, and asking them to be a part of that "together," and that he and I are now an us. I get that you don't feel the need to do that. I don't feel the need to do it either. I don't feel the need to be accepted or whatever it is you are referring to. I want to tell my family and friends. I want them to share in that. It's a difference, not a one is better the other, or one is right and one is wrong. I never said any different.
WlknCntrdiction: To me it's this very mentality about marriage being a "I'm better than you, I've got the documents to prove it" thing that gets on my nerves. You got married, whoop de doo. I've been with my girlfriend for 20 + years, we have a kid who is loved, cherished and not a moment goes by where we don't love each other, our child may be "illegitimate" but he/she is most certainly brought up better than yours. Bullshit and chips for tea again methinks:(
Never said I was better. As I said before, it's a difference not a right or wrong situation.
I will absolutely take issue with your statement "our child may be 'illegitimate' but he/she is most certainly brought up better than yours." I'd never say a child is illegitimate. Ever. Any implication that I'd say that I take as a serious affront, and ascribing such a thing to me is quite out of line.
Further to that, suggesting my children would not be well loved and well brought up smacks of some hastily thought out reasoning based on overly judgmental conclusions you've drawn from a simple forum reply in which I said, basically, "I love my fiance very much and I cannot wait to be Mrs. ___." I've no idea where your comment came from, but it was not from me.
Andraste: As for your notion of the vow having to be in front of people, I never said that at all. In fact, I said, "vow in front of friends/family/god/each other." Those slashes were meant to = and/or. If it's just in front of each other and no family, OK. That's fine. To get the legal benefits of marriage, however, it has to be a legal contract, meaning a legally appointed or sanctioned person has to preside.
Most states you still need two to four witnesses and a notary...so it actually (contractually anyway) really cannot be just the two people involved. In the US anyway.
I will absolutely take issue with your statement "our child may be 'illegitimate' but he/she is most certainly brought up better than yours." I'd never say a child is illegitimate. Ever. Any implication that I'd say that I take as a serious affront, and ascribing such a thing to me is quite out of line.
well said Andraste. who knows where WlknCntrdiction got his pressuposed notions of "arrogant married people", but it definitely was out of place since nobody here has echoed that sentiment.
TheNecroswanson: But other than that, those who think it's some needless label, can have fun dying alone. Just because noone wants to marry you doesn't mean we don't got the love to spread.
I'm sorry but just because some people do not believe marriage to be the ultimate goal of a relationship does not mean they will die without a partner - which is what I assume you mean by "die alone" -.
Snip. I'll stop you there, how long have you gone out with a woman/man? After 20 eyars, people will desire a commitment. And if you are unwilling to give it, yeah, they'll probably leave you. I've seen it a million times. I didn't mean alone in the, "Noone loves you sense". Though I can see how it looked like it. Marriage is a commitment, a true profession (verb, not job) that you are devotign yourself to one person. Weddings are a show.
The comments thread for My Big Fat Geek Wedding turned into a debate on the merits of Marriage: the Wedding Game versus its board game antecedent, Living Together.
Most of my full argument can be found there, but if you're too lazy to read it, let me summarize a few of my complaints:
1. Marriage is overhyped. The societal pressure to get married and have kids is astonishing, so much so that a lot of people don't even care who their mate is, they just want to get married just for the sake of being married, either because they're taken in by all the hype, or because they're sick of all their relatives asking them, "When are you going to settle down, get married and have kids?"
2. Getting back to the game metaphor for a moment: Given how aggressive the ad campaign for Marriage: the Wedding Game (and the expansion pack: Marriage II: Babies) is, you'd think the vendors wouldn't be quite so picky aboutwho they sell the game to...
I could joke and laugh but i don't think thats what you really want to hear. That said, if you really need to ask the like of us about marrige then you probably just arent ready to be married yet. But if your (and i can not stress who gay this is going to make me sound) heart tells you otherwise, and your really in love with this person then you should do it. Now i need to lift weights, spit and shave the bears coming out of my eyes. Grrrrr
apmpnmdslkbk: Marriages kill your sex life so I would stray away from them.
I've mostly seen that true with people whom have overly high sexual relations before marriage. And in other cases, it's the, "Oh god, I'm only going to be sleeping with one person for the rest of my life." thing. If that ever crosses your mind, did you ever love the person to begin with? Marriage isn't exactly about sex. Neither is the meassure of your worth, or how much you love someone.
Sylocat: 2. Getting back to the game metaphor for a moment: Given how aggressive the ad campaign for Marriage: the Wedding Game (and the expansion pack: Marriage II: Babies) is, you'd think the vendors wouldn't be quite so picky aboutwho they sell the game to...
apmpnmdslkbk: Marriages kill your sex life so I would stray away from them.
I've mostly seen that true with people whom have overly high sexual relations before marriage. And in other cases, it's the, "Oh god, I'm only going to be sleeping with one person for the rest of my life." thing. If that ever crosses your mind, did you ever love the person to begin with? Marriage isn't exactly about sex. Neither is the meassure of your worth, or how much you love someone.
The people who say that marriage killed their sex life have married the wrong person. As I stated earlier, you have to make sure you are sexually compatible with the person you want to marry. Yes my wife and I were a little more active when we were just dating, but we have a very healty sex life now and we have been married 3 years. Hell, the biggest problem with our sex life is that she wants it more than me. I never thought that would happen to me, ever. When we have kids, that might change for obvious reasons.
Marriage is totally not worth the hassle....if you ever do decide to get married...any of you..make sure its for money..cuz you cant survive on love alone...love doesnt pay the bills...
Marriage should NEVER be taken lightly, and should only ever be taken part in by two equally enthusiastic and interested parties. Divorce happens way to often these days, and is damaging to the people who are in the divorce, (parents) and those directly effected by said divorce. (kids)
Snip. I'll stop you there, how long have you gone out with a woman/man? After 20 eyars, people will desire a commitment. And if you are unwilling to give it, yeah, they'll probably leave you. I've seen it a million times. I didn't mean alone in the, "Noone loves you sense". Though I can see how it looked like it. Marriage is a commitment, a true profession (verb, not job) that you are devotign yourself to one person. Weddings are a show.
Ah ok, sorry to have misinterpreted your remark. I concede that marriage is indeed a commitment, however my point is that it is not one that should (in my opinion at least) be considered a strict necessity or considered the 'ultimate' when it comes to displaying a demonstration of ones (hopefully) reciprocated love for another.
It seems to me that it is at the very least conceivable that two people can co-exist in a loving long-term relationship without going through the process of marriage, with their relationship being in essence almost - if not totally - identical emotionally and physically when put in comparison to one that is reinforced by marriage vows.
This opinion obviously relies on the issue that the views held by these hypothetical persons on the importance of marriage itself have to be that they are largely unconcerned by the social significance of marriage (it is after all an integral part of society's 'traditional' social structure, and is something that we are brought up to accept and positively approve as an important aspect of love and human life in general).
For example, a factor to be considered is that of religious persons, devout catholics for instance, would likely place more of a significance on marriage than would a person devoid of such religious disposition. This shows that an individual's education of the importance of marriage, and their personal opinion of it, is what makes up their mind on deciding if they wish to wed themselves. So it follows that logically, two like-minded individuals, who in this case are two people who both do not attach much importance or are leastways ignorant to the marital institution, can have a healthy life-long partnership without marriage ever factoring into said relationship. That's my opinion anyway.
I've always thought that the actual public declaration that the love that two people feel for each other is enough that they can legally be binded together is really worth it in that situation.
Marriage is important to the woman here in the UK, they get nearly everything when they divorce, even if they are lazy and don't work, which makes me sick. Hey, just like benefit fraud, stealing off someone else.
sirdanrhodes: Marriage is important to the woman here in the UK, they get nearly everything when they divorce, even if they are lazy and don't work, which makes me sick. Hey, just like benefit fraud, stealing off someone else.
Wow. That is one term no one has ever used to describe me. So, I'm thinking you are perhaps misunderstanding my statements. I shall respond to your points.
We're agreed on weddings. That's a start.
You are using marriage and love interchangably. They are not. Marriage is, from the point of secularity, a legal binding of two people. That is not love. And though the above definition mentions social and religious recognition, the second sentence where it mentions "contract" and "civil process" makes marriage sound like it's only legal. Again, there are many legal contracts completed every day that have nothing to do with love, including marriage.
I don't see it as only secular, but that's my personal feeling. Taking a vow in front of people can be very meaningful. It's not necessarily a "now i'm really serious" statement, which could I suppose cause some thoughts of insecurity in others, though that feels a little judgmental. Taking that vow in front of people can be a statement of "This is my chosen One. Having one partner through everything can be hard at times. Will you, our friends and family, become part of our decision to be together forever, and support us?"
As for your notion of the vow having to be in front of people, I never said that at all. In fact, I said, "vow in front of friends/family/god/each other." Those slashes were meant to = and/or. If it's just in front of each other and no family, OK. That's fine. To get the legal benefits of marriage, however, it has to be a legal contract, meaning a legally appointed or sanctioned person has to preside. As to conforming to the masses, I'm sure for some people, that's all it is - simply going through some motions. It is not that for everyone.
I'm not calling you out at all, as I see no reason to do so. What you ahve is special and you have chosen how you wish to define it together. That's wonderful and I'm happy for you. Why do you choose to look down your nose at how I and some others might care to define our relationships? Why do you assume I'm looking for confirmation? I've no idea what sort of confirmation one should look for in marriage...
Yes, those things will give them a sense of security, and they are by far the most important things to giving them that sense. But when they are younger, kids don't fully understand abstract concepts - you can act it, but talking about them is tough. All it could take is one other child in their class or on the playground to say something about like "your parents aren't married..." (children can be very direct) to make a child wonder. They are deeply inured to societal pressures, they haven't thought about the abstract ramifications of such things. Things are or are not.
Again, there's a lot of swapping in love for marriage. Not the same. I'm not putting any doubt on your love. I never said anything at all comparing mine to yours - how could I? I don't know you!
By official, I mean what I described above, going and telling our friends and family we are together, forever, and asking them to be a part of that "together," and that he and I are now an us. I get that you don't feel the need to do that. I don't feel the need to do it either. I don't feel the need to be accepted or whatever it is you are referring to. I want to tell my family and friends. I want them to share in that. It's a difference, not a one is better the other, or one is right and one is wrong. I never said any different.
Never said I was better. As I said before, it's a difference not a right or wrong situation.
I will absolutely take issue with your statement "our child may be 'illegitimate' but he/she is most certainly brought up better than yours." I'd never say a child is illegitimate. Ever. Any implication that I'd say that I take as a serious affront, and ascribing such a thing to me is quite out of line.
Further to that, suggesting my children would not be well loved and well brought up smacks of some hastily thought out reasoning based on overly judgmental conclusions you've drawn from a simple forum reply in which I said, basically, "I love my fiance very much and I cannot wait to be Mrs. ___." I've no idea where your comment came from, but it was not from me.