regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard) (06/27/85)
> >>I just think that commitment is the keyword here, but it does not >>necessarily have to be towards marriage. > Nice sentiment, Colin, but marriage IS commitment and the MOST > commitment IS marriage. > Rick Merrill > Check that. Marriage is A commitment. One of a number of possiblities. It amazes me that many people (like maybe one in the past 20 I have dis- cussed my situation with) see only _one_ outcome of an ongoing SO rela- tionship. Marriage is also a legal contract with rights and priviledges that are defined state by state. Marriage also carries a certain amount of social debris that a couple may not welcome. It may bear religious connotations to which the couple does not subscribe. On a personal level, I heartily disagree with your statement that the most commitment is marriage, but then, I don't know you, and I'm not about to get married to you, so it doesn't matter much to me. But, a word of advice, do talk it over when/if you decide to get married, since she may not see it in quite the same light. Adrienne Regard
regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard) (06/27/85)
Check that. I meant to say " It amazes me that many people (like maybe ALL BUT one in the past 20 I have discussed my situation with) see only ^^^ ^^^ _one_ outcome of an ongoing SO relationship." Adrienne Regard
rap@oliveb.UUCP (Robert A. Pease) (07/03/85)
> > Marriage is also a legal contract with rights and priviledges that are > defined state by state. Marriage also carries a certain amount of social > debris that a couple may not welcome. It may bear religious connotations > to which the couple does not subscribe. > > Adrienne Regard Good point. I know of a couple who decided not to get married, but to just live together. They had children who kept getting hassled about their last name. It seems that the school board decided that the children couldn't use their father's last name because he didn't marry their mother. Well, to try and make things easier for their children, they finally got married. That was the end of a beautiful relationship. The fights started and they basicly fell apart. The story has a happy ending, though. They got divorced. Then they began living together. And they got along. And the school board couldn't say a damn thing about the kids' last name. Ok, the whole point to this story (and its a true one) is that some people can be committed to each other without having to get married and they know when they are better off. DON'T FORCE SOMETHING ON SOMEONE THAT THEY FEEL IS NOT RIGHT. -- Robert A. Pease {hplabs|zehntel|fortune|ios|tolerant|allegra|tymix}!oliveb!oliven!rap
desjardins@h-sc1.UUCP (marie desjardins) (07/05/85)
> > Good point. I know of a couple who decided not to get married, but to > just live together. They had children who kept getting hassled about > their last name. It seems that the school board decided that the > children couldn't use their father's last name because he didn't marry > their mother. Well, to try and make things easier for their children, > they finally got married. That was the end of a beautiful > relationship. The fights started and they basicly fell apart. > Why didn't the kids just use their mother's last name? Seems if you're going to defy one tradition, you may as well go whole hog. marie
simpson@lll-crg.ARPA (Rea Simpson) (07/07/85)
In article <485@oliveb.UUCP> rap@oliveb.UUCP (Robert A. Pease) writes: >> >> Marriage is also a legal contract with rights and priviledges that are >> defined state by state. Marriage also carries a certain amount of social >> debris that a couple may not welcome. It may bear religious connotations >> to which the couple does not subscribe. >> >> Adrienne Regard > >Good point. I know of a couple who decided not to get married, but to >just live together. They had children who kept getting hassled about >their last name. ... they finally got married. That was the >end of a beautiful relationship. The fights started and they >basicly fell apart. > >The story has a happy ending, though. They got divorced. Then they >began living together. And they got along. > >Ok, the whole point to this story (and its a true one) is that some >people can be committed to each other without having to get married >and they know when they are better off. DON'T FORCE SOMETHING ON >SOMEONE THAT THEY FEEL IS NOT RIGHT. >-- > Robert A. Pease > {hplabs|zehntel|fortune|ios|tolerant|allegra|tymix}!oliveb!oliven!rap I've heard a lot of talk about how getting married can ruin things. I'm not sure I understand this (I have never been married). What's the big difference between being married and living together. I lived with a guy for 1.5 years and at some points I think it would have been easier if we had been married, although neither of us was ready for that. ____ " Let there be songs to fill the air ... " " Reach out your hand if your cup be empty If your cup is full may it be again " ____ Rea Simpson Lawrence Livermore Labs L-306 P.O. Box 808 Livermore, CA 94550 (415) 423-0910 {dual, gymble, sun, mordor}!lll-crg!simpson simpson@lll-crg.ARPA
rap@oliveb.UUCP (Robert A. Pease) (07/09/85)
> > > > Good point. I know of a couple who decided not to get married, but to > > just live together. They had children who kept getting hassled about > > their last name. It seems that the school board decided that the > > children couldn't use their father's last name because he didn't marry > > their mother. Well, to try and make things easier for their children, > > they finally got married. That was the end of a beautiful > > relationship. The fights started and they basicly fell apart. > > > > Why didn't the kids just use their mother's last name? Seems if you're > going to defy one tradition, you may as well go whole hog. > > marie Sigh, you missed the point. To repeat; >>Ok, the whole point to this story (and its a true one) is that some >>people can be committed to each other without having to get married >>and they know when they are better off. DON'T FORCE SOMETHING ON >>SOMEONE THAT THEY FEEL IS NOT RIGHT. -- Robert A. Pease {hplabs|zehntel|fortune|ios|tolerant|allegra|tymix}!oliveb!oliven!rap
rap@oliveb.UUCP (Robert A. Pease) (07/11/85)
> > I've heard a lot of talk about how getting married can ruin things. I'm not > sure I understand this (I have never been married). What's the big difference > between being married and living together. I lived with a guy for 1.5 years > and at some points I think it would have been easier if we had been married, > although neither of us was ready for that. > > Rea Simpson I don't know why it happened, but when I got married something changed. We both noticed it and had a few minor arguments because of it. In our case, though, all it took was to recognise what was happening and make an extra effort to be more tollerent. -- Robert A. Pease {hplabs|zehntel|fortune|ios|tolerant|allegra|tymix}!oliveb!oliven!rap
bobn@bmcg.UUCP (Bob Nebert) (07/11/85)
> > I've heard a lot of talk about how getting married can ruin things. I'm not > sure I understand this (I have never been married). What's the big difference > between being married and living together. I lived with a guy for 1.5 years > and at some points I think it would have been easier if we had been married, > although neither of us was ready for that. > > >> If you are just living with someone there is a underlying knowledge that >> either one can just leave so each person tries a little bit more to make >> it work. After they get married a sense of routineness sets in and small >> quirks that went unoticed before become irratents and a downward cycle >> develops. >> >> This is not standard procedure for every marriage of course, but my >> explanation. I have known couples who never should have gotten married. >> *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
grwalter@watnot.UUCP (Fred) (07/12/85)
In article <500@oliveb.UUCP> rap@oliveb.UUCP (Robert A. Pease) writes: >> I've heard a lot of talk about how getting married can ruin things. I'm not >> sure I understand this (I have never been married). What's the big difference >> between being married and living together. I lived with a guy for 1.5 years >> and at some points I think it would have been easier if we had been married, >> although neither of us was ready for that. >> >> Rea Simpson > >I don't know why it happened, but when I got married something >changed. We both noticed it and had a few minor arguments because of >it. In our case, though, all it took was to recognise what was >happening and make an extra effort to be more tollerent. >-- > Robert A. Pease I don't see how a relationship could change for the worse just because you were married. Any such change would probably (to my way of thinking) have happened even if you didn't get married. I don't know your situation and so am curious as to what effect marriage had on your relationship (and on relationships in general - little things to watch out for when I finally find that special someone(s) whom I will marry). just curious fred UUCP : {decvax|utzoo|ihnp4|allegra|clyde}!watmath!watnot!grwalter CSNET : grwalter%watnot@waterloo.csnet ARPA : grwalter%watnot%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (07/12/85)
>>I've heard a lot of talk about how getting married can ruin things. I'm not >>sure I understand this (I have never been married). What's the big difference >>between being married and living together. I lived with a guy for 1.5 years >>and at some points I think it would have been easier if we had been married, >>although neither of us was ready for that. [REA SIMPSON] > I don't know why it happened, but when I got married something > changed. We both noticed it and had a few minor arguments because of > it. In our case, though, all it took was to recognise what was > happening and make an extra effort to be more tollerent. [ROBERT A. PEASE] It seems that the worst thing that marriage does to two people is the way it makes them take each other for granted. As if, throughout "courtship", they were just playing up their good side, showing off their good points and hiding their flaws; but once the rings are exchanged, he's (she's) got her (him)! No longer does either one have to worry about "making a good impression" on the other one. Leave your clothes all over the place, don't bother paying any attention to your appearance, be a general slob and/or boor, don't bother putting up the front of consideration, etc. Not that this happens to all couples, but it seems to fit for those who ask "What happened to my marriage?" and then answer their own question with "It's all my spouse's fault!" Some people were brought up with very strange ideas of what marriage and relationships are supposed to be like, and these expectations may be bludgeoned away by the reality of being married to another person. Isn't divorce inevitable if they continue to try to force their expectations onto the other person? I can't help but think that the entertainment industry perpetuates such ridiculous notions about relationships. How many soaps/MTV videos/etc. have had, as their bottom line, problems in relationships that are all the *other* person's fault? Not just the cockeyed heavymetal videos that depict the woman who won't succumb to her boyfriend's wishes as the "problem" in a relationship, but those shows/videos that work in the reverse sense, too! It certainly isn't helping us get rid of these notions that have their roots in arcane traditions that offer simple roles and expectations for everyone to adhere to... -- Like a turban (HEY!), worn for the very first time... Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr
barry@ames.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (07/17/85)
> I've heard a lot of talk about how getting married can ruin things. I'm not > sure I understand this (I have never been married). What's the big difference > between being married and living together. I lived with a guy for 1.5 years > and at some points I think it would have been easier if we had been married, > although neither of us was ready for that. > > Rea Simpson It seems to me that the subject line, "marriage = commitment", just about says it all. When a couple is only living together, their commitment to one another must in a sense be renewed daily. There is no implication of permanence in the arrangement. No specific problem need arise for a break to occur. Either party may simply weary of the situation, and decide to end it. With marriage, I believe a future commitment is made. It is not an *absolute* commitment to stick it out no matter what; that would not be realistic. Things change, people change, and there are no guarantees in this life. But, to me at least, marriage *does* mean a complete commitment to the relationship as it exists at the time of the marriage. In other words, each party is saying to the other, "there is nothing about you that I'm currently aware of which would ever cause me to leave you." I think some people take an opposite view of marriage, and for these people marriage can become the end of their relationship. They hope that the act of marriage will help resolve their difficulties, instead of resolving them before they make the commitment. Perhaps this works, sometimes, but when it doesn't work, the person finds they've made a lifetime commitment to an unsatisfactory mate. So they recognize their mistake, and call it quits. And marriage ends up destroying a relationship that worked reasonably well when they only lived together. Incidentally, I've lived with women both with contract (i.e. married) and without, and thoroughly approve of both. I don't mean to imply that lifelong commitment *can't* exist without formal marriage vows, only that it rarely does. - From the Crow's Nest - Kenn Barry NASA-Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- USENET: {ihnp4,vortex,dual,nsc,hao,hplabs}!ames!barry
warack@aero.ARPA (Chris Warack ) (07/17/85)
In article <1204@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) writes: >>>I've heard a lot of talk about how getting married can ruin things... >>>... [REA SIMPSON] > >> I don't know why it happened, but when I got married something >> changed. We both noticed it and had a few minor arguments because of >> it. In our case, though, all it took was to recognise what was >> happening and make an extra effort to be more tollerent. [ROBERT A. PEASE] > >It seems that the worst thing that marriage does to two people is the way >it makes them take each other for granted. As if, throughout "courtship", >they were just playing up their good side, showing off their good points >and hiding their flaws; but once the rings are exchanged, he's (she's) got >her (him)! No longer does either one have to worry about "making a good >impression" on the other one. Leave your clothes all over the place, >don't bother paying any attention to your appearance, be a general slob >and/or boor, don't bother putting up the front of consideration, etc. I've thought about this a lot. [Especially since recently married.] It does seem that people hide their bad points, or at least cover them up during courtship. However, it isn't totally true that they drop the "front of consideration" after marriage. It might just be that they can no longer keep it up. In a regular courtship, people aren't seeing each other as much as they will in marriage. It's easy to put up fronts when around each other. Even when living together, there is a sense that this is temporary [Not always, I admit]. Once the relationship becomes permanent, some psychological? priorities change. Maybe even a feeling that I can't keep this up forever, so I better let go. I conjecture that most of this stuff is sub-conscious and that is why it leads to so many problems in marriage. If it is brought out into a person's conscious, then it doesn't seem to cause as much problem. A good spouse will even help out if a person wishes to change a bad habit. >... Some people were brought up with very strange >ideas of what marriage and relationships are supposed to be like, and these >expectations may be bludgeoned away by the reality of being married to >another person... I wonder if many people have SERIOUS ideas about marriage period. It's not taught in schools [in general]; I never encountered it at home [except, of course, as an observer]; and during courtship, it is shrouded in that cloak of romance that easily clouds the mind. >I can't help but think that the entertainment industry perpetuates such >ridiculous notions about relationships... Or is it just romance -- which many might consider ridiculous anyways. Like a sturgeon (GLOOP!), that caviar's mine ... Chris Warack warack@aero.UUCP warack@aerospace.ARPA
simpson@lll-crg.ARPA (Rea Simpson) (07/17/85)
In article <1204@pyuxd.UUCP> rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) writes: >>>I've heard a lot of talk about how getting married can ruin things. I'm not >>>sure I understand this (I have never been married). What's the big difference >>>between being married and living together. I lived with a guy for 1.5 years >>>and at some points I think it would have been easier if we had been married, >>>although neither of us was ready for that. [REA SIMPSON] > >> I don't know why it happened, but when I got married something >> changed. We both noticed it and had a few minor arguments because of >> it. In our case, though, all it took was to recognise what was >> happening and make an extra effort to be more tollerent. [ROBERT A. PEASE] > >It seems that the worst thing that marriage does to two people is the way >it makes them take each other for granted. As if, throughout "courtship", >they were just playing up their good side, showing off their good points >and hiding their flaws; but once the rings are exchanged, he's (she's) got >her (him)! No longer does either one have to worry about "making a good >impression" on the other one. Leave your clothes all over the place, >don't bother paying any attention to your appearance, be a general slob >and/or boor, don't bother putting up the front of consideration, etc. >[RICH ROSEN] With the divorce rate the way it is I don't really think getting married means that you've "GOT" them, although I think the point Rich has made is a valid one. People do tend to show only their good sides at the beginning of a relationship. But don't they become lax (for lack of a better word) as the relationship continues whether or not the get married? ____ " ... and a friend or two I love at hand ..." ____ Rea Simpson Lawrence Livermore Labs L-306 P.O. Box 808 Livermore, CA 94550 (415) 423-0910 {dual, gymble, sun, mordor}!lll-crg!simpson simpson@lll-crg.ARPA
arnold@ucbingres.ARPA (Ken Arnold) (07/18/85)
> I've heard a lot of talk about how getting married can ruin things. I'm not > sure I understand this (I have never been married). What's the big difference > between being married and living together. I lived with a guy for 1.5 years > and at some points I think it would have been easier if we had been married, > although neither of us was ready for that. What often happens is that people have certain expectations about what a "wife" or "husband" is. These opinions are often held subconciously, but are still there. Thus, the person you live with has no defined role in this type of scheme, and so it is easier to define the relationship as befits the couple, but after marriage you suddenly have a "wife" or "husband", and they, by God!, have a role to play. The attidues are often formed by watching your parents relationships, plus those roles portrayed in the media to which you had access. I know several couples who had this problem, even up to seperation, and when they realized what was going on, they were able to work it out. One of the more common factors of these roles is that the other person is stuck with you, and so you start taking them more for granted. This often includes the idea that he is the head of the household, and she should give in to his wishes. Of course, these can exist in a non- marriage relationships, but often the actual assumption of the legal position brings these out with a vengence. Ken Arnold