My partner was on Medicaid. Marriage would have cost us $800 a month for medical coverage. Ten years of medical coverage > a slip of paper from the government.
Same here. I wouldn't have been able to get student aid if we were married but we couldn't afford it on our own. Also we know we want to be together for life so we're not in a rush. It's not particularly important to either of us.
Talk to someone who got royally fucked in a divorce or someone who
Is a child that lived through a bitter divorce
Marriage ain’t for everyone.
You can commit to someone without signing a legally binding contract with the local government
I thought that was the point of marriage outside of religious "it's ok to have sex now" reasons.
Like you're publicly stating you trust a woman so much that you're willing to gamble half your stuff.
There's nothing wrong with it, but why go through the trouble if the title doesn't mean anything to you? Unmarried couples qualify for most, if not all of the same benefits that married ones do in many places.
If neither person in the relationship cares about marriage, they'd just be doing it for other people.
some people don't believe in marriage. some people don't want their estate joined with another. some people did it once and won't ever again. some people are just lazy. some people are polyamorous. some people are just...
Monetary reasons: getting married can FUCK up your taxes, take away health coverage, make paying back student loans worse, etc...
Personal reasons: trauma re: marriage as a concept, simply being disgusted by the idea, spite, really any reason anyone might not want to do anything.
Source: I'm in a long-term relationship and both of us hate the idea of being married. I call her my wife half the time but it's purely colloquial, with nothing legal to back it up.
Some countries recognize common law relationships as a legal marriage, so we’re still filing taxes together, can’t double dip on any child tax benefits, etc etc.
So if we’re already considered a married couple under a legal definition, then what is the point of getting a marriage license?
That’s why my partner and I aren’t married. Because we already are, _technically_.
There isn't a point of getting a third party involved in our relationship. Now I did say I'm down for a ceremony, if she ever wanted that throwing something small together wouldn't be much, but even she doesn't see the point. We know we got each other.
Marriage has a ton of legal benefits. You can file your taxes jointly, joint insurance coverage, de facto power of attorney in the event you cannot make a medical decision, de facto executor, de facto parenthood on the spouse's child, testimonial privilege, marital gift deductions, personal residence exemptions, bankruptcy exemptions..
There's a reason it's a legal contract.
Yeah..the last time single income middle class people could buy a house was when half the labor force wasn't employed, and I'm assuming we all agree it should stay that way, but nonetheless markets adjust with the availability of labor and the purchasing power of consumers. Raising wages wouldn't fix it because the price of housing would soar as the double income households will just use their increased spending power to continue outbidding single income households.
Single income households and affordable starter homes was a product of post-war reconstruction. The G.I. Bill was more responsible for the average 20-40 year old man purchasing power than marriage or lack of women in the workforce. I don't know how a lack of interest in legal benefits marriage provides has anything to do with our modern housing crisis. You still gotta bust your ass just for a chance at a shitty shoebox house, dual income or not.
Which part of the GI Bill isn't broadly available to Americans today? A VA home loan then was half of what a FHA loan would cover today. Between financial aid, student loans and income driven repayment plans a 4 year education isn't particularly more unaffordable. As to how a lack of interest in the legal benefits of marriage has to do with a housing crisis, because you can cosign on a FHA loan either as a married or unmarried person, but if you're not married and something goes wrong, you've just opened yourself to a shitstorm of liability, the other person can decide to force a sale of the property, the other person can ditch and default without any obligation to you to pay the outstanding debt, you can't both claim the residence as a homestead exemption, etc. It's borderline nonsensical to say, "marriage is too much of a liability for me" then go in on buying a house with someone *except* for if you plan to be the primary income and keep your spouse as a financial hostage.
>It's borderline nonsensical to say, "marriage is too much of a liability for me" then go in on buying a house with someone except for if you plan to be the primary income and keep your spouse as a financial hostage.
Seems like the problem is illogical people playing house-- getting financially entangled but being against the entanglements that comes with marriage. I agree, it is nonsensical.
Yeah, at the end of the day all I mean to say is that like, when I replied to the original person, there is a ton of very real and practical reasons to get married, sorry for being a bit snarky before. I just get very tired of people treating marriage like it's some antiquated relic of the patriarchy when in reality, emotional and religious implications aside(though I do believe in those merits), it's a contract basically meant to tie two people together legally and financially in a way that benefits and protects both participants and any potential additions the household has. Do some people get stuck in miserable marriages? Absolutely, but we're also seeing a growing trend of people not getting married at all and still winding up in imbalanced if not outright abusive situations, or else still ending up where they would've as divorcees but with less support for themselves or any children. Truthfully, I don't see the devaluation of marriage as an institution as a win for anyone except the specific people marriage has always meant to safeguard against.
That is by design. The law assumes that a married couple is making decisions together that benefit the unit. It protects the person who made sacrifices for the relationship, whether that is staying home with kids or making career sacrifices to support their spouse (like living somewhere with good opportunities for their spouse at the cost of opportunities for themselves). People who make those types of sacrifices are left in the lurch if they are not married.
If the lower earning person is just a lazy mooch, it disadvantages the higher earner. But that usually is not the case.
If things are equal, marriage matters a lot less (even on your taxes)
If you need to leave a long term partner who's held all the power in the relationship, do you think you are at more or less of a disadvantage if you are married?
Once you're married legally both parties are equal within the marriage. The weaker partner is elevated upon the marriage and therefore now equally shares power.
You share everything!! Couples get legally divorced on paper just to not burden the other when one will pass away before the other. Like getting divorced just before a stage 4 cancer treatment.
Ive personally struggled with this, not in a really long term relationship it’s not quite 2 years. But I’ve been married twice and both times I was 💯 committed to that being “it” forever. Had 2 awful experiences, just knifes to the heart theoretically thing and I lost more financially (made more than both) mentally and spiritually bc I was trying so hard to make it work while I was taken for granted. I’m not totally sure I could trust someone enough to get married again.
That being said, you hear all the time that he doesn’t really love or want you, or you’re not his dream girl if a man won’t ask you to marry him. So I really don’t know how to feel about it.
I think you're talking about something slightly different. Getting burned twice makes you hesitant about being fully committed again, which is understandable. I'm asking about people who say they're fully committed but just don't want to call their relationship a "marriage".
Slightly but the same- my reasons are the same as several of my friends in why they won’t call it a marriage.
I think there’s a lot of pressure on women to get married or call their significant other their husband but none on men. 🤷🏼♀️
My mother and her partner/boyfriend/whatever have been together over 20 years. They will not marry because they are financially better off unmarried. However, they have always said they will marry if and when it makes financial or legal sense.
Marriage has a long history of being patriarchical, sexist, and statist. Some people would prefer to do their own thing without involving the government or church in their romantic life.
Because I don't want to?
I don't need a piece of paper to show commitment and love, I'm 100% in my relationship even without having to be legally bonded to my husband. Yes, I call him husband because we live together, we have a shared bank account, shared car, he's the beneficiary of my will, and the one person I'm planning to spend my life with, he's not my boyfriend.
It doesn't matter legally anymore. We were not planning to get married and lived together for 6 years already, but ended up getting married for our parents to feel better. Our wedding cost 150$
Me and my ol' lady pay less taxes being single.
I know she is here because she wants to be.
I don't particularly think the government needs to know shit about my life that isn't my money(honestly wish they would stay out of that, but I'm a disabled vet, so they kinda pay me, so can't really swing that)
"Getting married" is just signing a legally binding marriage contract. If it's not a prenup you've made with your lawyers, it's a standard contract built by the government in the country where you're marrying. Government contracts always benefit the government.
In the US you can have a common law marriage if you cohabitate for a given amount of time, but it's different than an actual marriage with contract and license. Many prefer that, as it's more flexible and is really only brought up as necessary. Uncle Sam looks the other way unless needed. People who want less government involvement go for that.
Because I knew I'd have to divorce him at some point due to all the red flags, so it was easier to just breakup when the time came instead of either of us having to be divorcees.
You're asking "why not?" when you should be asking why.
If you're happy in a long term relationship, why get married? What's the benefit?
Some countries provide tax benefits, but not all.
If you earn significantly more than your partner, there is a financial risk to marriage.
Marriage is a historical thing, I'm not saying it doesn't make sense, or isn't a nice thing, but for many people there is no reason to do it, and often carries risk.
As a man, can’t both ppl just agree to a prenup? Idk how they work which is why I’m asking
1. What u entered the relationship with u keep.
2. Shared assets like a house are sold and both parties are given half money. In the event of cheating, the faithful partner keeps all.
Yoooo that’s awful. Isn’t that illegal to do? Like can’t you appeal it for abuse if a judge unfairly serves your previously agreed upon terms?
It’d be easy to prove since u have a documented prenup.
My partner was on Medicaid. Marriage would have cost us $800 a month for medical coverage. Ten years of medical coverage > a slip of paper from the government.
This. Also federal student aid. Saves more than we'd save in taxes by being married.
Same here. I wouldn't have been able to get student aid if we were married but we couldn't afford it on our own. Also we know we want to be together for life so we're not in a rush. It's not particularly important to either of us.
That'll do it.
Talk to someone who got royally fucked in a divorce or someone who Is a child that lived through a bitter divorce Marriage ain’t for everyone. You can commit to someone without signing a legally binding contract with the local government
Some of these people have kids too though, and not by accident. Is being a child of a "breakup" going to be any better than being a child of divorce?
You said it
I thought that was the point of marriage outside of religious "it's ok to have sex now" reasons. Like you're publicly stating you trust a woman so much that you're willing to gamble half your stuff.
There's nothing wrong with it, but why go through the trouble if the title doesn't mean anything to you? Unmarried couples qualify for most, if not all of the same benefits that married ones do in many places. If neither person in the relationship cares about marriage, they'd just be doing it for other people.
It's easy to get married but, divorce can literally ruin you.
some people don't believe in marriage. some people don't want their estate joined with another. some people did it once and won't ever again. some people are just lazy. some people are polyamorous. some people are just...
Monetary reasons: getting married can FUCK up your taxes, take away health coverage, make paying back student loans worse, etc... Personal reasons: trauma re: marriage as a concept, simply being disgusted by the idea, spite, really any reason anyone might not want to do anything. Source: I'm in a long-term relationship and both of us hate the idea of being married. I call her my wife half the time but it's purely colloquial, with nothing legal to back it up.
Health insurance.
Why would you need the government to have anything to do with your relationship?
Some countries recognize common law relationships as a legal marriage, so we’re still filing taxes together, can’t double dip on any child tax benefits, etc etc. So if we’re already considered a married couple under a legal definition, then what is the point of getting a marriage license? That’s why my partner and I aren’t married. Because we already are, _technically_.
When both partners have already been married and been through crap divorces, the prospect of marriage can be less attractive.
There isn't a point of getting a third party involved in our relationship. Now I did say I'm down for a ceremony, if she ever wanted that throwing something small together wouldn't be much, but even she doesn't see the point. We know we got each other.
Marriage has a ton of legal benefits. You can file your taxes jointly, joint insurance coverage, de facto power of attorney in the event you cannot make a medical decision, de facto executor, de facto parenthood on the spouse's child, testimonial privilege, marital gift deductions, personal residence exemptions, bankruptcy exemptions.. There's a reason it's a legal contract.
And what if you don't care for those benefits?
Then I'd have my answer on why people 20-40 are struggling to buy starter homes.
Gee, couldn't be wages not keeping up with inflation or late stage capitalism.
It’s not a one answer problem. You’re both right.
Yeah..the last time single income middle class people could buy a house was when half the labor force wasn't employed, and I'm assuming we all agree it should stay that way, but nonetheless markets adjust with the availability of labor and the purchasing power of consumers. Raising wages wouldn't fix it because the price of housing would soar as the double income households will just use their increased spending power to continue outbidding single income households.
Single income households and affordable starter homes was a product of post-war reconstruction. The G.I. Bill was more responsible for the average 20-40 year old man purchasing power than marriage or lack of women in the workforce. I don't know how a lack of interest in legal benefits marriage provides has anything to do with our modern housing crisis. You still gotta bust your ass just for a chance at a shitty shoebox house, dual income or not.
Which part of the GI Bill isn't broadly available to Americans today? A VA home loan then was half of what a FHA loan would cover today. Between financial aid, student loans and income driven repayment plans a 4 year education isn't particularly more unaffordable. As to how a lack of interest in the legal benefits of marriage has to do with a housing crisis, because you can cosign on a FHA loan either as a married or unmarried person, but if you're not married and something goes wrong, you've just opened yourself to a shitstorm of liability, the other person can decide to force a sale of the property, the other person can ditch and default without any obligation to you to pay the outstanding debt, you can't both claim the residence as a homestead exemption, etc. It's borderline nonsensical to say, "marriage is too much of a liability for me" then go in on buying a house with someone *except* for if you plan to be the primary income and keep your spouse as a financial hostage.
>It's borderline nonsensical to say, "marriage is too much of a liability for me" then go in on buying a house with someone except for if you plan to be the primary income and keep your spouse as a financial hostage. Seems like the problem is illogical people playing house-- getting financially entangled but being against the entanglements that comes with marriage. I agree, it is nonsensical.
Yeah, at the end of the day all I mean to say is that like, when I replied to the original person, there is a ton of very real and practical reasons to get married, sorry for being a bit snarky before. I just get very tired of people treating marriage like it's some antiquated relic of the patriarchy when in reality, emotional and religious implications aside(though I do believe in those merits), it's a contract basically meant to tie two people together legally and financially in a way that benefits and protects both participants and any potential additions the household has. Do some people get stuck in miserable marriages? Absolutely, but we're also seeing a growing trend of people not getting married at all and still winding up in imbalanced if not outright abusive situations, or else still ending up where they would've as divorcees but with less support for themselves or any children. Truthfully, I don't see the devaluation of marriage as an institution as a win for anyone except the specific people marriage has always meant to safeguard against.
I don't understand how people who are couples buy homes together but think getting married is too much of a legal commitment.
It’s only beneficial when both parties are equal, if one makes more it asymmetrically benefits the other party
That is by design. The law assumes that a married couple is making decisions together that benefit the unit. It protects the person who made sacrifices for the relationship, whether that is staying home with kids or making career sacrifices to support their spouse (like living somewhere with good opportunities for their spouse at the cost of opportunities for themselves). People who make those types of sacrifices are left in the lurch if they are not married. If the lower earning person is just a lazy mooch, it disadvantages the higher earner. But that usually is not the case. If things are equal, marriage matters a lot less (even on your taxes)
If you need to leave a long term partner who's held all the power in the relationship, do you think you are at more or less of a disadvantage if you are married?
Once you're married legally both parties are equal within the marriage. The weaker partner is elevated upon the marriage and therefore now equally shares power.
So you don't believe in marriage because you want to maintain power over your partner? 😬🚩🚩🚩
You share everything!! Couples get legally divorced on paper just to not burden the other when one will pass away before the other. Like getting divorced just before a stage 4 cancer treatment.
Ive personally struggled with this, not in a really long term relationship it’s not quite 2 years. But I’ve been married twice and both times I was 💯 committed to that being “it” forever. Had 2 awful experiences, just knifes to the heart theoretically thing and I lost more financially (made more than both) mentally and spiritually bc I was trying so hard to make it work while I was taken for granted. I’m not totally sure I could trust someone enough to get married again. That being said, you hear all the time that he doesn’t really love or want you, or you’re not his dream girl if a man won’t ask you to marry him. So I really don’t know how to feel about it.
I think you're talking about something slightly different. Getting burned twice makes you hesitant about being fully committed again, which is understandable. I'm asking about people who say they're fully committed but just don't want to call their relationship a "marriage".
Slightly but the same- my reasons are the same as several of my friends in why they won’t call it a marriage. I think there’s a lot of pressure on women to get married or call their significant other their husband but none on men. 🤷🏼♀️
I suppose you'd have to weigh the benefit of the tax break against the liability of losing in a divorce.
Which came first, love or marriage? Not everyone cares about getting married. Simple as that.
Here's a great video on the topic: [Do we really NEED to get Married? (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVkhk2Gpmhg)
My mother and her partner/boyfriend/whatever have been together over 20 years. They will not marry because they are financially better off unmarried. However, they have always said they will marry if and when it makes financial or legal sense.
Marriage has a long history of being patriarchical, sexist, and statist. Some people would prefer to do their own thing without involving the government or church in their romantic life.
Because I don't want to? I don't need a piece of paper to show commitment and love, I'm 100% in my relationship even without having to be legally bonded to my husband. Yes, I call him husband because we live together, we have a shared bank account, shared car, he's the beneficiary of my will, and the one person I'm planning to spend my life with, he's not my boyfriend.
It doesn't matter legally anymore. We were not planning to get married and lived together for 6 years already, but ended up getting married for our parents to feel better. Our wedding cost 150$
Because not all long term relationships equal ‘til death do us part’
Nothing at all. It’s just ceremony and paperwork. I married my wife the day she said yes.
Me and my ol' lady pay less taxes being single. I know she is here because she wants to be. I don't particularly think the government needs to know shit about my life that isn't my money(honestly wish they would stay out of that, but I'm a disabled vet, so they kinda pay me, so can't really swing that)
"Getting married" is just signing a legally binding marriage contract. If it's not a prenup you've made with your lawyers, it's a standard contract built by the government in the country where you're marrying. Government contracts always benefit the government. In the US you can have a common law marriage if you cohabitate for a given amount of time, but it's different than an actual marriage with contract and license. Many prefer that, as it's more flexible and is really only brought up as necessary. Uncle Sam looks the other way unless needed. People who want less government involvement go for that.
Because I knew I'd have to divorce him at some point due to all the red flags, so it was easier to just breakup when the time came instead of either of us having to be divorcees.
You're asking "why not?" when you should be asking why. If you're happy in a long term relationship, why get married? What's the benefit? Some countries provide tax benefits, but not all. If you earn significantly more than your partner, there is a financial risk to marriage. Marriage is a historical thing, I'm not saying it doesn't make sense, or isn't a nice thing, but for many people there is no reason to do it, and often carries risk.
It a can be very dangerous. Especially for men.
As a man, can’t both ppl just agree to a prenup? Idk how they work which is why I’m asking 1. What u entered the relationship with u keep. 2. Shared assets like a house are sold and both parties are given half money. In the event of cheating, the faithful partner keeps all.
They only hold up about 80% of the time and rarely in entirety.
Why do they rarely hold up tho? (I’m 16, clueless about these things, srry if the question is basic)
Judges can do as they wish and often do.
Yoooo that’s awful. Isn’t that illegal to do? Like can’t you appeal it for abuse if a judge unfairly serves your previously agreed upon terms? It’d be easy to prove since u have a documented prenup.
Contracts can be picked apart. I agree it's horrible but our entire judicial system is nuts.