The Student Room Group

Do you think marriage makes a difference?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Beckyweck
I want to know what people think about marriage. Do you think that there is a big difference between marriage and just cohabiting?

For example, I don't feel that marriage is a massive step if you're cohabiting already since after a wedding you just go back to normal life anyway but when I voiced this opinion in a conversation I was told not to be ridiculous and of course it makes a huge difference.

My parents have cohabited for the last 22 years without being married and I don't think their lives would be any different if they were married.

What do you think?
Posted from TSR Mobile


I think there is a stronger level of commitment after being married, and on the other hand, you develop that sense of entitlement and take one another for granted more than someone who has cohabited and who is still free to leave the relationship.
Original post by Beckyweck
I want to know what people think about marriage. Do you think that there is a big difference between marriage and just cohabiting?

For example, I don't feel that marriage is a massive step if you're cohabiting already since after a wedding you just go back to normal life anyway but when I voiced this opinion in a conversation I was told not to be ridiculous and of course it makes a huge difference.

My parents have cohabited for the last 22 years without being married and I don't think their lives would be any different if they were married.

What do you think?


It makes a huge difference legally and emotionally as it forces couples to sort out problems they have or face consequences. Also as I said, legally it makes a huge difference eg. any child would have no legal ties to the father and would be a bastard. That's pretty bad :redface:
Original post by Beckyweck
Do you think that there is a big difference between marriage and just cohabiting?

With marriage comes spousal rights that you'd otherwise not get but then there is the downside of losing 50% (hell could be a lot more :eek:) of my wealth should I divorce :sad:
Original post by Jimbo1234
Also as I said, legally it makes a huge difference eg. any child would have no legal ties to the father and would be a bastard. That's pretty bad :redface:

Being a bastard is not bad, how dare you say that because someone's parents were/are not married that they are a bastard and thus inferior :angry:
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by tehFrance
Being a bastard is not bad, how dare you say that because someone's parents were/are not married that they are a bastard and thus inferior :angry:


Legally you are very inferior to a child of a married family. That is how the legal system works in this country. I'm only stating facts.
Original post by Jimbo1234
It makes a huge difference legally and emotionally as it forces couples to sort out problems they have or face consequences. Also as I said, legally it makes a huge difference eg. any child would have no legal ties to the father and would be a bastard. That's pretty bad :redface:


Both my brother and I are bastards (obviously since our parents are not married) and it hasn't ever detrimentally affected me. With the exception of having to learn the birds and the bees probably younger than other kids because a girl in my class told me my dad wasn't my dad because they weren't married. It never bothered me though.

Apparently my father had no parental rights over either of us though, so in theory my mum could have disappeared and he would have no way to stop her. But I heard that for any child born after 2004 I think it was, the father had equal rights or something like that. My dad was told he would have to adopt us legally to have any rights but it's a non issue now since I'm 21 and my brother is 17.

Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Beckyweck
Both my brother and I are bastards (obviously since our parents are not married) and it hasn't ever detrimentally affected me. With the exception of having to learn the birds and the bees probably younger than other kids because a girl in my class told me my dad wasn't my dad because they weren't married. It never bothered me though.

Apparently my father had no parental rights over either of us though, so in theory my mum could have disappeared and he would have no way to stop her. But I heard that for any child born after 2004 I think it was, the father had equal rights or something like that. My dad was told he would have to adopt us legally to have any rights but it's a non issue now since I'm 21 and my brother is 17.


But if the couple splits up (which happens a lot), the kids are screwed. Also, why didn't your parents get married?
Original post by Jimbo1234
Legally you are very inferior to a child of a married family. That is how the legal system works in this country. I'm only stating facts.

Really? that is strange as my father is my father despite never marrying my mother so in what way am I inferior? :holmes:
Original post by tehFrance
Really? that is strange as my father is my father despite never marrying my mother so in what way am I inferior? :holmes:


Beats me, but that is how the law stands. I think people forget that marriage is not just religious, it is also a binding legal contract between two people.
Original post by Jimbo1234
Beats me, but that is how the law stands.

I think people forget that marriage is not just religious, it is also a binding legal contract between two people.

So you have no way in telling how I am inferior yet insist I am? you sir are the inferior one, especially in regards to intelligence.

Oh you don't say? why didn't you tell me it was a legal contract, is that what I have been missing all these years? :rolleyes:
Original post by tehFrance
So you have no way in telling how I am inferior yet insist I am? you sir are the inferior one, especially in regards to intelligence.

Oh you don't say? why didn't you tell me it was a legal contract, is that what I have been missing all these years? :rolleyes:


:facepalm2: No, it is inferior as you would inherit nothing, your father have no legal ties to you after 16, no inheritance, nothing. Legally, you are nothing to him after 16.
Why this is, I don't know. That is what I was saying.
Original post by Jimbo1234
:facepalm2: No, it is inferior as you would inherit nothing, your father have no legal ties to you after 16, no inheritance, nothing. Legally, you are nothing to him after 16.
Why this is, I don't know. That is what I was saying.

That is strange, his will stipulates I get everything... funny that isn't it? you say I am nothing to him after the age of 16 yet I am in my early twenties and I get everything when he dies, I get virtually nothing from my mother though since she remarried and has another son, quite funny really.
Reply 31
I view the main benefits of marriage as:

- Having the wedding day, which is (only to me personally, others may not feel the same) an emotionally and socially significant day, celebrating with family and friends, displaying commitment, creating a treasured memory etc.

- Relating to above, in particular it's something that I know will greatly please my parents (only for the sake of my happiness and getting to go to their child's wedding, not because of controlling expectations) I bit like having a graduation ceremony doesn't make a difference to your degree, but people want to go and feel proud to be there.

- Social benefits, it is my perception that others are more likely to take a married couple more seriously and treat the relationship with more respect. Although granted, I think this aspect is probably greater before you have children / if you don't have children, and is probably gradually changing.

- Legal benefits/ recognition of the relationship. Although I think this is (quite rightly) changing so that long-term cohabiting couples or in some other way "registered" couples will probably have identical rights fairly soon.

- Lastly, and probably leastly - the tradition and the connotations of marriage (commitment, ring-wearing, going through the wedding malarky, "rite of passage", romantic associations) just appeal to me, and are what I have imagined as a "nice thing that will happen one day" for a long time. Although, obviously that appeal might not exist for others and is fairly subjective/meaningless I know, it would just be dishonest not to mention it as a reason.

In direct answer to OPs questions - no I don't think marriage will make much of a difference to me - ultimately a loving relationship is a loving relationship, and marriage doesn't change that. But those are my reasons for wanting to regardless.

I have nothing against unmarried couples (marriage doesn't appeal to everyone and shouldn't have to) and truly believe they should not be discriminated against in any way; but it does irk me when people say "it's stupid to get married", "if you need marriage to validate your relationship you aren't in love" etc - to me that's erroneously jumping to simplified conclusions about why people want to get married, and also in many cases being a hypocrite. Eg: I don't need to go to a graduation ceremony to "validate" my degree, but I still want to, I don't need to have a party to "validate" how old I am, but I like to, having a Sunday roast as a family won't majorly alter your family bonds but for many it is a welcome tradition, we don't need to have funerals to "validate" somebody's passing - but social rituals like these are often beneficial in more subtle ways and are clearly something that in general appeal to human beings (including the "intelligent" and "rational") whatever they mark (or indeed even if they are fairly arbitrary).
Original post by tehFrance
That is strange, his will stipulates I get everything... funny that isn't it? you say I am nothing to him after the age of 16 yet I am in my early twenties and I get everything when he dies, I get virtually nothing from my mother though since she remarried and has another son, quite funny really.


But if he remarried and had a child, although that might not be possible/unlikely, that could cause a **** storm.
I don't see why you are getting so aggressive. This is how the law stands. It's not my fault that your folks didn't marry and this is what the law says about it :curious:
Original post by Jimbo1234
But if he remarried and had a child, although that might not be possible/unlikely, that could cause a **** storm.
I don't see why you are getting so aggressive. This is how the law stands. It's not my fault that your folks didn't marry and this is what the law says about it :curious:

Ah he has remarried and yet I still get everything as per his wishes, his new wife gets a living allowance and nothing more so it hasn't caused a **** storm.

I am getting this way as you seem to think that someone is inferior yet you couldn't tell me why and frankly that is moronic. The law is clearly wrong and should be changed but considering you couldn't even give a reason as to why someone is inferior tells me you are either making this up as you go along or are researching as you go along.
Reply 34
This is also particularly annoying

Original post by cartman
Marriage is geared in favour of the woman. No sensible man would even think about getting married.


Why cartman, why is that?

Because of course you will be out earning more money than said wife, whilst she stays at home parasitising you by lazily caring for your children?

Then, because of her inherent fiendishness/ evil master plan, she'll initiate a divorce or you'll get one (because she's such a megabitch) and just so she can get your cash.

- Not that it's at all possible some women earn as much or more than their husbands (I'm guessing somehow you think your logic also applies to them?!)

- Not that staying home instead of working to raise children is god forbid I suggest it - a shared responsibility, which becomes a sacrifice if one partner takes it on alone...

Not that it's possible some people get married for reasons other than financial equity

Not that anyone would want to continue a relationship without "sensible" pre-formed ideas on how to do over their partner after who knows how many years of mutual love/respect and/or creating a family with children together.

Not that not getting married would protect you from the scheming of your female partner were she as evil as you presume...
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by tehFrance
Ah he has remarried and yet I still get everything as per his wishes, his new wife gets a living allowance and nothing more so it hasn't caused a **** storm.


Eh? Again you misread what I wrote. I said it would be a problem if he had a child...because they could contest the will.


I am getting this way as you seem to think that someone is inferior yet you couldn't tell me why and frankly that is moronic. The law is clearly wrong and should be changed but considering you couldn't even give a reason as to why someone is inferior tells me you are either making this up as you go along or are researching as you go along.


So you can't read. I have listed where you differ and you are getting aggressive due to not liking simple British Law. That is not my fault is it :rolleyes:
Reply 36
Original post by Pigling
This is also particularly annoying



Why cartman, why is that?

Because of course you will be out earning more money than said wife, whilst she stays at home parasitising you by lazily caring for your children?

Then, because of her inherent fiendishness/ evil master plan, she'll initiate a divorce or you'll get one (because she's such a megabitch) and just so she can get your cash.

- Not that it's at all possible some women earn as much or more than their husbands (I'm guessing somehow you think your logic also applies to them?!)

- Not that staying home instead of working to raise children is god forbid I suggest it - a shared responsibility, which becomes a sacrifice if one partner takes it on alone...

Not that it's possible some people get married for reasons other than financial equity

Not that anyone would want to continue a relationship without "sensible" pre-formed ideas on how to do over their partner after who knows how many years of mutual love/respect and/or creating a family with children together.

Not that not getting married would protect you from the scheming of your female partner were she as evil as you presume...


42% of all marriages in the UK ended in divorce in 2012. Enough said. Life isn't perfect. **** happens. So forgive me for keeping my best interests in mind. You can't predict if your marriage is going to fail, so in my opinion, it isn't a chance worth taking. If you do get divorced, the man loses everything. I'm one step ahead of women and always will be.
Original post by Jimbo1234
But if the couple splits up (which happens a lot), the kids are screwed. Also, why didn't your parents get married?


They got together when in freshers at uni, so they were 18. I came along a year later and when they graduated they hadn't got much money and had a house and bills and a baby to spend money on. Then when I was 4 my brother came along so they just had a lot of things to spend money on that were immediate and pressing so the wedding got shunted back and back.

By the time they could afford it comfortably they'd been together over a decade and didn't feel that it was that necessary anymore. They'd rather spend their money on other stuff!

Also, my Mum is really self conscious and shy and hates to be the centre of attention so a wedding would probably be pretty terrible for her. She skived her graduation ceremony at uni because there would be photos and too many people!


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 38
Original post by Jimbo1234
Eh? Again you misread what I wrote. I said it would be a problem if he had a child...because they could contest the will.




So you can't read. I have listed where you differ and you are getting aggressive due to not liking simple British Law. That is not my fault is it :rolleyes:


Um, your statements of fact about 'simple British law' are inaccurate as it now makes virtually no difference whether your parents are married or not, provided that your father is named in the birth certificate. Nobody even uses the term 'bastard' as anything other than an insult anymore. Of course, none of this affects the condescending tone of your posts, which is what I think the other guy is reacting to more than anything. Tone it down, don't be a TSR stereotype.

I think marriage is rhetorical at best, pointless at worst. It sounds nice, and we've all been brought up assuming that it is going to happen to everybody at some point - like chicken pox. However I think as time goes on we're realising that it's an outdated social structure and money-making exercise, justified as being a pre-requisite to functional family life.

There's nothing marriage gives you that a stable cohabiting relationship doesn't, objectively speaking, although whether you want to MAKE something out of it is everyone's choice. I basically don't care about getting married for its own sake; however, I WOULD wonder why the guy hadn't asked, particularly if he shares the cultural views that are considered normal, where we still err on the side of obligation.

I'm not fussed, but if it matters to him, I'll do it.
Doesn't make a difference, my parents got married due to religious beliefs they now hate each others guts. Marriage is a cultural/religious expectation, a couple can be happy and stay together without marriage.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending