<p>meeting in college? I guess you can meet your future spouse anywhere, so that’s why college is also possible.
But I don’t want to get married all my lifetime - i don’t want to replace freedom with anything.</p>
<p>"You know… you can have a good time in college IN a committed relationship. There are people out there that don’t have to “finish sowing their wild oats” while in college. People have this strange impression that everyone in college has to go out get drunk every night, and pass out on the side of the road because they fell asleep at the wheel from drunkenness. There are some people that are mature enough in college to know what they want to accomplish in their career and know who they want to be with for the rest of their life. Just because you’ve worked for a few years doesn’t make you any wiser or mature. I know plenty of people in their upper 20’s/lower 30’s who are immature and working jobs they couldn’t care less about, while still bar-hopping most nights.</p>
<p>When you know what you want and who you want to be with, there is no sense in pushing that off. Go out and get it. I’ve had plenty of beers and plenty of years to “know myself”."</p>
<p>Yay thank you for posting this. This is what I keep trying to say over and over. I don’t like to drink, I don’t like to party, I don’t like to go out every night-- or at all, I don’t like dating, and I have an extremely loving and devoted man in my life whose goals for the future and idea of a good life align with mine (and who doesn’t mind my utter lack of love for fun :P.) Why would I give that up to go do a bunch of things I don’t even like? I have no wild oats to sow. Could not be less interested. I am a little busy working on my career and doing things that I do enjoy, which are all things that are much better when shared with my fiance.</p>
<p>Manayy… my husband was voted into the “Men of OurCollege” calendar by the female students at OurCollege. He has been repeatedly told he looks like a certain movie star, and once when we were at a pool on vacation an older woman came up to him and asked him if he was “one of those soap opera hunks.” We met in college and got married at 23.</p>
<p>Take that back to your brother.</p>
<p>My husband’s cousin was talking about how she thought DH and I had been more ready for marriage at 23 than his sister was when she married at 28. She said, “You and DH were old when you were young. Sis was young even when she was older.” In other words… maturity level.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t encourage either of my kids to marry at 23 - but I do hope they will marry when they meet the right person and are ready, regardless of their age.</p>
<p><strong>tee hee</strong> Oh my this thread is getting HILARIOUS! 
I haven’t had this many laughs in a lonnnnnng time lol</p>
<p>First, I just took a good, long look at myself in the mirror…you are right manayy…I don’t think I have ever seen such a homely person in all my days! And checking out my hubby’s picture, I can see your brother’s point…I can’t decide if he is more wretched looking than myself or vice-versa! :)</p>
<p>futurenystudent:</p>
<p>Graduating already? From high school? Congratulations! :)</p>
<p>pinkstrawberry (that is such a great name BTW! Yes I agree…I was about 31 when our daughter was born, I was just thinking way late 30s and early 40s us gals are pushing the envelope. I wouldn’t have been ready right out of college either. Are you in college now yourself? Best of luck in your future…in the end all things work out fine :)</p>
<p>H and I married while in grad school: started dating in feb married in dec. I had just turned 26 he had just turned 31. We’ve been married 23 years. In both our families going back as far as we can find … there has been 1 divorce on each side, but nothing recently. We’ve both grown up where “our norm” is that. And, I think it’s affected how we look at marriage … it’s definitely for the long haul. We’ve been praying since I got pregnant with our first child that our kids will be able to find spouses with the same covenant (vs contract) philosophy – that lovely “sweet spot.” </p>
<p>zebes</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>From college, thank you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Finally, a rationalist. I’ll never be ready for a lifetime commitment, at any age.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You see, I don’t need to. I’m not getting married unless it’s on my terms. Why is that so inconceivable/unreasonable to people?</p>
<p>That’s not a rationalist view of marriage at all.</p>
<p>Marriage is helpful for many things - for pooling physical and emotional resources, for one. </p>
<p>Marriage is not for everyone. Some people prefer not to have a partner. They’d rather help themselves out of messes than get help and then have to turn around and help someone else. They’d rather fund their house themselves, rather than have extra money to spend on other luxuries. They’d rather take care of kids themselves, rather than have the extra time (or perhaps they don’t find the time one would have to spend with wife/kids in a marriage pleasurable). </p>
<p>But for those who do enjoy it, marriage makes perfect, rational sense. Some people like working in pairs. Certainly some pairs are dysfunctional…they waste money rather than save and create it, waste time, etc…but there is no reason a marriage can’t be set up in such a way that is mutually beneficial to all involved (not necessarily in a HUGE material sense, but certainly that’s one possibility, and certainly there’s other things you might want to pool besides money, such as love and support and companionship).</p>
<p>Besides being forced to pay more taxes, name one thing that married couples can do that a single person can’t.</p>
<p>I mean, I pretty much covered that.</p>
<p>Here is one very simple example.</p>
<p>A single person has $500 to spend on a couch. </p>
<p>Two single people have $1000, or $500 leftover.</p>
<p>This can also apply to anything - utilities, houses, cars (depending on the situation - maybe not), children’s tuition…</p>
<p>You can also pool TIME put into chores, children, etc. Yes, you may ultimately have to relinquish some time with your “guy friends” to chill with the wife, but having married her one should consider the wife a pleasurable activity equal to any other (chores, not usually).</p>
<p>Visit each other in the hospital in every state.</p>
<p>^Which plays into the pooling of emotional resources, not just time/money.</p>
<p>It’s also a LOT easier to get foster children…single parents are usually looked down upon in the process and are not given preference.</p>
<p>Of course not everyone WANTS a family, some people are perfectly happy with the money they spend on mortgage or rent and the money they have left over, some people don’t CARE to have a partner in crime. That’s fine. But others simply think it is more rational and economic to do it the other way.</p>
<p>Any savings will probably be wiped out by having to pay more taxes and divorce lawyers and/or marriage counseling.</p>
<p>I frankly fail to see how one parent working 70 hours a week is somehow less competent a parent than two parents that work 70 hours a week. The social stigma against the “single dad” or “single mom” is absurd. Marriage/monogamy is nothing more than an archaic social ritual invented by the Church to impose its views upon everyone (or to perpetuate itself, depending on how cynical you are). People just don’t make lifetime commitments, legal or otherwise.</p>
<p>^No, that’s not true. Many couples never get divorced and never need marriage counseling that drains the bank and many don’t need marriage counseling at all (though there is nothing wrong with counseling and it can even be said that in some cases a marriage could make you a more fulfilled and happy person, therefore reducing the need for any kind of counseling overall, though some marriage counseling may be beneficial). A marriage can be mutually beneficial or it can be dysfunctional. This depends on the compatibility of the partners and the personality of the partners, which are things that CAN be assessed before marrying. In some cases the divorce/cheating/etc. blindsides everyone involved. But these instances can be minimized with effort on your part in choosing the right partner, 1, and then in being a compromising and kind person with good communication skills, 2 (if you are a horrible judge of character and have no desire to be this kind of person, that’s fine, you don’t need to get married - some people, however, are drawn to things that are good for them and are naturally compromising and have good communication skills).</p>
<p>On single Dads: Sorry if you think the stigma is “stupid” (it is in some respects, but in others it makes sense - two parents will have more time to spend with their children than 1, for reasons already stated). Though you and I may personally think many single parents do a great job raising kids, the other attitude prevails at most adoption agencies, so good luck trying to adopt children without spending a huge amount of money (it is tens of thousands of dollars to do so even if you are married) and many, many years fighting for your right to adopt as a single dad. It’s possible, but it’s no doubt you’d save money and time if you got married. And it’s also possible that you may simply not succeed, for things you may not be able to change (stigma, costs, etc.). If you’re all about avoiding “risk” it seems very stupid for you to consider fostering children as a single parent - there is ALL kinds of risk involved in that endeavor, starting from the very beginning.</p>
<p>You can pool emotional/financial/physical resources without getting married you know. I fail to see how a single parent plus a legal guardian makes less competent parents than two married parents, if they’re both working 70 hours a week at demanding jobs. Either way they’ll be raised by a full time staff. You could remain permanently engaged, not commit to each other for life, and enjoy all the frivolity of getting married. Each party is absolutely free to terminate the arrangement at any time without painful and expensive litigation.</p>
<p>Single parent+legal guardian (or two single parents, however you look at it)=>two married parents>>>>>Two divorced parents. </p>
<p>Since divorce can ONLY follow marriage, it no longer makes any sense to get married. If a permanently engaged couple has two kids, each party can declare one of the kids as a dependent, and name the other party legal guardian, and both get the head of household tax status on top of minor dependent tax bennies.</p>
<p>“Each party is absolutely free to terminate the arrangement at any time without painful and expensive litigation.”</p>
<p>Unlikely. Partners with a share in a house, children, etc. will probably require some litigation to sort everything out (what happens to the house, who gets to see the children when, etc. etc.). It is not “marriage” that complicates in the event of a fallout, but the pooling resources without some kind of fallback plan that complicates in the event of a fallout. “Marriage” is actually a contract in and of itself that protects people from risk - it is an agreement that says “we’re permanent partners, business and otherwise,” and seeks to minimize the risk involved in buying a house and selling it before it’s paid off, having children with the income and hands/eyes/ears of two parents and then losing one, or any other kind of thing that might happen in arrangement where “partners are free to walk away at any time”. Marriage as an agreement protects all parties involved. And yes, there are messy consequences if one breaks the agreement, just like there are messy consequences if someone breaks agreements you’ve made pooling your resources in a non-married state. That is why one should 1. consider who you marry carefully and 2. not regard the marriage itself as the ONLY verbal or written agreements between the two. As an aside, terminating any kind of close relationship is painful - the word “divorce” does not make it any more or less so. </p>
<p>And yes, it’s great that you think the stigma against single parents is stupid, but that has no bearing on how easy it will be for you to adopt.</p>
<p>Marriage is a useful contract for those who have entered it prudently and have considered how it can and will be mutually beneficial to the partners involved. In that case, the risk is severely diminished.</p>
<p>I can’t imagine going through this crazy life without my husband. Having a supportive, loving and responsible partner makes everything easier, especially raising children.</p>
<p>Marriage is a contract whose origin was most likely originally to protect women and to give men exclusive sexual access to a woman (or women) in order to prevent fighting with other men. Whether marriage as an institution is outdated or not depends upon how you view the protection of women. I believe women still need protection because they still bear the brunt of childbearing and child rearing. Having children and taking care of children do impact one’s career and/or ability to amass wealth. One thing many young people don’t think about is that having kids is a crap shoot. It’s not uncommon to have a child who is handicapped in some way - anything from mental instability to slight learning disabilities. A handicapped child takes an enormous amount of resources - time and money.</p>
<p>If two people wish to live together or even pool their resources, I agree that marriage has more downsides than upsides, but once children are involved you have a lifetime commitment to them whether you like it or not. Of course, you can always dump them, but then you are truly cold-hearted.</p>
<p>One other thing that might hamper nyu’s plans is that many states have common law marriage. Just living together for an extended period of time can bind two people legally and financially.</p>
<p>Only 11 states recognize common law marriages: Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, New Hampshire (posthumously), Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah and in the District of Columbia.</p>
<p>I have no intention of living in any one of those states, and there are no jobs that would take me to any of those 11 jurisdictions. The only remote possibility is Texas and DC, but DC can be avoided by living in MD or VA, and Texas can be more easily avoided. TX either requires a declaration or 3 requirements, two of which are “an agreement to be married” and “representation to others that the parties are married”, neither of which will happen. The other 9 states require some kind of “intent to marry”, “declaration/representation that the parties are married”, or “hodling each other as husband and wife”, none of which will happen under my arrangement. The rest of the states either abolished common law marriage or never allowed it in the first place.</p>
<p>You’re also assuming that both parties in my arrangement will buy property together. Well you know how much I vehemently oppose that. One person buys the primary residence and the other person reimburses part of the cost, but there will be one sole owner for every piece of property, furniture, and plant matter in the place.</p>
<p>Actually, umcp11 said it best. Anytime two people pool a large amount of resources they should have a legal contract. Marriage is as good as any, mostly because there is a large body of law built up around it. nyu’s argument is that he doesn’t plan to pool resources. That is very difficult to put into practice. Keeping track of each input to the relationship (including time as well as money) is impractical. Everything will have to be negotiated - “I’ll take a week off work to visit you if you pay for the plane ticket.” - that sort of thing. And, that presumes that the other party to the relationship is as calculating as nyu and doesn’t get taken advantage of.</p>
<p>gstein: "You know… you can have a good time in college IN a committed relationship. There are people out there that don’t have to “finish sowing their wild oats” while in college. People have this strange impression that everyone in college has to go out get drunk every night, and pass out on the side of the road because they fell asleep at the wheel from drunkenness. There are some people that are mature enough in college to know what they want to accomplish in their career and know who they want to be with for the rest of their life. Just because you’ve worked for a few years doesn’t make you any wiser or mature. I know plenty of people in their upper 20’s/lower 30’s who are immature and working jobs they couldn’t care less about, while still bar-hopping most nights.</p>
<p>When you know what you want and who you want to be with, there is no sense in pushing that off. Go out and get it. I’ve had plenty of beers and plenty of years to “know myself”."</p>
<p>This has nothing to do with drinking. Sowing wild oats has nothing to do with drinking. Not to me. I went through four years of college without touching so much as a drop of alcohol. I’m talking about SEX. Committing yourself to one person in undergrad is way too young. It only leads to regrets after many years of marriage when you wonder what sleeping with a lot of others would’ve been like. </p>
<p>Use high school, college and the first few years after college to get that stuff out of your system. Then you can go to grad school happily looking for that lifetime spouse/partner.</p>