Why do men get married?

[monkeybingo]

FUCK WHY MARRY WHEN YOU HAVE TINDER... Wish that app existed 3 years ago and I would be just dating random girls everyday

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by carve

To paraphrase 1love, if you can't answer "what's in it for me", then you don't understand why you're doing it. Cultural inertia

Not necessarily true. I cannot speak for others, but i did it because i wanted to. I didn't want a wedding (THIS is the definition of cultural inertia, but i accepted that b/c it was important to my wife and family) but i did want to get married. Best decision of my life so far.

[carve]

Originally Posted by 1love

Not necessarily true. I cannot speak for others, but i did it because i wanted to. I didn't want a wedding (THIS is the definition of cultural inertia, but i accepted that b/c it was important to my wife and family) but i did want to get married. Best decision of my life so far.

OK- what did bringing a legal contract into your relationship do to improve said relationship, and how was it your best decision?

[carve]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

I don't give a shit if they are thought out or not, they aren't my reasons. You asked why, those people told you why.

OK- so most people get married for non-applicable reasons. That's what I thought, and why I got married when I was younger.

You aren't looking to get married, why do you even care?

I'm being devils advocate here. I kinda assumed I would one day, but then I asked myself "why do I assume that? What's in it for me?"

My wife shared her perspective and said men have more incentive than women. She said that women typically have more work to do when they get married while men have less.

Men don't have to look for strange or hire hookers anymore.
Men don't have to clean the house anymore.
Men don't have to eat ramen noodles anymore.
Men don't have to try to stay buff anymore.
Men don't have to do the dishes anymore.
Men don't have to do the laundry anymore.
Men don't have to pay the house hold bills anymore.

Women get to clean up after another person after marriage.
Women get to cook for 2 after marriage.
Women are expected to stay buff after marriage.
Women get to clean more dishes after marriage.
Women get to do twice the laundry after marriage.
Women get to be responsible for making sure the lights and cable stay on.

I had to do more of most of that crap than ever when I was married. Marriage reduces incentive to do those things. Except looking for strange. I actually enjoy that, but don't do it anymore because I prefer being with my girlfriend. Marriage means women have LESS incentive to do any of that stuff than before, because you're legally locked in. It's not like if she doesn't do that, you can get divorced and sue her for maid, chef and prostitute service. If you could, then they'd be highly incentivized. What'cha gonna do? Conversely, if SHE want's the divorce, she can still sue you to perform your husbandly provider duties with nothing in return, and usually WINS. This is why marriage is a raw deal for men. There is zero punishment for women not doing their part, and zero protection for men if they get bored, but huge punishment for men and protection for women.

So i suppose it all depends on your point of view. Especially when that point of view is from a person who doesn't break down marriage into a binding, state sanctioned contract.

Legally speaking, that's all it is. Without the legally binding contract, you're not considered "married". That's the only legal difference. I suppose I'd be fine referring to a long-term partner/girlfriend as my wife, but it's not legally binding, and the contract is broken and a raw deal for men.

[Woodengun]

Marriage is a partnership. Love has little to do with it. Like all partnerships, there is a lot of work involved to reap the rewards of the partnership.

As for the contract part - it does help with legal decisions - most of those we all hope to never need to excersize.

[pgviper]

Originally Posted by carve

I'm being devils advocate here. I kinda assumed I would one day, but then I asked myself "why do I assume that? What's in it for me?"

You have posed this question multiple times throughout this thread. It leads me to believe that you are an extremely selfish person. Don't get me wrong, its not in a bad way, its just how you come across. I don't see marriage as something you do to expect some type of return out of. Clearly you won't move towards it unless you see that return or have us (bimmerpost) convince you that such a return exists that you don't understand yet.

[carve]

Originally Posted by pgviper

You have posed this question multiple times throughout this thread. It leads me to believe that you are an extremely selfish person. Don't get me wrong, its not in a bad way, its just how you come across. I don't see marriage as something you do to expect some type of return out of. Clearly you won't move towards it unless you see that return or have us (bimmerpost) convince you that such a return exists that you don't understand yet.

I keep posing it because there hasn't been much in the way of a sensible answer, and because it's an interesting topic. I'm not asking you to talk me into it- I'm asking why people do it, and expecting some answer that actually has to do with involving the state in your relationship, because any other answer can be achieved WITHOUT signing the contract and therefore not being legally married. The only answer is legal rights, such as hospital visitation, but that just seems to be a poor risk/reward scenario, and you could probably draw up another contract for things like that.

When I was married, I was extraordinarily selfless about it. Anything that required any work in the household or relationship, I did between 66-100% of it. The harder I tried, the less she tried. Being married guaranteed me nothing but losing half my stuff. If it did guarantee me some kind of benefit, I wouldn't have had those problems and probably would still be married. I now have a great relationship with a real contributor and partner, and don't see any benefit to changing the terms.

If you don't expect a return (or put another way, a benefit), then why DO you do it? I'm assuming it isn't because you like to risk half your assets and being made into a slave in case it doesn't work out, right? I'm guessing it's just because you want to be seen a certain way by other people, such as your parents, which basically amounts to cultural inertia, which doesn't seem to be a good reason in 2015, especially given the increased risk for men these days. I'll admit that was the case for me.

[Billup]

I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but I get this lingering feeling that you're expecting a certain answer that nobody on this board is going to be able to provide. The reasons people listed are certainly good "reasons" why men get married and what they feel they get out of it, but it clearly doesn't fit your expectation of an "acquired asset by formal document".

Clearly marriage and children are not for you, and you have your reasons, but I think you're clouding their reasons against your own, so nothing is going to sound like a real asset to you.

[carve]

Originally Posted by Billup

I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but I get this lingering feeling that you're expecting a certain answer that nobody on this board is going to be able to provide. The reasons people listed are certainly good "reasons" why men get married and what they feel they get out of it, but it clearly doesn't fit your expectation of an "acquired asset by formal document".

Clearly marriage and children are not for you, and you have your reasons, but I think you're clouding their reasons against your own, so nothing is going to sound like a real asset to you.

Their reasons aren't "good enough" because they have nothing to do with the legal institution of marriage. I think it's because people think of marriage in terms of what it aught to be rather than what it actually is: a legal contract. I certainly did, and really never thought otherwise until this week, and thought it was an interesting epiphany I wanted to share. Funny we don't think of it as a legal contract when it's not considered official until you sign the papers and send them to the office of your secretary of state. My actual goal was just to get people to think outside the box.

[pgviper]

Originally Posted by carve

If you don't expect a return (or put another way, a benefit), then why DO you do it? I'm assuming it isn't because you like to risk half your assets and being made into a slave in case it doesn't work out, right? I'm guessing it's just because you want to be seen a certain way by other people, such as your parents, which basically amounts to cultural inertia, which doesn't seem to be a good reason in 2015, especially given the increased risk for men these days.

To eventually have children and reasons I am not posting on a forum.

Like I have said previously, its a personal decision... not "social inertia"

[carve]

Originally Posted by pgviper

To eventually have children and reasons I am not posting on a forum.

Like I have said previously, its a personal decision... not "social inertia"

I'll just assume you guys gave each other herpes :P

Of course it's a personal decision, but i believe people make the decision based on cultural inertia- it's considered "respectable" or just "the next step" after you've been together for a long time. This was the case for me, and I have seen nothing here to suggest otherwise. I'd argue it's not a very good reason for a man given the risk involved these days.

[nagisak31]

OP is just a troll. It's so obvious, I wonder why people are even responding. It's classic "your thoughts are not good enough to me therefore you're incorrect and invalid." And he is "trying to get people to think outside of the box" and into HIS box. So if you don't agree, again you're argument is invalid.

Just stop responding to him and eventually he will give up.

[carve]

Originally Posted by nagisak31

OP is just a troll. It's so obvious, I wonder why people are even responding. It's classic "your thoughts are not good enough to me therefore you're incorrect and invalid." And he is "trying to get people to think outside of the box" and into HIS box. So if you don't agree, again you're argument is invalid.

Just stop responding to him and eventually he will give up.

Trolls try to provoke an emotional response, such as what you just wrote. Your emotional response contributes no information or discourse to this thread. I'm looking for a rational response.

[nagisak31]

Yes, because taking an event such as a marriage which has incredible emotional, psychological, and possibly religious connections, besides just "what do I get out of it," then lambasting people about their decisions because "they aren't good enough reasons" isn't attempting to get a rise out of anyone...

[pgviper]

Originally Posted by carve

I'll just assume you guys gave each other herpes :P

Of course it's a personal decision, but i believe people make the decision based on cultural inertia- it's considered "respectable" or just "the next step" after you've been together for a long time. This was the case for me, and I have seen nothing here to suggest otherwise. I'd argue it's not a very good reason for a man given the risk involved these days.

And i'll assume that you gave her herpes and thats why she left you and took all your shit...

[carve]

Originally Posted by nagisak31

Yes, because taking an event such as a marriage which has incredible emotional, psychological, and possibly religious connections, besides just "what do I get out of it," then lambasting people about their decisions because "they aren't good enough reasons" isn't attempting to get a rise out of anyone...

Well, that's the rub of it; you can have the emotional, psychological and religious connections without involving the state in your relationship by signing a contract whose terms have changed over the last 50 years. I totally get that, and it's not what I'm arguing. So, what do you get out of signing the contract. I doubt you're getting your emotional, psychological and religious needs met by signing a contract with the state, are you? I think you're conflating what marriage aught to be and what it actually is.

What other high-risk contracts do you sign to meet your emotional and religious needs?

[carve]

Originally Posted by pgviper

And i'll assume that you gave her herpes and thats why she left you and took all your shit...

Did I say I'm not mentioning things on the forum, or did you?

[Mr Tonka]

Originally Posted by nagisak31

OP is just a troll. It's so obvious, I wonder why people are even responding. It's classic "your thoughts are not good enough to me therefore you're incorrect and invalid." And he is "trying to get people to think outside of the box" and into HIS box. So if you don't agree, again you're argument is invalid.

Just stop responding to him and eventually he will give up.

OP is not trolling. He could discuss / debate topics like relationships, marriage, kids, religion, etc.. for hours on end with a rational person and enjoy every minute of it. With as messes up as some of the forum members think is views on certain topics are, i'm quite sure he's genuine about his quest for information on said topics.

Originally Posted by carve

OK- so most people get married for non-applicable reasons. That's what I thought, and why I got married when I was younger.

Those reasons are applicable when it comes to the desire to be married. People "sign the contract" because that comes with getting married. And as stated, the majority of people get married because you're supposed to and don't realize the ramifications of the contract in certain situations.

Originally Posted by carve

I'm being devils advocate here. I kinda assumed I would one day, but then I asked myself "why do I assume that? What's in it for me?"

Fair enough.

Originally Posted by carve

I had to do more of most of that crap than ever when I was married. Marriage reduces incentive to do those things. Except looking for strange. I actually enjoy that, but don't do it anymore because I prefer being with my girlfriend. Marriage means women have LESS incentive to do any of that stuff than before, because you're legally locked in. It's not like if she doesn't do that, you can get divorced and sue her for maid, chef and prostitute service. If you could, then they'd be highly incentivized. What'cha gonna do? Conversely, if SHE want's the divorce, she can still sue you to perform your husbandly provider duties with nothing in return, and usually WINS. This is why marriage is a raw deal for men. There is zero punishment for women not doing their part, and zero protection for men if they get bored, but huge punishment for men and protection for women.

Yes, but you are not the norm. And it's not laws protecting women and punishing men. It's laws protecting those with no or less means to procure a meaning full job to support themselves. The only part of divorce that is skewed is child custody. If you and your ex-wife had reversed positions in your marriage, you would be able to ride the alimony pony for years. And you would have had access to 50% of the assets she had.

Originally Posted by carve

Legally speaking, that's all it is. Without the legally binding contract, you're not considered "married". That's the only legal difference. I suppose I'd be fine referring to a long-term partner/girlfriend as my wife, but it's not legally binding, and the contract is broken and a raw deal for men.

So let me ask you a question. You've spoken of your current girl friend with much favor. You say she's gainfully employed, has her own place, career oriented, etc... much like a female version of your self. You've also said that you married your ex because that's what you were supposed to do... cultural inertia.

What if you had never been married, lead a man-whore of a life until you met your current GF. Don't you think you're outlook would be different and you might say, dang, she's the one. i want to spend the rest of my life with her. And since you had no previous divorce experience, wouldn't you ask her to marry you? And for all the reasons you claim aren't good enough? It's really just your previous marriage and divorce experience that creates your opinion that those reasons aren't good enough, right?

[upstatedoc]

OP's not a troll, he's been here for years but I think he has been soured by his past relationship. You mentioned that your GF said "I sense you're not the marrying type" or something along those lines.. Do your GF a favor and tell her now your views on marriage and children. It's the least you can do for what sounds like an awesome lady.

[termigni]

because we are suckers? lol

[carve]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

OP is not trolling. He could discuss / debate topics like relationships, marriage, kids, religion, etc.. for hours on end with a rational person and enjoy every minute of it. With as messes up as some of the forum members think is views on certain topics are, i'm quite sure he's genuine about his quest for information on said topics.

Thank you. Spot on.

Those reasons are applicable when it comes to the desire to be married. People "sign the contract" because that comes with getting married. And as stated, the majority of people get married because you're supposed to and don't realize the ramifications of the contract in certain situations.

I'm in complete agreement, and I think that's the crux of the issue. I have no problem with the traditional institution of marriage (well, I think living in a tribal environment is more in line with human nature, but marriage is a non-coercive agreement and I'm fine with that), but these days that's not the part with the "teeth". It's like that thing I posed a few pages back; the vows are just poetry, and the actual terms fill volumes of legal books and depend on the mood of the judge (I know I always go straight toward divorce, but that's really the only time the terms are invoked other than a few other ancilliary rights).

It's like a bait and switch. What a pity.

Yes, but you are not the norm. And it's not laws protecting women and punishing men. It's laws protecting those with no or less means to procure a meaning full job to support themselves. The only part of divorce that is skewed is child custody. If you and your ex-wife had reversed positions in your marriage, you would be able to ride the alimony pony for years. And you would have had access to 50% of the assets she had.

I don't think it'd be any better if it were the other way around. To get the benefits, you need to fill your role. This isn't 1870 where a woman is screwed if the husband leaves.

I think alimony only makes sense for a few years so a woman who was a homemaker can get an education, or in the case that they're already living off of their retirement. Other than that, it's slavery. The judge gets to decide your earning potential, too, so if you decide to take a lower paying job or get fired, too bad. You don't own your life.

So let me ask you a question. You've spoken of your current girl friend with much favor. You say she's gainfully employed, has her own place, career oriented, etc... much like a female version of your self. You've also said that you married your ex because that's what you were supposed to do... cultural inertia.

What if you had never been married, lead a man-whore of a life until you met your current GF. Don't you think you're outlook would be different and you might say, dang, she's the one. i want to spend the rest of my life with her. And since you had no previous divorce experience, wouldn't you ask her to marry you? And for all the reasons you claim aren't good enough? It's really just your previous marriage and divorce experience that creates your opinion that those reasons aren't good enough, right?

She's awesome. I'd be less concerned of being married to, or even having a kid with, her than anyone I've ever met. If we're still together in our retirement years, I'll voluntarily support her (as I make more) married or not. And, married or not, we would help each other through hardship; we're just not legally forced to.

My outlook would be different, but only slightly. I've been saying for years the state should not be involved in marriage like it is, usually in reference to the gay marriage debate. It's only been in the last week that I've really thought about the "why get (legally) married at all" question.

We learn from the mistakes. Everyone thinks they're marrying "the one", but I see so much divorce and so many unhappy marriages.

[bimmette]

Carve, I like that you're asking these questions and I agree with many of your beliefs about people giving in to societal norms. I do hope, however, that your girlfriend is truly on the same page as you.