asdasd wrote:When will people stop using this stat without context? Look up the numbers for college educated, upper-middle class people who wait until at least their mid-20s. It's nowhere near 50%.
So when you're determining an average, do you always add/remove those factors which would conflict with your position?
The WRONG reasons:
Pregnancy, to escape a dysfunctional family,in the military, property/$ reasons, convenience/comfort, they don't think they can find someone better so they settle, to escape problems in their own life like unemployment...it's a long list.
Granted, these reasons can work both ways.
There is a lot to your post that I understand - there are scenarios where the woman is in a better position regarding children, home, $, etc.
But then again, it's exhausting and DEPRESSING listening to everyone faithlessly rant about marriage or the idea of marriage. There may be people out there who abuse the system and obviously do not genuinely care about the well-being of their significant other, but that doesn't mean each sex should keep attacking the other and stereotyping the idea of something that should be a wonderful addition to a couple's life. It's not the marriage that fails. It's the people that fail.
I recently worked for a woman who was not only employed by the government, but also the UN, a U.S. multi-billionaire (she directs a board regarding how his funds are distributed to charities), and also worked for 2 other powerful organizations that are involved with agriculture.
I was her personal assistant and knew her on a more personal level. I saw her entire life torn apart by her marriage. She married a man she thought she was in love with who developed alcoholism during the marriage. He refused to get a job, drank all day, and smoked in her house while she was gone. Was verbally and physically abusive. Long story short he gets about 250k a year from her in divorce payments. Still does not have a job. The only reason she was allowed to keep her home was because it belonged to her family originally. This is a woman who paid me to come over on Christmas eve and decorate her tree with her because she didn't want to be alone. It's also a woman who donates hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to charities around the world and helps to feed millions of impoverished people in third world countries. The first year I worked for her she won a $250,000 prize for her work organizing the nutritional care of children in Africa/Asia. She gave every single penny back to that cause. I never once heard her cry about how her marriage crumbled, EVER. You would never know she makes the money she does. She drives a ford focus, lives off pasta and cheerios, wears the same damn clothes that are falling apart, and lives in a tiny home.
The point isn't to prove that women are any better than men, or vice versa. The point is people need to stop getting up on a soap box and preaching about who is at fault, how they were hurt, etc. Dust yourself the f*ck off and get on with your life. If you have yet to be knocked down quit predicting how rotten your future will be based upon the mistakes of others. I learned a lot from working for her as an assistant. The amount of genuine care, empathy, and passion she brings to other peoples' lives on a daily basis far outweighs the negative experience she went through with one person. She didn't let a "failed marriage" destroy or define her life. She's also much older than I would say 95% of the people posting on this message board and I've been there to witness her go on dates and put herself out there again. If someone old enough to be your grandmother can step back on the court and man up then maybe you should be less concerned with something that hasn't even happened to you yet.
actuuuuually wrote:
More like why would women tie themselves down by getting married..
The two are not mutually exclusive propositions:
Men should not tie themselves down by getting married.
Women should not tie themselves down by getting married.
DivorceAtty wrote:
asdasd wrote:When will people stop using this stat without context? Look up the numbers for college educated, upper-middle class people who wait until at least their mid-20s. It's nowhere near 50%.So when you're determining an average, do you always add/remove those factors which would conflict with your position?
When you're telling someone their risk of divorce, it is disingenuous to use an overall mean when more accurate data is available. Particularly when certain, easily definable factors create such distinct outcomes.
If this were a civilized country, divorce and remarriage would be punishable by a legalized policy of the death penalty.
DivorceAtty wrote:
Men and women still get married today because they live in a fantasy world that despite the odds, MAYBE theirs will succeed. The FACT is that 1/2 of all marriages fail and I'd venture a guess that AT LEAST 1/2 of those that remain together, are miserable, but stay together for other reasons (financial, kids, etc).
So why do people still get married? I have no freaking idea
50% is not bad odds
Live together without marriage and you could still get screwed over financially especially if you have kids
Being able to extend health insurance to your spouse would be a big reason.
Another would be spousal privileges, such as visitation in the hospital, the ability to make medical decisions on your behalf (instead of your parents or the state), and automatic inheritance (in case you die), all are afforded to your spouse when you get married, but not to your long-term boy/girlfriend.
Take the case of Stieg Larsson... he didn't marry his long term partner. The profits from his books which were published posthumously all go to his father and brother, instead of to the person who helped and supported him while he wrote them. She's even sitting on a fourth manuscript written by him that she can't publish because she doesn't have literary rights to the characters.
[/quote]
When will people stop using this stat without context? Look up the numbers for college educated, upper-middle class people who wait until at least their mid-20s. It's nowhere near 50%.[/quote]
The context is for the AVERAGE US resident...which is NOT college educated, upper-middle class, mid 20s. So why would you select a population based on minority classifications?
The gains of a succesful marriage outweigh the risks of an unsuccesful marriage or life of an unmarried person.
First of all, these threads about "all men" and "all women" are silly. People are different and they want different things in life and you can't make such broad generalizations.
Second, to answer OP's question, you get married because you meet a woman you want to spend the rest of your life with and raise a family with.
Personally, I've had 28 happy years so far and no regrets. For me, it made perfect sense. Other people are different and want different things out of life, which is fine too.
areusure? wrote:
When will people stop using this stat without context? Look up the numbers for college educated, upper-middle class people who wait until at least their mid-20s. It's nowhere near 50%.[/quote]
The context is for the AVERAGE US resident...which is NOT college educated, upper-middle class, mid 20s. So why would you select a population based on minority classifications?[/quote]
Providing context would go like this:
On average, 50% (though this is truly closer to 40%, but I digress) of marriages end in divorce, though (this is the context part) this varies greatly based on education, age, and income. Then if the person fits the college educated, upper-middle class, mid 20s criterion, you can tell them that the percentage is closer to 20% for someone like them.
asdasd wrote:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/11/25/idUS176777+25-Nov-2008+PRN20081125This link has a link to a calculator that uses census data to give the odds of divorce for you individual situation.
Odds of divorce in the next five years. That doesn't tell me sh*t. You are making claims that the 50% is nowhere near accurate and you're based it on this? Come on, man.
Hey good news folks; marriage works. According to the marriage calculator only 14% of my cohorts have divorced and my odds for divorcing is only 2% for the next 5 years.
asdasd wrote:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/11/25/idUS176777+25-Nov-2008+PRN20081125This link has a link to a calculator that uses census data to give the odds of divorce for you individual situation.
Neliah2507 wrote:
I recently worked for a woman who was not only employed by the government, but also the UN, a U.S. multi-billionaire (she directs a board regarding how his funds are distributed to charities), and also worked for 2 other powerful organizations that are involved with agriculture.
I was her personal assistant and knew her on a more personal level. I saw her entire life torn apart by her marriage. She married a man she thought she was in love with who developed alcoholism during the marriage. He refused to get a job, drank all day, and smoked in her house while she was gone. Was verbally and physically abusive.
I am curious as to how a woman so driven and successful ends up with such a loser. This seems to happen often but not to this extreme.
Somewhat Confused Male wrote:
So can someone, anyone, PLEASE explain to me why an American male would get married rather than just have an un-married long term relationship with a woman?
Can't hold his gas in anymore.
but wait wrote:
asdasd wrote:http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/11/25/idUS176777+25-Nov-2008+PRN20081125This link has a link to a calculator that uses census data to give the odds of divorce for you individual situation.
Odds of divorce in the next five years. That doesn't tell me sh*t. You are making claims that the 50% is nowhere near accurate and you're based it on this? Come on, man.
Come on, man. There are two numbers. "People with similar backgrounds who are already divorced" and the "People with similar backgrounds who will be divorced over the next five years" one you were referring to. The first one is the one you are looking for. Over the time the data was collected, if you are male, college educated, married after 1980, and 27-28 when married, then 23 years after marriage(the longest period they have available for this criterion), the people with similar background who are already divorced is 15%.
toodarnloud88 wrote:
Being able to extend health insurance to your spouse would be a big reason.
Another would be spousal privileges, such as visitation in the hospital, the ability to make medical decisions on your behalf (instead of your parents or the state), and automatic inheritance (in case you die), all are afforded to your spouse when you get married, but not to your long-term boy/girlfriend.
These privleges can already be extended to somebody else through a medical power of attorney, a will, and being a named beneficiary on insurance policies. It is a little more work but you can have these benefits without the downside risk of marriage.
Insurance can sometimes be extended to a partner w/out marriage, but that depends on the specifics of your policy (and therefore likely your employer's preferences).
In other words, I don't think these are good reasons to get married.
An Old Married Guy wrote:
Second, to answer OP's question, you get married because you meet a woman you want to spend the rest of your life with and raise a family with.
You can spend the rest of your life with somebody and raise a family with them without getting married.
I get into debates about these kinds of topics with my business partner all the time.
Yes, many marriages are awful. The people should have never gotten married and both parties are to blame. Marriage in itself is not a good thing. A good marriage takes dedication and hard work.
The main issue here is a total difference in the way to men think. Men who are happily married enter into the relationship with the intention of making their partner's life better. The same can be said for the women in happy marriages. To us, it isn't about us. It is about giving your life to another person. To fully devote yourself to someone else, you must really love that person. You must want to die for that person.
Sure, it sounds very corny. That is fine. Laugh away.
Guys who go out and try to game chicks with cool lines and an alpha attitude are going to end up with a woman who is gamed by cool lines and an alpha attitude. Is that who you want to marry? Maybe, who knows. I don't care.
My business partner cannot understand why I like to eat lunch with my wife and kids a few times during the week. His view of marriage is based off of dull sitcoms like "King of Queens" and the like. He thinks men are supposed to hate their wife and kids. That makes me sad.
In the end, it has little to do with a marriage certificate. It has to do with the fact that if you truly love someone, you are willing to take a risk and devote yourself to them totally.
For the record, I have been married for 26 years. I am very happy. My wife is happy as well. We enjoy our kids.
I am sure one of you mopes is going to comment about her getting drilled up the ass by the milkman as I type this, but I can assure yo that her ass is probably sore from all the drilling I did last night.
TL;DR - Don't get married unless you would happily die for the woman.
Mr. Obvious wrote:
You can spend the rest of your life with somebody and raise a family with them without getting married.
Obviously you can, and in my case I don't think my wife or I would have done anything differently regardless of whether we were legally married. That being the case, I don't see any advantage to me in not being married, and being married does make many things like insurance simpler and there's less ambiguity as to what everyone's rights are if you get by a bus, etc.
I suppose if you are completely unwilling to take a risk on another person, you slightly limit your financial risk by not getting married, but not by much if you are going to have children together.