Discussion/Debate - Why do we keep the institution of marriage around? Why isn't it possible to just stay with the partner you love without risking half of your worth and livelihood? Do you feel life long relationships would be easier if the risk of losing everything wasn't there?

ShitfacedBatman · 2015-03-27T18:20:33+00:00

It's a feminist supported institution to prevent men from easily trading in their SO's for newer models once they hit the wall. It's easy to deduce this considering if a woman doesn't want to get married there is very little stigma but if a guy doesn't want to get married he's "immature", won't "man up," is afraid of commitment, etc. See every romantic comedy ever.

dallasdarling · 2015-03-27T15:17:48+00:00

There are still some benefits to being married, for both partners, namely being able to be covered under a partners employer health insurance, and ensuring that your partner can visit you in the hospital and help make medical decisions for you. The latter can be secured with a notarized document, but the former is exclusively available to married couples, as are tax breaks. These are some of the reasons people continue to participate in legal marriage.

Also, if you don't want to risk half of your net worth, sign a prenup.

dragoness_leclerq · 2015-03-27T08:48:52+00:00

If someone is really concerned with not losing half their wealth they're going to have to take a hell of a lot more steps that just not getting married. Commonlaw marriage and "palimony" are very real things. But so too are prenups and postnups. I know here in California, prenuptuial agreements wield a lot of power within the courts.

It is possible to greatly decrease the financial risks or the chances of losing everything should your marriage fail, but the problem is, people fail to take the steps necessary to prevent that from happening.

Too many marriages happen with one party bringing exactly nothing to the table so they can take the other party's stuff.

Can you quantify this statement? How many is too many, even percentage wise? 10%, 60%?

In 2015, women are in the workforce in quite similar numbers to men and even out-earning their male counterparts in some sectors. The days of women sitting idly, waiting for a man to take care of them are long gone for the most part.

This notion that all divorcees are looking to financially rape their STBX spouses and the courts just handing over half the assest willy-nilly while the husband stands helplessly by is something of an urban legend.

you destroy the core of what a relationship really is: Two people who want to be with each other for as long as possible.

Yeah, that very well may be "the core" but there's a whole lot of shit surrounding it that needs to be approached pragmatically. That whole "being with each other for as long as possible" is only one part of a long-term relationship.

But I don't have any idea what you meant by "commercializing love".

trpMilo · 2015-03-27T16:59:22+00:00

Kids. Only makes sense for the kids.

wazzup987 · 2015-03-27T12:41:38+00:00

There isn't. marriage is dying, good riddance. If some one demands a ring or marriage you say no and explain why, if they persist leave them, but as a man DO NOT GET MARRIED.

tomatostew · 2015-03-27T17:49:49+00:00

Marriage is around for civil, financial, and religious services. In addition, a vast majority of marriages are between people that love each other and the choice to do it wasn't a business decision. I think there is a problem in debating this type of question on this sub. Some people here see marriage as a merging of lives, some see putting assets in danger, and some see other things.

Really though, people don't go into marriage with the end of a relationship in sight. That's kind of the whole point to some people. Marriage and love are a few of those weird things that may not make perfect sense all the time, but when it does, it just does.

Melodyheart · 2015-03-27T20:52:37+00:00

The issue is with marraige is a mix between religion traditions still being part of the government and people abusing the hell out of the system if everything wasn't written down in contracts.

While there are people who abuse the system as it is now, and it's mostly abused in the divorce system. This is because the divorce system isn't very refined. Considering divorce has only gotten big the past few decades, and the government's speed at fixing problems with it's systems, this isn't too surprising. While this system isn't prime, we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water. There should be more flexible marraige laws, as well as something such as "long term relationship laws." The long term relationship laws is a middle ground. Instead of being married or not married, there would be laws along the lines of a long term relationship being something "officially" documented. A flexable, safer document saying that a significant other is considered a partner, and is less extreme than the marraige gamble. This would also allow wiggle room for people in non-traditional relationships such as polyamoury or polygamy, avoiding people who are in those situations to accurately fill out taxes and what-not. That way, traditional people can work their way up to marraige one step at a time, going from "single" to "longterm relationship" to "marraige" through a period of many years, as they come to know what their future will look like with this person. They could even stay in the "long-term" for the rest of their lives if they so please, having most of the advantages married people have with less of a risk.

While it sounds all fine and dandy, as any kinks could be worked out, this would never make it. The main reason: religion still being a major player in the government system. Because let's face it, ask a random person in the streets, male, female, straight, gay, etc, they will probably say they would like to get married. Whether that's what they actually want, whether that's actually the best course of action for them or not, most of society still holds traditions above change. Saying marraige is a "feminist-driven agenda" or "patriarchal suppression" is just plain retarded. Marraige still exists as it is, and probably won't change much because we are all part of species that is a sucker for habits and tradition. Anywhere from sitting in the same seat in class every day to keeping laws that don't apply anymore, we don't change easily.

Comments