This was a subject that I brought up in the middle of someone else's thread (oops [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img] ) and I kinda was wanting some input from you guys on it, if possible.<p>Actually, the whole not married thing really led to a good bit of my discontent, I think. I wanted to get married since girlhood...it's just one of those things that were always part of what I pictured for the future. He never wanted to, though...he always thought that getting married would "ruin" our relationship (HA HA!!). I never saw it that way, of course...I just saw it as never being "good enough" to bother with the trouble of marrying.<p>Then I have my affair...and THEN I get the whole "I thought of you as a wife" treatment. Well, it would have been nice to let me know that, buddy I never had a say one way or the other...he didn't want to marry, so it wasn't even considered. I tried to tell myself that marriage wasn't important, that it didn't matter as long as we loved each other...but the whole "assumed exclusivity" bit made me feel...jypped, I guess. This isn't justification, so extinguish those blowtorches...this is just an examination of my discontent, not an excuse. I've been with this man for almost nine years, since I was in high school...<p>Finally, the question...is being married all that different from a long term non-married relationship? If it is, how so? If someone has been in a relationship as long as I have, is it worth even debating? It does still bother me that we never married...but when I ask myself why, I'm not sure. It's like all the practical reasons lean towards not getting married...but all of the emotional reasons lean towards it.
My therapist says he wants me and my SO to discuss marriage and what it means to us...but I don't even know where to begin [img]images/icons/shocked.gif" border="0[/img]

I made a separate post to you on this topic:<p>http://www.marriagebuilders.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=37&t=016194<p>Cali

TTF,<p>You asked is there a big difference between a long term relationship and a marriage? My answer to that is yes there sure is and the fact that your BF wouldn't ask you to marry him suggests that he thinks so as well.<p>If it was all the same and you wanted to there would be no problem, but there is a problem. THe problem I think is called commitment. It is one thing to have a relationship and feel that you can leave anytime you want. No paper work, no alimony, no...<p>It is a far different thing to stand up before friends, family, and yes God and Vow to take this man/women for the rest of your life. When you do that you cannot just leave, there are divorce proceedings, there is the moral commitment you made, there are so many things.<p>More importantly all parties concerned KNOW that marriage is a tough commiment to make. Why? Look at the vows. Better or worse, sickness or health, etc. Those vows were created by people that know that marriage isn't one big party. It is a life time commitment.<p>So my not so short answer (sorry [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img] ) is yes it is different,and not only do you think so, so does your BF.<p>God Bless,<p>JL

It's a weird situation...we both know that marriage is different...but are not sure how. He likes to say that what we have is "like marriage", so why bother getting married and possibly ruin a good thing? When it comes time for me to explain why I want to marry...I can't do it...I get the same "well we're so close so why bother getting married?" bit...and I can't get my point across well enough to have him agree to such a thing. I don't even really know why I want to marry! I just want to...I want that safety and commitment, I guess...but why do I require marriage to feel safe?

TTF, I think Dr. Harley made some excellent observations on the pages that Cali posted about the difference in being married after living together, and I can't improve on those. But about the difference between being married and living together, why do so many living-together relationships fail? Why do people get married? I'd say it boils down to two main reasons. First, marriage makes the commitment between two people explicit on both sides. And second, marriage, whether it's "religious" or civil, has always involved a declaration of that joint commitment in front of a community. This is much like telling our friends we're going to quit smoking (for instance), so that if we falter in our purpose, they'll help to keep us up to scratch. We may falter in marriage as well, and if we do, we've got that much more motivation to try harder and not to fail in front of everybody. They'll usually help us too. That's unless we have the kinds of friends who take sides; and if marriage has "friends" like that, it doesn't need enemies. But that's another story.<p>If we simply live together, we may be lacking some of that community support to keep us together, but not necessarily. Even if we're not married, we still have a certain pride in staying together, and others can help. Apart from that, although just living together has a higher failure rate, I'm sure the probability of failure really depends on the reason why couples choose not to marry. If they avoid marriage just because it would mean letting government grab more of their money in taxes, that's a good practical reason, and shouldn't make any difference to their relationship. I'm sure too that some people avoid marriage because they see it as a convention that allows partners to drop into boring roles, or relax and get sloppy with one another. They'd sooner remain aware that a relationship needs work and maintenance and spontaneity to keep it vital, and a certain amount of evolution over time. They may value their partnership in a romantic way because they make it work without the formality of marriage, and doing so becomes a challenge to succeed at. I see nothing wrong with that.<p>However, this still calls for commitment to one another on both sides. That requirement is no less essential to success whether we have a piece of paper stamped "marriage license" or not. In my mind the piece of paper isn't so important. The commitment is.<p>But a commitment to what, exactly? Your partner talked about an "assumption of exclusivity." Well, "exclusivity" is a necessary ingredient: necessary but not sufficient. What's missing? There are two things I haven't heard.<p>First, I haven't heard the word "permanence," or anything that implies that. Sure, we can be "exclusive" with one another; but for how long? If living together is a "trial marriage," how long will it remain a mere trial, and when will it become a permanent commitment? Marriage is a promise "for as long as we both shall live." (Barring, of course, special circumstances such as intolerable abuse.) Living together in some people's minds is only a promise "for as long as we both shall love." If that's based on the assumption that "love is something we feel," it can translate to "if one or both of us doesn't feel in love any more, all bets are off." The marriage promise is based on the assumption that "love is something we make." It says something different: that "if one or both of us doesn't feel in love any more, we will work to recreate love."<p>Second, I haven't heard anything that implies an explicitly shared understanding of any commitment, whatever that commitment is. I expect you know what people say about the word "[censored]-u-me." A great deal goes wrong in relationships because one partner assumed things that the other partner never assumed at all. If we're lucky, we may happen to have the same assumptions in both of our heads: that our partnership is exclusive, that we're both in it for the long haul, that we're both going to work on it as necessary, and many other things besides. But that may be sheer dumb luck. If we want to dispense with the need for luck, we'd better declare our expectations clearly to one another.<p>So I'm hearing that your guy "assumed" you were exclusive; and all right, maybe you're taking liberties with his silence on that issue, but even if he gave you his own exclusivity, I haven't heard that he gave you his promise on that score. Or that you gave him your own. Neither have I heard that either of you gave one another a promise of permanence. I don't know what exactly he meant by "getting married would ruin our relationship," but how are you to know whether that means no more than it literally says (which could be OK, as I said above), or whether what he really means is "I don't want a permanent commitment." In the absence of a declaration to the contrary, I wouldn't blame you for suspecting the latter, and saying that's not enough to keep you there. Besides, if you think there's a big "ha ha" attached to the idea of "ruining" the relationship, there isn't enough commitment to work on it yet.<p>An affair isn't really a good idea, but it can get a partner's attention. So now that you've got his attention, it's certainly a good time to start bargaining for what you want, and getting open with one another along the lines of the MB principles. Whether you have a piece of paper or not. Good luck!