A
female
age
36-40,
*rganique
writes:Hello dear Aunts :) and uncles :)What is your position on living together before marriage? Before engagement? What do you think the pros and cons are to each scenario?Some say that while living together, the man gains everything, while the woman not so much. How does that popular saying go? "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?"Do you think that when living together without a further commitment, it decreases the man's motivation to propose and make it official?Just wanted to get a little friendly discussion going :) Reply to this Question
Share |
Fancy yourself as an agony aunt? Add your answer to this question! A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (11 December 2012): My husband and I moved in together one year before we got married. We were engaged for about a month and a half before we got our place.
With that said, I think it's all about personal preference. If you're already committed to your partner and the relationship, then do what you feel is right for you. Living together is a good way to be 100% sure you're compatible if you do choose to marry in the future.
I was 23 and living with my mother when I decided to move in with my now husband and things were really rough at home for both of us. We decided that moving in together would be beneficial for both of us.
Financially, we would have preferred to have stayed at home for the year before our wedding because it would have saved us A LOT of money...but we decided that our mental health was more important and we could still make the move fairly comfortably. It was the best decision.
Long story short, I support moving in before marriage if the circumstances are right. I wouldn't recommend doing it if the relationship isn't serious. (Some people, move in with one partner, then move home, then move in with a different partner etc). That would make break-ups more catastrophic than if you lived alone or with roommates/family.
Do what's comfortable. I agree that people that are unsupportive of "living in sin" tend to be more conservative. Our families certainly did not approve.
A
female
reader, Staceily  +, writes (10 December 2012):
 I think people against living together before marriage are typically old fashioned or are older in general. I lived with my husband before engagement and marriage. I never had a thought otherwise or thought it could be negative. My father was against it but there wasn't much he could do. I was there every day anyway, most of my things were at his place, I worked 5 minutes from where he lived versus the 30 minute drive from my house to work. It was the logical choice in my opinion. Besides I really believe it is best. You get to know someone the most when you live together, you spend all of your time at home and you can't get a break to leave for the night or a few days. When you get to know someone as well as you do living together then you know if he/she is someone you want to marry. Whereas you could get married without ever living together and have it end badly, like a cousin of mine. They had issues they would have known before ever getting married if they had only lived together first. My husband also lived with a woman before me. Before living together they saw each other a few times a week, they moved in together after 2 years and once they did it lasted for only 8 more months. He realized he wouldn't ever marry this person. Who knows what would've happened had they not lived together first. Either dated for an eternity the way they were or got married and realized he wasn't happy then end in divorce. I believe marriage is forever so you should know someone as much as possible and do all you can before entering into marriage. It's a lot easier to leave when living together than to get a divorce and have a failed marriage. Living together beforehand doesn't equal forever happily married of course but I don't see how it would hurt or harm a future marriage.
To be honest I don't even understand the statement 'don't buy the cow when you can get the milk for free' when it comes to living together. That's more for people who are having sex, which most couples are having sex long before marriage. I don't think living together then means he will never marry you. I think it is the step on the way to marriage, it's a huge deal and committment. Dating, committed, living together, engagement, marriage, kids is the order I believe it goes. Of course everyone is entitled to what they think is right but that has always been my view on the way it should go. Know before living together if marriage is what he ultimately wants would be good advice if you are afraid of being stuck in that situation. If he isn't thinking of marriage at all or doesn't believe in marriage then that would be something to know before living together and taking the first plunge.
...............................
A
female
reader, So_Very_Confused +, writes (10 December 2012):
 My father is living with someone. They will never marry but she's as much my stepmom as anyone will ever be so I call her QSM (quasi-stepmom) and we all love it. They wanted the companionship without the financial legal entitlements.
For some folks marriage is a must. My best friend would NOT move in with her now husband till they were engaged with a date set.
One of her children did not move in with his wife till after they were married.
One of her kids did live with her now husband before they were engaged... it killed her mother but she held her tongue.
I know of couples that lived together for 6 years and were happy so they got married. 2 years later, they divorced.
My husband moved in with me in December 2011. We knew we were going to marry and neither of us cared if we did.... we got engaged two months later and then married in October.
So it happens both ways.
If you want the marriage experience and you will co-mingle funds after being married, then by all means have the whole experience... things do change with that piece of paper... although since we moved in and began living as husband and wife from day one we were co-mingled and to be honest that marriage ceremony was just a piece of paper and nothing changed and no feelings changed...we were that committed to each other before the ceremony...
the only advice I can give you is that if you want a man to marry you, do not live with him expecting it to lead to that unless you two have discussed it and you have a firm understanding of where he sits on the topic.
IF you want to marry a man and he says "oh i'm not sure let's live together for a year and revisit it then" I'd not hold out much hope.
Same with open ended engagements... I think when folks get engaged there needs to be a date in mind for getting married... not "oh in a few years" no... 6 months to a year is all you need to plan a huge wedding... no need for a longer engagement.
to me living together is not the means to the ends...
so many folks married years and years ago before they had sex or lived together and they survived just fine.... we have developed a throwaway mentality with relationships (and things).
It's a personal choice OP, but if you want marriage and you move in with a man without discussing that you want marriage first and you are just living with him temporarily n the way to the alter, and then two years down the road you find out he does not want to get married... he's happy with things the way they are, then you can't be mad as you didn't discuss with him in advance what moving in meant.
...............................
A
male
reader, Danielepew  +, writes (10 December 2012):
 I don't think a hard and fast rule can be made, but, when two people decide to live together and that works, it is possible for one of the parties to stay unmarried. That does not make much difference for a man but often it does make a lot of difference for a woman, who wants some sense of security that just living together does not provide. So it is usually the man who will say that he doesn't want to marry, things would be just the same, et cetera.
You Wish described a situation where the woman doesn't lose much financially or career-wise. I beg to slightly differ from her. Once two people move in together, a degree of commitment is made.
Personally, I think it's best not to live under the same roof unless both parties agree as to the kind of relationship they want. Which may be that they will never marry; that happens, too.
Just for the sake of illustration, I have met people who are married but live in separate homes. That worked for them under their circumstances.
...............................
A
female
reader, Honeypie +, writes (10 December 2012):
 I personally think living together is the way to go. I don't think marriage is the "ultimate goal" for a woman (or man).
I think when you DO live together you get a much better sense of your partner and who he/she is and how they deal with various issues. But I DO agree with YouWish - I would still want to stay independent. I would no co-mingle finances or share phone plans, bank accounts, car loans.. NA DA. Only 1 person would be on the lease. and so forth.
If we got married after a year or two living together, things could be united in every way.
Do I think a guy is less inclined to get married if they live together? I think that depends on the guy. I think ANY guy who is not really ready or interested in marriage - isn't fully committed emotionally anyhow, so I don't see him being more or less gung ho on getting married.
...............................
A
male
reader, MikeEa1  +, writes (10 December 2012):
 I don't get it really. If a man and woman commit to a relationship then that's the way forward regardless of how many institutions get involved. If you and your man are on the same wavelength why does the church or the government have to get involved. if you can't trust your partner who can you trust?
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (10 December 2012): I don't see how a man would benefit just because you're not married. That makes no sense. OP having a ring on your finger is a guarantee of nothing. Besides the vast majority of people live together before marriage. How can you get married to someone who you don't even know whether their living habits are tolerable?
...............................
A
male
reader, Sageoldguy1465 +, writes (10 December 2012):
 You write: "Do you think that when living together without a further commitment, it decreases the man's motivation to propose and make it official?"
I have made at least a dozen submittals, on this site, to remind women that MEN have, or get, all the "power" in a live-in situation. Women seem Hell-bent on granting it to them.... EVEN tho' that little voice in the back of their mind keeps saying: "Are you crazy???? This guy isn't concerned about your best interest!... he's looking for a piece of tail, for himself, being right there at the same address....."
AND it's most-often the woman who suffers more the breakup... since SHE has "invested" her feelings in the arrangement; whilest the guy invests only an afternoon to bring his things over.....
I would almost-always discourage a woman, any woman, from exposing herself to this....
P.S. It doesn't "decrease" his motivation, it ELIMINATES it!!!!!
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (10 December 2012): For me there's only one thing that matters and that's whether you work well living together. There are no guarantees no matter how long you've been together. Being married means a hell of a lot more problems if you end up not being able to stand living with someone. I always advise having a test run first. Other than that marriage changes nothing other than some tax benefits and other legal rights. You don't need a wedding to have a lifelong commitment.
...............................
A
female
reader, YouWish +, writes (10 December 2012):
 There are pros and cons either way. I wouldn't say the man gains everything because the convenience factor benefits both the man and the woman (since this is in the context of heterosexual relationships, I'll continue this context for the sake of this discussion).
There is a difference between living together and "playing house". All too often, women who live with another man play house, share bills, become domestic and manage a household that doesn't exist. If a woman treats the living together situation like co-existance, then it's an equal opportunity. Never combine bills, pay half separately, don't "take care" of him by doing everything, packing his lunch, doing 100% of the cleaning, or paying his bills while he's in college in the hopes that he'll return the favor when he's out, and do NOT have kids.
In my opinion, the "why buy the milk" argument has already been nullified when sex enters the scene. That saying originated when parents were telling their daughters to remain virgins until the wedding night. It doesn't fly in the live-in scenario.
A woman becomes disadvantaged when she starts giving up too much in the live-in scenario and mistakes it for the security of a household. I'm talking about career choices, like passing on a promotion or giving up a job to move to be with the guy, or not advancing a career because it would mean not being home when he wants her to. And I'm talking about finances, like her paying his way through things, combining credit cards, leases, moving into a house he owns but she makes payments on, joint ownership in cars, and bank accounts. In my opinion, unless there's a marriage, NEVER make your finances vulnerable by combining them with a guy who has the freedom to bolt and leave you the bag. This goes both ways, as a girl can do that to a guy too.
It's just that the women are more apt to give up too much. What if she gets pregnant while they're living together, and the lack of a marriage makes it easy for an immature guy to bail? Then she has a kid, financial hardship, AND bills he's bailed on.
A woman must never give up independence before marriage. If she moves in with a guy and it's a true 50/50 roommate situation where there are no kids, the bills and chores are split 50/50, you never ever combine financial stuff like credit cards or bank accounts, and one isn't supporting the other with the promise of making up for it in the future, then it's a great arrangement. However, like I keep saying, the peril is when the woman mistakes domesticity for commitment and gives up her future. Living together is NOT commitment. There are things you just don't ever do until you're married, and if you don't believe in marriage, then never do them, and never entice a partner to do them for you.
Hope that makes a small bit of sense!
...............................
|
