Should I stay or should I go

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-23-2005
Should I stay or should I go
8
Thu, 12-22-2005 - 2:10pm

Hi everyone Happy Holidays!

I need some rational advice here.
Been with the guy for almost 2 years - I Love him sooo much!! We are so attracted to eachother in every way - we laugh all the time, we have a strong friendship/relashanship/partnership - (We own a business together - and just bought a beautiful home together) -

HERES THE THING:

He's been married before - for 1 year - with a a girl he was with for almost 7 years - Things went sour after they got married..."the famous "SHE CHANGED"

NOW, (lucky me...) he beleives a couple should live together for 2 years before even considering marriage.

LADIES I AM THE WOMAN FOR THIS MAN!! THIS IS THE 1 FOR ME!!

I do everything for this guy to see that I am not like any other woman he's been with -
I am very sexy, I am successful, I have an education, I treat him so good - and I beleiv ethat marriage is a teamwork and support and communication with trust will keep it!

But I also know that I am worth it! He is 40 y.o I'm NOT!! and I'll want kids soon - and in a few years he will be 45 y.o and might not want any by then...
I hate to ask it this way BUT: Do I keep giving him the milk?? (I hate that term but you know what I mean)_

I don't want years to go by without us beeing engaged then when and if we do we'll have to wait a year minimum just to plan the wedding yadda yadda yadda- and YES I 've spoken to him about this - and this is how HE FEELS! %$&%%^$*^% I almost feel like I am forcing him - but that's not what I want -

HELP
PLEASE Any thoughts and or advice is welcomed

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-23-2003
Thu, 12-22-2005 - 5:55pm

I

 Start

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-22-2005
Thu, 12-22-2005 - 11:31pm
Move On, all im hearing is what you've done for this guy, how great you treat him Im not hearing how great he's been to you. If he trully, trully loves and cares for you he'd realize it as your walking out that door. Your to young to be wasting your time on this guy hes been there done that.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-23-2005
Fri, 12-23-2005 - 4:05pm

Thanks for your thoughts and advice,
Her's a small update:
This morning did we ever get into it!
I said that in normal loving relashanships there is nothing wrong with talking about marriage and spending lives together - the thing is, I am almost convinced that we are on 2 different pages in our lives or maybe even a different book - I asked him if he moved on from his divorce?, I also told him that I only wanted to do something good for our future so we can live comfortably financially and emotioanlly - I am not going to wait 2 years for him to propose to me and he understood that, but I am not gonna feel like i have to beg this guy to marry me either! I have more self worth to realise that I can do better - I also told him he will regret this when it's too late because I am separating myself emotionaly away from him - why should i invest so much into him and hold my breath?

He told me he never said that he never wanted to marry me but in his own words he is gonna stall this and strech it out as much as possible - because he is affraid to have to go through another divorce again!

So I am left with the question - should i stay and wait it out? or should I go and invest my time and love for someone that I may feel will never measure to my man now?

Thanks again - thoughts and advice are very welcomed and much needed
I will keep you posted

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-28-2005
Fri, 12-23-2005 - 5:13pm

Perhaps you need to realize why the phrase "she changed after marriage" COULD be his perception.

Alot of women have a different set of expectations and needs for their partner to live up to post-marriage vs. pre-marriage.

it's the "aisle/altar/hymn = I'll alter him" - theory that many young brides ascribe to.

They belive that to "get him to marry them" - they must do things his way, on his terms, for his needs, adopt his goals and values and standards.

They assume once they have a title of "wife" he's now obligated to cnosider them in aspects, wyas and percentages he didn't before.

And this is often what happens.

She adores his every word, she prioritizes his every action, she adopts his every need as her own to meet - pre-marriage.

So what he's saying "I do" to is literally having to never do anyting he doesn't want to do, and alwyas having her time, energy, money, and abilities at his beck and call.

She's saying "I do" while internally wiping her brow - going "I thought I'd never get him to the altar, before I ran out of things to give him, or built up so much resentment at everything going his way I refused to marry him".....

So while he's in the grooms room with his best man going "I"m getting a great girl, she gives great head, she pays her bills and contributes to the household,a nd she never has asked me to do a thing other than be myself".

She's in the bride's room going "I Have given my last blow job, and, he doesn't know it yet but i quit that awful job yesterday and I'm going to stay home and take it easy for awhile, all my life all I've done is work, and he can wait on me for a change."

But neither has a discussion about these expectations o changes in dynamic pre-I do. So they say "I do" have the reception, go on the honeymoon which again doesn't depict reality at all...and come home.

HE gets up to go to work, and finds no breakfast, no laid out clothing, and most importantly, her laying in bed and announcing she's quit her job, going to switch professions, is in a state of professional limbo and is going to "figur eout what she wants for the rest of her life."

Meanwhile, he's basically doing the same thing he did pre-marriage - going to work, paying the bills, doing whatever he wnats - only now she's got demands and expectations for him to meet, while she's not putting forth the attention, adoration and effort that sh was in the past.

He didn't say "I do" - to the change in dynamic between them or situation....he said "I do" to what he thought would exist post-marriage, as it did pre-marriage.

So realize that he's 40 and he's very accustomed to getting his way. Quite likely the last wife did precisely the above - to some degree. Particularly if she was younger than him and wanted the security and lifestyle he could provide for them, that she couldn't provide for herself alone.

And so she did "change" once she got a title....and he didn't like that and that ended the marriage. And very likely wehre the "living together two years" thing came from is that he figures if he had lived with her that long and she was able to not have demands, resentments, or requests....other than him being like he is - she can continue to do that without resentment or regret post marriage - becuase she couldn't put on an act" for two years.

Children are an issue - if you think you want them and refuse t rule them out as an option in your life and he absolutely does NOT want them, realize you marrying him means you won't "be a parent" like you thought.

While you might have a baby.....he won't parent it - he doesn't awnt demands and obligations or responsiblities except to his own pursuits, interests and goals......and so you'll be basically a single mother - whther you two stay together or not.

Which you're really going to regret - if that becomes the case. Because he'll still go to Bermuda - only without you and kids.

So you're banking a lot on what "could be if only"...while putting out in the present for his present-level benefit.

The phrase about the cow and the milk......here's a way to think about it. From a good male friend of mine i truly respect.

"I don't know why women use that cow and milk analogy. IF a man wants to be a dairy farmer he knows that going in and will buy the cow pretty quick. HE wants the milk from th cow for himself, and for a profit in his life as well. But if a man doesn't want to be a dairy farmer, he's more than content to buy the milk from the store and pour it out of a plastic container. A little money out - but alot less work, hassle, responsiblity and obligation."

His perspective makes it very clear that "milk" is not a concrete element as universally defined. Milk is not sex, or not money, or not a laundry service, it could be all those things, none of those things, or some variant of those things at some point in time, and not at other times.

What you're really wanting ot know is if you should spend your time and energy on a non-guaranteed investment...when you know that he doesn't really want what you want. Does that make it any clearer to you what you should be considering?

But, if he's absolutely "the man for you" - you'll take him on his terms. YOuo want "him" more than anything else you have seen, defined, or would consider.

Erin
quickblade14@hotmail.com

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-28-2005
Fri, 12-23-2005 - 8:57pm

HEre's a way to consider this.

To you apparently marriage means the following in some capacity, and not limited to this of course.

It means he he love syou more than he does now "or else he wouldn't marry you".
It means he's obligated to your well-being, security, success, and best interests "becuase he's married to you".
It means taht you're now free to pursue the next portion of your life "motherhood"....which he wants no part of or else he'd have kids already and be involved and participarty on a daily basis if he has them already.

So to you "marriage' is a line in the sand, without crossing it you don't have the assurance that you're "as loved as you're going to be, or as secure or optioned as you're going to be, or as guaranteed of non-abandonment (via motherhood) as you're going to be".

So that would make marriage as a very appealing status and package to you.

Now......here's what divorce does. Because marriage and divorce are strictly "legal contracts and realities" - they have NOTHING to do with feelings.

Divorce takes anything you two jointly earn and own - and splits it down the middle. It takes his assets which he's more invested in and less able to "re-earn" as a result of his age - and gives hem to you if this marriage doesn't work out and he's invested in a joint purchase or venture with you post-marriage.

If you have children, that makes him liable for support and obligation financially, if nothing else ethically and emotionally, for the next 22 years. That means he's going to work longer for less, if he has children - whether you two stay together or not. But it assures he's going to work longer for MUCH less on a personal level - if you two have kids and split.

Once you've been divorced, you've got the picture. Marriage isnot about love, romance, sex, or companionship - it's a legal responsibility, liability, and requirement. And divorce is not about hate or anger or loss of love - it's a legal ramification of having engaged in the legality of marriage.

He's now 40.......and i don't recall your age, but apparently you're significantly younger, at least 5 years, probably 10.

In the professional realm.....

HE's at the peak of his productivity and success, and everything he has not earned up to now in terms of accolades, promotions, and positions - he likely will not earn. At least not after 2-3 years from now. So where he's at financially in terms of the present, and preparing for the future - is already set in stone.

He doesn't have "time" because he doesn't have youth on his side - to re-earn what he loses in a divorce financially and there is nowhere else for him to "move up to" - which is what usually is what causes "financial upgrade" - a status promotion.

You're at whatever age you are, not preparing or thinking about reitrement, except as "marriage" which you've subtley alluded to, as being to on your retirement priority plan. You figure if you're married, you'll have whatever your husband has, and obviously you're not looking to marry someone with nothing, or with nothing but "optential" that is yet unrealized. Smart, not gold-digger, but smart. You want someon that has demonstrated their willingness and ability to earn a living, produce a successful result, be self-dsiciplined in savings and responsible for their present and their future.

You simply want to "cash in" with them as a result of marriage. But you've got plenty of years to put in at a career, and work your way up the corporate ladder, at if at 35 or so you're not married and with children - you'll probably being to prioritize very seriously retirement plans, home purchases, and putting down "roots" for your future security.

Notice nowhere in here did "love" come into the picture.........because love is not really a part of marriage. Nor is it part of romance.

Love is something you either have for someone or you don't, and yo'll have it in the same capacity you have for yourself - if that person has earned your respect, trust, and admiration as an individual.

What you're looking at is the "reality based" facts of why age-gap marriages demand prenuptial agreements, and why there are clauses in those agreements about limitations on number of children or if children are ot be "allowed" in the marriage at all. And because this person has invested more in every way in themselves and the lifestyle - they "call the shots" - and it's often why anything that is currently in individual ownership is fully paid for and never sold.....so that it never becomes community property and subject to dissolution in the event of divorce.

I think you heard this from your side of the "legal" fence...and when he asked you to move in you were pretty sure it was because he wanted to marry you, and you were being given a "test drive".

Realistically, why would anybody "test drive' a relationship. You're either compatible or you're not, and you'e either a good match or you're not. You either share values, goals, priorities, adn principles of you don't - and all that is readily available to be established and known concretely by both parties prior to cohabitation. If both parties are objective, discerning, mature, realistic, and self-aware and responsible, that is.

And from his side of the legal fence, he was saying move in because I love you as you are, and as this is. But I have no willingness to put myself and my assets at risk of dissolution again as a result of a legal reality called marriage/divorce.

That's the thing to realize....marriage puts everything he prioritizes in jeopardy or limbo. Divorce doesn't. Divorce is the blade on the ax of his fear....but his fear is not "marriage" as an institution, it'ss not your worthiness as an individual, it's not an "attachment" to his ex wife or that situation.

It's simply "waht I have I want to keep, and the way to do that is not change the status quo".

Because marriage of is no "value" to him.....it's a risk.

Because you see marriage as being the step you require to move on - it's a necessity.

Erin
quickblade14@hotmail.com

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-28-2005
Fri, 12-23-2005 - 9:38pm

Oh, I get it - yu're in my "marriage #4"!

Are YOU in for a shock!

So you've invested in this business, you have no income outside of this business, your entire life revolves around him and his needs, goals, stnadards, and requirements.

You've done this to yourself -and do keep that in mind as you continue to read.

Past behavior is the best indicator of future behavior.

So some period of time ago in his 30's....he was with a woman for 7 years, and married for 1. So he's very accustomed to one thing....as long as he dates/cohabitates he's cateered to, adhered to, prioritized over all else, and his goals, needs and standards are adopted as hers.

That's why the marriage lasted less than a year....she expected him to be considerate, and consider her needs, wants, and feelings post-marriage - lik ehe never did pre-marriage.

In that split, it would appear that he lost his shirt financially. Because he's 40 now, and he's getting another business started thanks to your 100% "manual labor assistance" and probably some investment financially.

And you've bought a home together, and in almost every state would take an act of God and congress to split the proceeds of, and the longer you remain cohabitational - the worse it would be to dissect who getts what and in what % and when.

So basically, with you he's now where he was when he met that first wife....and here's you - doing what she did. Wanting "marriage" as a commitment......aka "a protection of my investment".

So cut to the chase, since i've been here in the 3rd marrige at 27 that lasted till I was 35......get out while the getting is good and things are easily determined to be who's in what percentages.

Because the longer you work for the company - the less you have professionally and personally in a realm outside of him. The more you "benefit" on a daily basis from a lifestyle for working for the company -and thus you're entitled to nothing "more" as a result of a split

In short, whatever you put in there financially right now - you could probably get back- at least on paper. Don't EVER count on getting anyting back "except on paper" and I don't mean greenbacks. HE's going to have to be solvent financially for you to get your investment back monetarily.

As far as the house, as you're not married, it depends on who's name it is in, and who can prove in terms of checks and cashier's checks who paid what to whom and for what and in what percentage. Right now - you haven't lived there very long, it's worth "X", and splitting it in terms of waht percentage you each actually invested in it is possible to do.

The longer you live in it, the less you're "owed" in one sense...and the less it's worth the older the house gets. That said, you can't forced him to sell the hoouse so that you recoup your investment. But right now, you could possibly force him to refinance so that you recoup your investment, it would depend on the judge's ruling in light of how you present your case.

But he's done nothing 'criminal" at all...it's all civil matter and there is precedent in your state and laws, but everything is subject to judge's ruling and interpretation.

So I get what you're trying to do - whatever source you got your money from - they advised you "don't give it to him" - and you did under the guise of "we are starting a bsuiness".

You didn't really comprehend that starting a business as a rule for at least 5 and usually 10 years means "I'm investing in my own debt"....so in reailty, whatever cash you put in - you can't get back out - because there has not been enough profit from the business to pay its bills, and allow an overage of significant amount to pay you and NOT bankrupt the company.

So you need to write off whatever youp ut into the business as a loss on your taxes....and get a court order that says if he's solvent to "X"% or "X" $$$ amount - you're entitled to a set dollar figure. That won't be monitored by the court or the IRS or other banking entities - you'll do that yourself. But you can get the court order, and then enforce it - should he become solvent. If he never operates in the black to a high enough margin, if he ssells the business your court order can mandate that you receive a percentage of the proceeds of sale. Of course, if it goes bankrupt, you're out the investment. And do realize that if your name stays on the business as a partnership - you're legally liable for the entirety of the debt including IRS taxes, should he be fiscally irresponsible or insolvent.

That's what got me $100k in debt in the last divorce. HE operated the company in the red and I was the only free manual labor once I had made an investment of $20k, which he did not match to start up the business. When I left him, we had not paid taxes on the business and i was listed as a partner, and I was totally liable for the debt, as was he. The kicker was I wanted to be employed, earn a paycheck and establish a retirement and a lifestyle...that meant the IRS could and did come back to me to pay the entirety of it HE remained self-employed and eluded the IRS. So do get your name off the legal liability of this business, I know you think that protects your investment, but it really does not at this time, and it doesn't appear realistically that the relationship will survive, although the business might.

So you're looking to protect your investment, cash in on this being your "status and security and retirement and success package"...and it WILL NOT WORK.

He's smarter this go around than last. And he's likely got it financially set up to where he's the primary benefactor, while you've assumed he's the primary liability agent.

And it wno't be because he did it on purpose. It's just default reality.

You two own a business, if you can't run it to a point of solvency while being self-sufficiently supporting - he should run it. If he runs it - he reaps the profits, he pays the bills, and you release your liability and debt option, and you relinquish your investment until such point as the court order you get NOW, would be applicable to his situation, which you'll have to monitor.

You likely lack the skill or ability or experience to run the business and operate in the black while paying yoru bills at this point in time, being self-sufficient. To dissolve he business means that you lose your investment entirely - as it is unlikely the business owns assets that if sold, would return each of you your investment to date in terms of cash.

You two own a home........you're both by law fully liable for the entirety of the mortgage. The mortgage company doesn't care which of you pays - as long as they get paid. Right now, you're not married and you can prove hopefully with copies of checks - how much you peresonally invested from your savings and checking account that is all personally earned OUTSIDE of this business - into this house.

That's the "equity" you have in the house - in terms of investment. Very likely if you went to court now having lived in it a very short time, the judge would decree that you've gained no benefit from your investment in terms of daily living. You'd be entitled to all or a large part of that investment to be returned - and the judge could decree that he has "X" amount of time ot refinance the house solely in his name, relinquish to your attorney the stated amount due to - otherwise you return to court to proceed with a law suit for civil damages that include and are in excess of the investment in the home.

The longer you gain benefit from a daily lifestyle in the house.......the more "joint" your investment each becomes. The more joint the investment is, while it is a 50/50 split, which MIGHT be in your favor if you stayed for 10 years if he invsted significantly more than you monetarily in the downpayment, the more reluctant a court is to force a sale in order to give you your investment return. They can force him to refinance, giving him many months or ven a year to do it - to allow him to get a good interest rate, and make equitable arrangements regarding his other bills, due to loss of income because of splitting with you.

If you wanted to retain the house and he was good with it - could YOU Personally refinance the house solely in your name, return to him the investment he made in terms of %% in the percentage the court demanded, make the payments, insurance, and taxes? Probably not....at least not now - if your primarily revenue and income is the joint business.

So while he did nothing intentionally to benefit himself.....he waws NOT doing what you assumed he was - looking out for your long term best interests,well-being, security, and success. I'm sure that you assumed everything you were doing and investing at his request or advisemeent was based on his objective and discerning review of the "best interestss and long-term well being of you both"...and it wasn't.

You've heard that very clearly, I have no desire to go thru another "divorce". Rehear that more accurate "I have no desire, nor will I willingly engage in any situation that is or could result in my financial loss".

Nothing he's done with your time, money or abilities has the potential at this point to "cost" him anything. He wouldn't have it wihtout you - and you can't get back what you've got in it - at least not right away.

Because you weren't proactively and self-responsibly discerning and determining your goals, and looking out for your best intrests and long term needs, and self-identity - what you've done is fall into a hole - not a trap.

What you have- you cannot get back in terms of money or time or energy. IF you stay to recoup the investment, you lose opportunity and option to get what you want (marriage/children) because he doesn't want the same thing.

NOW you are being given the opportunity AGAIN to look out for your best interests and meet your needs, and live up to your standards, and be self-responsible - you always had this right and option - but you abdicated this authority, power, and control in "wanting him and only him and this relationship and what you were sure it entailed, offer, and could provide and would mean".

Do you want marriage? If so, he's an EXTREMELY unlikely candidate for it, and his previous history indicates he does not like "commitment" and will shun it. It doesn't mean you couldn't get commitment out of him...but it would likely mean he would not be happy with you in commitment and make your life imiserable.

Do you want children? If so, he's an extremely unlikely candidate for that position. His previous history indicates that if it doesn't involve his long term success and security AND his instant gratification - he dissolves it or disassociates with it. So while you might get him to make a fetus....you will not make him a father, nor will you have the assistance and partnership of a parent in him by your side - should you become a mother.

So if you want marriage/children - he's NOT where you should be. Despite the fact that your money, time, and energy have been put there - and some of it is irretrievable in light of investment and manner of investment........you can learn from this, move on and find someone who wants what you want - before you put your well-being into their hands.

Because every time that you want to be a little girl and be looked after, protected, and loved the way that you're doing it...what you're saying is "utilize my assets, take my offers, accept my assistance".......and you're not going to get a darn thing in return, not really.

Erin
quickblade14@hotmail.com

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-21-2004
Mon, 12-26-2005 - 10:09pm

Basically, neither of you are right or wrong for wanting what you want ... it just is what it is ... in that your timeframe doesn't match his, his doesn't match yours.

If he's "worth it" ... if you're certain that he is IT for you ... then, you simply enjoy the relationship for what it is without pursuing marriage as a goal. That would be my "argument" (for lack of better words) for staying.

If marriage is a goal, then my answer to the "stay or go" would be ... GO. Because he's not prioritizing marriage in the same regard as you are ... at this point in time, in your lives and relationship ... if he agreed to your wanting to "get on with it now" ... he'd likely resent it later.

So, if you go, like Jilly said ... there is also no guarantee that you'll find another man who wants what you want on your timeframe. And, there's no guarantee that THIS guy will be ready in 2 years, either. Basically, there are no guarantees EVER. You just have to go about your life the best way you know how to, while doing what's in your best interests.

You COULD start dating again, and VERY EARLY in the process ask each of your potential suitors, "do you see yourself married in two years?" .... don't waste time investing more than a few dates in each guy, and date fervently and frequently with passionate pursuit of finding the right guy with the right timeframe and compatible goals, etc. And with that, dating is a numbers game anyway ... so, if you're looking for the "perfect fit" to match what is within your timeframe and requirement for your future ... you'll likely have to date more frequently than the "average bear" to find the guy who wants what you want within 2 years or less.

If you ended things with him today (hypothetically speaking), you'll also have to take into consideration that since you already have several things "commingled" with your current BF ... that it will likely take a few months until you're in a "no strings" position in order to get out there and start dating again ... sharing a home with someone and then breaking up, it's not as logistically easy to "part ways" as it is in situations where the couple has no prior tangible commitments or obligations. There should also be the obligatory standard few months after any relationship prior to entering another one, just to "heal and cleanse" oneself ... to put it behind you ... so, you can start again with a completely clean emotional and mental slate.

So, if you ended it today, the "moving on" begins ... and you'd be in a position of dating free of any emotional or tangible obligations in 3 - 6 mos. That said, you'd have to knock those months off your timeframe ... or increase your timeframe for marriage and children by 6 mos or so.

Anyhoo, I think you get what I'm getting at here ... it's that ... if you impose a timeframe or structure into exactly when and exactly how you want to achieve these things (ie, engaged at 32, marriage at 33, first child by 35 ... again, just hypothetical, since I don't know your age) .... what it's doing is taking the OTHER PERSON out of the equation and imposing others to conform to what fits your schedule. If it's mutual, that's great, that's ideal ... if the other person has to conform to meet the others agenda, that's when resentments ensue.

If you were to stay with your current BF, in what areas are you willing to compromise? In what areas is he willing to compromise? Are you willing to give it another year, while offering yourself a 'silent ultimatum' and detach yourself physically and emotionally ... so, that when that year is up ... you "cut bait" without the current lag time that you'd likely have if you were to do it today?

Please take a gander at my post over on GT on the subject of "living together before marriage or committment": http://messageboards.ivillage.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=iv-rlguytalk&msg=24893.1&ctx=0

Good luck!!

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-23-2003
Tue, 12-27-2005 - 8:03am

No one can tell you whether you should stay or go.

 Start