Living together before marriage, Y or No
Find a Conversation
Living together before marriage, Y or No
| Mon, 01-31-2005 - 5:45pm |
Living together before marriage
Saying you’re marriage minded......(I’m sure this has been posted before) thought it would be fun to see both sides.
Yes or No and why?
The Peanut
I say yes because this way you don’t need to rush into the marriage and you can see how they are on a daily basis (even if you take a two week vacation together, spend 5 nights a week) the daily routine can make or break a lifetime decision together. I used to think, no, proposal first but if you move in with the intent of marriage (w/in the year) then I think it’s the way to go. I also heard a statistic that people who lived together before marriage were more likely to get divorced, not sure why?

Pages
I used to think it was fine, but BTDT and won't do it again. Then I thought engagement was enough, but I've changed my mind there too.
I've also been around the boards enough to see too many stories of "we moved in together on the premise that we would get engaged/married & it's been X# years & still no ring/wedding date, what gives?"
I also have a young child so I'm sure that has influenced my position to some degree. I won't just play house when I want marriage & family.
I do not believe in a "trial period to see if we can live together" - you reach a point where you know each other's schedules, habits & mentality enough to know it will either work or not.
I'm with Sheri on the idea of having the wedding in the works within a few months. By that time, for me, I think I would know the commitment is solid enough. Proposals can contain ulterior motives & some people don't take it quite as seriously... engagements can last indefinitely if specific plans aren't being made.
I think the statistic is not cause/effect but correlation. The people who do not live together before marriage tend to be those who take it more seriously, and those who do live together (like the "trial period") might not. Exceptions to every rule, of course, but I think in general that is true.
Hmmm...
I have lived with someone twice in my dating life. Once when I was 24-25 and living in Vail, CO. I saw it as a way to get become closer, a step towards marriage, a commitment to my best friend. He saw it as a great convenience since he moved out there to be with me (so he said)... Hell, it fell apart because we both did things all wrong (ok, ok...maybe my depression and drinking was a bit of a problem, but that's a story for ANOTHER board!!), but even so...He was doing it to figure out if we should be together and I was doing it because I "knew" we should be together. Yeah, hindsight.
The second time was last Winter. I lived with my boyfriend for 6 months, we had dated for 2.5 months before that. I had always sworn off not doing it again, but last year I was tired of my rule and wanted to be more open, more willing. I loved that man, very much. He turned out to be using me and my family. He has lived with girlfriend after girlfriend after girlfriend...I was just one more. He's living with another one as we speak!! Should've realized that when he said the last time he had been in love was 11 years ago that MAYBE something inside him was BROKEN!?
Enough of my sappy story...
MY vote: I won't do this again until we have a formal engagement and a DATE SET. I don't want a ring and then have to spend the next X amount of years saving for the wedding, getting close, backing off, etc.
I have many friends that livig together has worked out great for them. It just ain't my bag. I want the formal commitment to go along with all the mind/body/spirt connection shmutz and lovey words.
Besides...I have had roomates since I was 15 (although not currently). I KNOW how to live with people. I don't need to practice or figure out if I can do so with one particular person.
This is an interesting question.
i have always been no on this, because GRAMMA says "if you can get the milk for free why buy the cow???" however, it could be a trial and error thing.. and I think if you move into together it should be w/ the intent to have a committment , maybe engaged w/in that following year..
I don't know I have also read/heard the divorce rate is higher for those that live together first. I think i am very ambilavent when it comes to this issue.
I also am afraid to give up my independence, I have owned my own house , currently have my own place.. To live w/ someone would mean we are sharing and if we did break up then what? I have to start all over.. I am very happy the way things are now.. and I do agree w/ Sheri that you can get to know someone just as wellw /out living together. I mean you can spend weekends together, at eachother's places, but you don't have to give up your independence just to "try it out" per say.. I think it is scary to me to live w/ someone and then if you break up they can easily walk out. It would be much more difficult of a break up to go through , rather than if you did not live together. and of course there are no promises that if you live together you will be married.. So i guess i am a NO on this like I thought I was.. I guess the only exception was if had the ring and we had the wedding planned and all that..
hmm....
I was a sociology major in college and in my Sociology of the Family, they explained the answer to your question.
The reason being, when two people live together outside of a legal committment to each other (marriage), it is easy to leave. Ok maybe it's a pain the butt to move your stuff out. But emotionally, it's easier to walk away, since that greater committment doesn't exist. The theory is that those people who live together before marriage, carry that same "easy to leave" attitude into the marriage. Nothing really changes in their lives between the living together and the marriage. Except for the wedding and the reception, their lives pretty much stay the same. Thus, that "easy to leave" attitude still exists when problems arise in the marriage, and those couples are more likely to divorce.
I personally won't live with a man until after we have said our "I do's." Not so much for moral reasons, which are all valid. But, as I get older, there are very few things left for me to "save" for my husband. And I that's something I want to give to my husband. He will be the first and only man I live with. Kind of chessy, but it's what I feel. :)
Now, the trick is finding that man...
>>IMHO, I think that the living together thing was invented by commitment phobic men who want to have their cake and eat it too...<<
LOL I thought it was invented by woman who haven't figured out when a guy just wasn't that into her, so she decided to get him to move in so he would see how totally great it was to live with her full time- thereby "tricking" him into being as good as married, so he might as well go the distance.
The guy, of course, was therefore getting sex more often, so he thought it was cool- until the next good-lookin' girl came along.
;)
I also think it depends on your lifestyle and personal assests. I don’t own anything and look forward to change so I don’t view it as big of a deal. Plus I want to be married one time and one time only (divorce only being an option if abuse or something weird happens down the road). I personally would want to live with someone first. I’ve only lived with one man my entire life and the next one will be with the intent of marriage, it doesn’t make me less into the commitment it means I’m taking it seriously! Yes it’s harder to move your stuff but better than realizing in a home you don’t mesh, works both ways. Even if in my heart I feel he’s the one, this way you don’t have to rush into the marriage, you can take your time and have fun in the process.
Here’s the viewpoint from a close male friend who’s for the living together first to see the other side:
Living together BEFORE getting engaged is important. Why?? Simple -- because an engagement is planning of a wedding, it is not meant to be a "trial" stage. If you get engaged, then you have already made up your mind that he or she is the ONE you plan on marrying. Nobody gets engaged to "see" if you have what it takes -- people get engaged because they "know" they have what it takes. Understand? You live together BEFORE getting engaged because you need to learn more from a personal habit level, living conditions, etc. This way he cannot hide anything from you. Like maybe he has a porn addiction you know nothing about? You'll never know until you live with him. Trust me, it's for everyone's benefit. Not sure where you read that statistic though -- regardless, with the divorce rate being at 63%, I don't think living together will be so divesting. Besides, it's actually VERY FUN. I love living with a woman!! :-) I have done it two times... and will do it again...
Of course, if after living together and you decide you want to get married, then cool. If not, then no big deal -- as nobody gets hurt, nobody gets embarrassed by calling the family saying "Our engagement is off!", nobody has to cancel any type of wedding plans, engagement parties, return gifts, etc. Sweety, being engaged is a lot of work and very expensive -- you have to put deposits down and more often than not, you don't get that deposit back on most things. My friend M got engaged and lived with her boyfriend about 1 month after the engagement. They lasted 9 mos. before he called it off. She was to be married with only 2 weeks left! They lost all of their deposits (nearly $10K) which were non-refundable. The sad part was when she asked him why -- he replied "After living with you, I honestly cannot see myself spending the rest of my life with you. I can only see us lasting for 5 or maybe 6 years before I would want to strangle you!" Can you believe he said that to her?? She cried and cried -- asking him to tell her what to fix and he could not think of anything. All he said was that she drove him crazy with her little habits -- how she ate only one kind cereal, how she always watched Seinfeld and wouldn't make any plans on Thursday nights, how she always somehow managed to make a crappy pot of coffee, etc. Little things like that just tore him up inside.
So bottom line.....if you're giving up s_x to him/her, then I believe you have shared as much as you can with him/her, so living with him/her should NOT be a big deal. He/she is not taking advantage of you – he/she is trying to discover if you are both right for each other. It should be welcomed and you should understand the importance behind the notion versus placing boundaries on something as important as that. You may not want too live with him/her -- in which case, don't live with him then. It is your right to say no, however, to tell someone "No, I will not live with you UNLESS we get engaged first" is asking a lot. I definitely would never do that. I'd tell her if you need a commitment, then I'll give you a promise ring -- but no way will I propose to you until I know for sure that you're the one. And with me, I can't know this until I live with her. The divorce rate is simply too high to rely on GUT when it comes to marriage. marriage is just too important I think -- it's for life! If a girl told me that, then I'd say "Ok... see ya." It's that important to me to discover our living arrangements before proposal of marriage. As I said, when I propose, it is because I know I want to spend the rest of my life with her and there is no doubt at that point... for better or worse -- not because I want to see if it's a possibility. Being engaged is the beginning of marriage -- not a trial of marriage in my opinion.
Oh well, I am not saying I am right. Many people think like me and others don’t-- it's really a toss up. Nobody is right or wrong -- but it can get ugly if the two people do not agree on this issue. If you really feel strongly against it, then don't ever do it. Just keep an open mind about it though. :-) Seriously, it can be a lot of fun. :-)
Pages