Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Over 45  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 GrandmaBooBoo
Joined: 12/30/2006
Msg: 39
view profile
History
over 45 men and marriage???Page 2 of 9    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)
^^^^ This is really nice.....in THEORY; but the problem with the REALITY of it IS: that while it makes things more affordable for the lesser earning partner, it simultaneously LOWERS significantly the lifestyle of the higher earning partner.

HENCE: Say, one earns $5,000. per month, the other earns $2,500. per month. If the 2nd partner pays EQUALLY, then they have 0 money left over.....OR, the higher earning partner MUST LOWER their standard of living to where the lower earning person can afford to pay their 50%.

I'm certainly not willing to lower my lifestyle in my "golden years" just so someone who wants the financial security of a relationship so they can make their own life more comfortable...for THEM...while making mine LESS COMFORTABLE for me.

Get it?

BTW: New Deal, you make some excellent points. "Happiness" is "subjective"; and you're absolutely right, happiness to one person is being able to say they've traveled and purchased new vehicles...but to ANOTHER person, happiness IS...dieing in peace (of mine), with integrity and dignity. Whether this comes through knowing that they never cheated anyone and always carried their own weight; never raised an hand in violence to another human being, or that they gave to charity. But mostly, I think that you'll never get some people to admit that "their definition" or what THEY need to BE happy is no more (or less) valid than someone elses...which may be totally different from their own.
 GrandmaBooBoo
Joined: 12/30/2006
Msg: 41
view profile
History
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 7/22/2010 7:49:34 AM
LOL! But...you've failed to show where 2 can live as cheaply as one EQUALLY...when one lifestyle is significantly "higher" than the other. EXAMPLE:
House payment: $1500 per month. That's $750 for each partner. PLUS now you add in, $1,000 a month for 2 car payments, and now that originally mentioned "travel", another say, $6,000 per year.

There's no way you're going to convince ME...or anyone else who can do the math, that the higher earning partner is going to SAVE a penny by the "2 can live cheaper than 1" scam. The ONLY way they're going to save anything is to lower their own standard of living....which...they could do WITHOUT getting married....or 2) marry someone who earns MORE...and who is willing to subsidize their quality of life.

Forget the emotional arguments and the "those who keep score are just bad people, or bitter"...LOL! just look LOGICALLY at the FACTS.
Just as you say
Remove the cost of rent/mortgage/maintenance of one dwelling.
LOL! HOW do you figure it would save me anything if some guy who can barely afford $500 a month rent were to move in with me? IF he can't afford the $500, then he surely can't afford the 50% of MY lifestyle.....which his share (50%) of would be $750.


And any couple that is "keeping score" on who earns more and who pays more... is creating unnecessary problems.
As long as income total exceeds total expenses... who cares?
Well, I'd have to say that ANYONE who's over the age of 45 yrs old, and NOT looking to take on new financial burdens...that's WHO CARES. By the time one is 45 they're supposed to be looking toward shedding those financial burdens, not finding new ones.

99.9% of people just can't seem to separate fact from fiction (finances from romance)
LOL! If I fell deaf, dumb, blind and stupid in love with someone...I would have little concern for what he earns as long as he could "support himself"; and that his financial obligations didn't drain my resources to the point that I had to lower my own standard of living. WHAT I WOULD mind would be....if he took me to divorce court 5 years later and got 50% of something that he put less than 10% into...simply because he thinks that 2=5; because nice people don't "keep score". Mark me down as one who's "not nice".
 Smarts and Heart
Joined: 12/15/2009
Msg: 42
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 7/22/2010 10:23:47 AM
GrandmaBooBoo


HOW do you figure it would save me anything if some guy who can barely afford $500 a month rent were to move in with me? IF he can't afford the $500, then he surely can't afford the 50% of MY lifestyle.....which his share (50%) of would be $750.


Finding someone on your level is important. No one said that you shouldn't.

What you've taken as an example is an extreme. If a man can't afford $500 a month rent and has no assets by this age it says something about his character, goals and asperations. Now before anyone starts jumping on me for this generalization, yes we often go through hard times, divorces, business failures etc but the true character of a person comes through with how he deals with these "bumps" in the road. If you've been a go getter all your life you'll bounce back . Where there's a will there's always a way. (and that doesn't mean latching on to someone like a leech.)


Spliting $1500 living expenses isn't unreasonable or asking alot. It simply comes down to choosing someone compatible with your lifestyle. It's about finding compatibility and happiness and obviously you wouldn't be happy with less and that's absolutely your right, neither would I.

But were you to find someone on your level then you'd both benefit in positive small ways.
 ForRumOnly
Joined: 3/16/2009
Msg: 44
view profile
History
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 7/22/2010 1:49:10 PM
GBB is right, actually.

Before sharing housing expenses:

Her:
Income: 5000 / mo
Housing: 1000 / mo
All other non-discretionary expenses: 2000 / mo
Available discretionary funds (travel): 2000 / mo

Him:
Income: 3000 / mo
Housing: 1000 / mo
All other non-discretionary expenses: 1000 / mo
Available discretionary funds (travel): 1000 / mo

After sharing housing expenses:

Her:
Income: 5000 / mo
Housing: 500 / mo
All other non-discretionary expenses: 2000 / mo
Available discretionary funds: 2500 / mo

Him:
Income: 3000 / mo
Housing: 500 / mo
All other non-discretionary expenses: 1000 / mo
Available discretionary funds: 1500 / mo

Sure, they each have more money available for discretionary expenses, such as travel. However, if she wants to spend 2000 / mo on travel as before, he still cannot match that even with his improved financial situation, so she must do one of the following:
a) travel less so as not to leave him behind
b) leave him behind sometimes since he can't pay his way
c) subsidize his travel

In marriage you'd probably pool the savings and adjust to use what's available, but if you keep your assets separate, then difficult choices result.
 GrandmaBooBoo
Joined: 12/30/2006
Msg: 45
view profile
History
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 7/23/2010 7:03:52 AM
:-) I'm glad MOST of you get it!


Money being more important than loved ones is a prioritization that excludes having loved ones who are more important than money.
First of all....you're NOT a "loved one" before starting a relationship...and that's what THIS topic is about. People can't find someone WITH money...who will make them a "loved one"; but they're all to eager to put anyone who HAS money into the category of "greedy", for not intentionally seeking out someone to "rescue"...and provide travel and cars. Ever notice how it's always those "without" who are calling those "with"....greedy??? LOL! It seems to me that those who worry about others having too much....are just as greedy as anyone else. They just don't stop to take an objective view or their own agenda.


What you've taken as an example is an extreme. If a man can't afford $500 a month rent and has no assets by this age it says something about his character, goals and asperations. Now before anyone starts jumping on me for this generalization, yes we often go through hard times, divorces, business failures etc but the true character of a person comes through with how he deals with these "bumps" in the road. If you've been a go getter all your life you'll bounce back . Where there's a will there's always a way. (and that doesn't mean latching on to someone like a leech.)
Spliting $1500 living expenses isn't unreasonable or asking alot. It simply comes down to choosing someone compatible with your lifestyle. It's about finding compatibility and happiness and obviously you wouldn't be happy with less and that's absolutely your right, neither would I.
But were you to find someone on your level then you'd both benefit in positive small ways.
That's exactly what I said in my first post...that I know LOTS of guys over 45 who would LOVE to get married...so I don't get the OPS observations. I think what she really meant was....that she can't find a guy over the age of 45..>WITH MONEY who wants to get married. LOL! as for the rest of it....I was only using myself as an example....hopefully to eliminate all the male bashing about the greedy men who care more about their money than they do about....
How do I love thee? I dunno, let me count my money and I'll get back to thee...
I love you outside the bounds of my checking account.
I don't think Browning even had a checking account.



The main difference is he only has a $1000 leftover compared to your new found $750 which takes you to $3500. Sounds like a sweet deal for you.

The flaw in your math is that you based it on income and not expenses in your first post resulting in a zero return for you. You make more therefore you can save more than someone making half of what you do. But that does not mean he cannot share equaly in living expenses. He just can’t save like you can.

Now of course there is more to the equation when it comes to expenses, but each case is different and has to be discussed and agreed upon. I do think Fred has it right when you actually do the math.
NO, NO, a million times....NO!!!! And let me show you WHY. (I know this from 1st hand experience from the last 2 men that I dated "seriously") You see....in general....most men will think this way ^^^^; but most women don't! MOST men....will get REALLY PISSY if I want to take "my savings" and go on a nice vacation...that THEY can't afford. MOST men have a real issue letting a woman pay. Most women....have ZERO problem letting a man pay for all "luxuries"...in fact....many of them EXPECT it.

ForRumOnly gets the prize here:
Sure, they each have more money available for discretionary expenses, such as travel. However, if she wants to spend 2000 / mo on travel as before, he still cannot match that even with his improved financial situation, so she must do one of the following:
a) travel less so as not to leave him behind
b) leave him behind sometimes since he can't pay his way
c) subsidize his travel

In marriage you'd probably pool the savings and adjust to use what's available, but if you keep your assets separate, then difficult choices result.
That's EXACTLY right.
But I further agree, that in a MARRIAGE...as long as it's going WELL..."the 2 become 1" and it all gets joined together. THAT is where the arguing comes in. Suddenly, the partner with the greater discretionary income discovers that NOT only is he/she subsidizing the lower earning partner....but ALSO...the lower earning partners, children, parents, brothers and sisters, etc.

LOL!!! You keep trying there Fred, you'll get it eventually. Ahhhh, NO, you don't combine the 2 incomes BEFORE taking the 50%......by doing that...you've already subsidized...and getting ready to subsidize AGAIN. (I see your wife trained you well in Feminist Economic Theory....but 2 does NOT equal 5.

Ya know....I can't speak for the men about their own experiences with women who were angry at them for earning more; but I can speak (with empirical knowledge) about my own experiences with men who resent and were angry that I earned more. It's a "green eyed" demon that rears it's ugly little head no matter what. Don't let anyone tell you that it happened because the one with more money flaunted it!!! NAY! That's more often than not....NOT the case. "Insecurity" is a very ugly thing to live with, and the insecure/jealous person will find a villain hiding in every nook and cranny. They will create "bookkeeping" to justify their "demands" (position) rather than just ADMITTING that...they LUCKED out and found someone who was loving and generous. I think that a LOT of marriages could have been saved had the partner who was being "supported" would have just looked at their spouse and SAID.....THANK YOU!!! I APPRECIATE what you do FOR ME! But, unfortunately....instead...they come up with skewed mathematics...and site stupid poetry to demonstrate that the person doing the supporting...is actually an evil dog with no spiritual value simply because they're able to do the supporting. In essence....I certainly can't blame ANY man (or women either) who's over age 45....and finally gotten the message that society teaches today that they're damned if they do...and damned if they don't. They may as well spend everything they have on themselves...'cause no matter what they do...someone (always with less....very rarely someone with more) is going to condemn them for it.
 AintNoDeal
Joined: 2/3/2010
Msg: 48
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 7/24/2010 12:15:28 AM
Louise is right - get two new roommates and pool your resources to buy a Suburban and a camper trailer. You're all set for adventure!!

Also stock up on baked beans.
 forums1
Joined: 2/14/2010
Msg: 49
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 7/28/2010 11:35:59 PM
"I would love to be able to travel again someday. I'd love to be able to buy a new car again someday. That means I'll need to be part of a two income household again. "

That would turn me off right there. "I" would love to travel, "I" would love a new car, so "I'll need" to be a part of...

What exactly are you going to be doing for him other than using the extra money he brings to the table to spend on things *you* want? Everything there is focused on money and pretty much screams "gold digger".

Whereas someone who wants a *person* (not their wallet) would be focusing on the person, not their income... "I'm looking for someone to enjoy time with together, maybe travel with, spend romantic evenings with...", togetherness, time, love...

...not "I want to travel, I want a new car, and I need your wallet to do it" which is what that sounds like. Yeah, that's every guys dream - especially if he's, as many have mentioned, divorced and maybe paying child support now. He's gonna want and rush out to marry you to "provide" you with the "things" you want. You'll be waiting a long time to find that guy. Sounds, um, rather "cold & calculating" to me, not loving.

See, the thing is, if I love a woman I probably would want to do some of those things *together* with her, might even buy her that car - because I wanted her to be safe (because I love her)... but it would be because *I* wanted to (loving her), not because its "what she expects she's going to 'get' out of the relationship." You sound like someone with some mixed up priorities with those statements.

edit: GBB, I do see your point - but you are also are you not (not necessarily completely wrongly) focusing on the financial aspects and not love?

Somehow I seem to, moreso as I've gotten older, be finding women who may not have a lot, but don't "need" a lot (like the OP seems to)... to the point of feeling guilty and not wanting to accept me helping even if they could use it. Good qualities I think.
 JerseyGirl2008
Joined: 12/27/2007
Msg: 50
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 7/29/2010 6:29:50 AM
I've found pretty much the complete opposite. Most men I've dated have been very eager to become exclusive - maybe because I wasn't looking to be exclusive and they found that a challenge? I'm not sure, but in either event, several have told me they were looking for exclusivity with an eye towards marriage in the future. When I wasn't willing to commit to that, they got angry and moved on.

But I have read alot of posts by men and women here in the forums who'd rather chew their left legs off than ever get married again, so I think marriage is really becoming a thing of the past for alot of people (both female and male).
 GrandmaBooBoo
Joined: 12/30/2006
Msg: 51
view profile
History
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 7/29/2010 7:46:59 AM

edit: GBB, I do see your point - but you are also are you not (not necessarily completely wrongly) focusing on the financial aspects and not love?
LOL! Yes, I AM, though to the opposite side of the fence...and; purely as an object to debate, as, I'm not looking for marriage....and, sure...money has a small part in that: BUT...unlike many males...I get the "double whammy". Meaning that...1/2 of the opposite gender are gigalos, perfectly willing to be supported; and the other 1/2 are macho men who wouldn't dream of having a relationship with a woman who out earns them! LOL! and you GUYS think you have problems!!!
 whytwater
Joined: 8/7/2008
Msg: 52
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 7/29/2010 10:44:03 AM

I get the "double whammy". Meaning that...1/2 of the opposite gender are gigalos, perfectly willing to be supported; and the other 1/2 are macho men who wouldn't dream of having a relationship with a woman who out earns them! LOL! and you GUYS think you have problems!!


Might be the most simplistic assessment of the gender worlds I've ever encountered. By your working definitions, I'm not a man, and (quick look to the south), I ain't no girl. Lol
K, I like that song Willie sings about "If you got the money, honey, . . .", but it's just a song, like Puff the Magic Dragon, not a lifestyle for anybody I ever met. And I suspect that if Willie had lived that way, he'd have been able to afford to pay the IRS.
Better take another look at your data evaluation, or find another wolf pack to pick from.


But I have read alot of posts by men and women here in the forums who'd rather chew their left legs off than ever get married again


My prior one might fall into that category, but much as I like wolves and wild things, I'm not about to chew off any of my body parts to get free of a trap, 'specially my left leg- just got a big blue butterfly inked on that thigh. Lol Would rather think I could talk my way outta trouble, or maybe try that Davy Crockett "grin 'em to death" thing- my experience does suggest that a smile/grin, in lieu of words, avoids lotsa traps.
 DragNFlyBuzzez
Joined: 12/9/2009
Msg: 53
view profile
History
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 7/29/2010 12:42:13 PM
Let us look at Divorce from this case

my ex wont settle, offered house and 100k, she said no, 1.8years later,
just got back from settlement panel, she refused, wants a jury trial

So attorneys have taken 150k, and another 120k to support two homes
alimony will be 70k a year................which will start when trial is over in a year

So tell me, If I am not having kids anymore, why do I want the chance to go thru this again?
The penalty for picking bad at this age is life in a medicaid nursing home.

I am a one women man, I don't date two people at once, would I commit yeppers, I would like someone to cherish again, I would put a ring on it, but would find it hard to believe "forever after' as said in marriage vows are true anymore
 lostsoullooking
Joined: 7/3/2009
Msg: 55
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 7/29/2010 9:44:25 PM

Calling Rod Sterling...will this episode ever end???


Isn't that a loooooong distance call?

lsl
 GrandmaBooBoo
Joined: 12/30/2006
Msg: 56
view profile
History
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 7/30/2010 4:41:48 AM

Calling Rod Sterling...will this episode ever end???
Go back to sleep dear.....nobody was trying to steal YOUR thunder.
 jezebellpgh
Joined: 2/3/2010
Msg: 58
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 8/3/2010 6:32:26 AM
Get use to it, the world and 97% of the men that are in their 40s are bitterly divorced and they are p*ssed off at all women. Therefore the reason why I refuse to want to date them. Does any female need or crave this hate?
 Smarts and Heart
Joined: 12/15/2009
Msg: 62
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 8/5/2010 4:46:24 PM
For every bitter man there's a bitter woman. Divorce is never pleasant, but there are just as many cases of relatively amicable and equitable divorces where the lawyers aren't the ones who come out the winners. It's bitterness and vindictive personalities of men and women that feed the lawyers. They love it!

Not all women were supported by their husbands. Most worked hard, and raised children at the same time. As we all know, the instances where household chores were divided are rare. I think it's more a case of one not appreciating the value of a partner's contribution.

When I hear a man complaining how "he made it all" and the "wife got it all.", I think if you made it all, how come you're still not "making it?"
Did that ability go with the wife as part of the settlement?

Talk about RED FLAGS! That one will get me running faster than a bullet!

Just pick a person on the same level and page as yourself.
 whytwater
Joined: 8/7/2008
Msg: 63
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 8/5/2010 5:21:28 PM

When I hear a man complaining how "he made it all" and the "wife got it all.", I think if you made it all, how come you're still not "making it?"
Did that ability go with the wife as part of the settlement?


In most states, not only do they award marital property, but they also dig in to the primary provider's future earnings, and award that, too. I guess you could look at as a profit-sharing plan, or, from the other end, a surtax by a society that disapproves of the asundering of a marriage (although ample mechanisms, all kinda pricey, are provided by same, lol). You don't need a judge, or a lawyer, to get married, but you gotta have the guy in the robe for a divorce. And the prelate is nowhere in the vicinity.

Although I hear it said less often now, it wasn't so long ago that women, and the support groups, and the judges themselves, although more quietly, justified some very substantial claims, and awards, because "he took the best years of her life". For several reasons, that never sat well with me. And what about his best years, and the mutual exchange, and loss? I dunno. Matter of perspective, certainly. I've seen good marriages, just never had one myself. And while I was familiar with the concept of cover charges to gain entry, what's up with the sticker-shock level price of departure? Shouldn't that at least be disclosed up front? lol
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 64
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 8/5/2010 7:35:48 PM
I get the "double whammy". Meaning that...1/2 of the opposite gender are gigalos, perfectly willing to be supported; and the other 1/2 are macho men who wouldn't dream of having a relationship with a woman who out earns them! LOL! and you GUYS think you have problems!!!

Only by ypour own choosing. Just because someone is willing to be supported doesn't mean you have to support him. I would have dated a woman who expected to be supported and then let her in for a rude awaking when whe wanted some financial support. As long as it;s fun while it lasted, so what? Don't discuss your salary and the guys you date wont know if you make more or less money than they do.
 Smarts and Heart
Joined: 12/15/2009
Msg: 65
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 8/6/2010 7:26:57 AM

In most states, not only do they award marital property, but they also dig in to the primary provider's future earnings, and award that, too. I guess you could look at as a profit-sharing plan, or, from the other end, a surtax by a society that disapproves of the asundering of a marriage (although ample mechanisms, all kinda pricey, are provided by same, lol). You don't need a judge, or a lawyer, to get married, but you gotta have the guy in the robe for a divorce. And the prelate is nowhere in the vicinity.


whytwater...those judgements are based on prevalent facts that usually show that the spouse had a major role in helping, establish/ put the spouse through school, etc. which enable those future earnings. When it's shown that the future earnings would not have been possible without that help/investment by the other partner then, yes they're entitled to their share. Let's be fair.

I've never heard of a man who was wealthy and self made before the marriage have to give future earnings if the wife didn't contribute to his success in any way.
Alimony yes, especially if the wife was a stay at home wife with children. But, if the marriage was short even alimony has an expiration date. The law isn't ususally unjust when ALL facts are known. It's just that you never get the whole story from one playing the victim.
 whytwater
Joined: 8/7/2008
Msg: 67
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 8/6/2010 3:52:03 PM

The law isn't ususally unjust when ALL facts are known. It's just that you never get the whole story from one playing the victim.


I used to do divorce cases, but priced myself right out of there when I realized that the only rational one involved was the judge, who was usually seriously bored, and already knew that the divorcing parties, and their lawyers, were over the top. Sure, relevant, more than prevalent, facts are supposed to count, lol, but the judges always have plenty of wiggle room, and especially the older ones find a way to ensure that no woman will end up on public assistance, no matter what her contribution, or lack thereof, has been to her husband's career success. I completely finished school, for which I paid, with the help of the GI bill, before marriage, and there were no residual student loans. She had a master's degree, and worked. During the 10-year marriage, I did all the child care for our daughter from dawn til noon, and in the evening, she did the same (I spent loooong hours at the office, to enhance my career). She was awarded/rewarded everything we had, house, Volvo, etc. - I got to retain my license to practice, that is, I retained the opportunity to generate revenue. Oh, and she got several thousand dollars/month from my future earnings. No health issues on either side.
Not sure who you're calling a victim, and I was by no means wealthy at the start of the marriage, nor at its end, but I think I got tagged heavily. If ^^^^^ surprises you, K, then consider me as Exhibit A.
I'm not bitter, nor have I ever done anything vindictive (I might have made an occasional irreverent comment or two, lol). I just got the sense from your first post that you feel that justice is always served in the domestic relations courts, based upon "all the facts", and that would be a mistake. I learned, sort of, but it took another marriage with a similar ending to refresh my understanding of just what marriage vows really mean. Love has little to do with it- it's a legal partnership, about the surnames of children, and money. jmho
 Smarts and Heart
Joined: 12/15/2009
Msg: 68
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 8/6/2010 7:24:25 PM
I learned, sort of, but it took another marriage with a similar ending to refresh my understanding of just what marriage vows really mean. Love has little to do with it- it's a legal partnership, about the surnames of children, and money. jmho


I'm sorry you had history repeat itself . For myself personally I'd never take something which wasn't mine or I didn't contribute to. My pride and self respect wouldn't allow it. Can't take it to the bank, but I like myself.

As you said a marriage is a legal partnership and it should be a fair partnership as well. What happened to your ex's ability to generate future income if she worked throughout the marriage and had a master's degree? I'll guess her income was considerably less than yours and it came down to "sustaining the standard of living she and your child(ren) were accustomed to".

I think that's why it becomes so difficult for us to find compatible partners at a later age. We don't want to risk the small security we have as our productive years become fewer and fewer. The OP made a statement of wanting a partner for an easier life and everyone's red flags came to attention.That's why I believe we should think with our brains and not only with our emotions when choosing partners at this stage of our lives. Take the time to really get to know someone to determine true compatibility. If someone walks into your life that seems too good to be true, beware, they usually are.
 sweetest
Joined: 10/8/2007
Msg: 70
view profile
History
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 8/8/2010 8:02:08 AM

And while I was familiar with the concept of cover charges to gain entry, what's up with the sticker-shock level price of departure? Shouldn't that at least be disclosed up front?

^^^While funny...I wonder if it would substantially reduce numbers to any great degree. This type of consideration doesn't exactly suggest 'a comfortable placement' when up against all those feelings of love and undying commitment at the front end.
 *topchef*
Joined: 8/2/2008
Msg: 71
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 8/8/2010 1:47:42 PM
It seems that no one wants to subject their "love" to the more pragmatic matters of a relationship. Be it marriage or cohabitation, clearly their are financial implications as it relates to common expenses, at the very least.

We are all too easy to declare our undying love, share our inner most secrets and explore levels of intimacy beyond our senses....so why is it so absurd to resolve financial arrangements when we take that leap into a "live in" arrangement. No one wants to taint their pure heart by putting a price on their commitment. It seems when sanity prevails, this would be the time to do it, and at this age, women have just as much to lose as men.

I am not interested in marriage as such...but should I choose to live with a man again, be sure, we will discuss finances and our willingness or lack there of to co-mingle our resources.....for better or worse.
 sweetest
Joined: 10/8/2007
Msg: 72
view profile
History
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 8/8/2010 2:11:05 PM
Ahh. For better or worse (financially-speaking)

I agree topchef, marriage or cohabitation should have both parties discussing and disclosing financial vulnerabilities, expectations as well as to lay out restrictive boundaries (prenups), future plans. Within that discussion, it must also be ok to consider what are strengths and gains that we as a couple when together could realize, no?

Much of the op's points imo, were missed by some here and certainly brought out the ire and labeling that I don't see as fair, because of course there is definitely some benefit and increased quality of life associated to sharing an abode and pooling resources through marriage; she was merely lamenting that lost aspect, as I'm sure a few of us have done when we've divorced and are facing new financial realities that are starkly different than those we planned with our spouses.

I get what she's talking about...as well as getting the importance of some of the 45+ group who want to make sure they are able to protect what they've amassed.
 Smarts and Heart
Joined: 12/15/2009
Msg: 75
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 8/12/2010 9:28:30 AM
Sometimes it's not about marriage, but just the fact that someone can love you and you can love someone enough to WANT to totally commit your all to each other.
It's the comfort of the security that you love and you're loved faults and all.
Unfortunately many forget that that shouldn't include taking your partner for granted or showing them less love once you're married or expecting that which isn't given in return.

That's what has put a damper on many people's perception of marriage.

A seed once planted needs constant nurturing as does the sapling which goes on to become a sturdy tree. A relationship is like the tree. One partner is the water and the other the sun. Both different but both essential.

 Smarts and Heart
Joined: 12/15/2009
Msg: 76
over 45 men and marriage???
Posted: 8/12/2010 5:21:55 PM
.......and birth the #1 cause of death! ^^^^^ You're really good at coming to conclusions!
Show ALL Forums  > Over 45  >