Bad Manners and Brimstone

I guess I could see the joking style of it, but it really would rub me the wrong way.  Not everyone wants to advertise everything about their life.  If I want to share my medical stuff, I will.  If I don't, I won't.  I don't like being baited into sharing something.  This is one of the many reasons why I'm not interested in Facebook.

Eh, I did a quick post when I got my Covid vaccine, and it wasn't to bait anyone into sharing their medical information. I shared it because I know that some people out there were on the fence about having it done and it was my way of saying that I had it done and it was no big deal. I know plenty of people who have been vaccinated and haven't posted about it and I would never, ever guilt or shame them into doing so.

Quote from: Aleko on September 07, 2019, 12:00:45 pm

....
No, it won't. And why should it, if they aren't willing to confirm to the world that they are and wish to be a legal couple? Indeed, how could it know for sure if they were and they did? Would anyone be happy, if say one of a couple died in a work accident, for the survivor's entitlement to compensation, a widow(er)'s pension et cetera to be assessed by an official with a clipboard coming round and checking how long they had lived together, how many long-term purchases they had made jointly, and asking the neighbours if they seemed fond of each other?

I have sometimes said, when people complain that their longtime sweetheart, with whom they don't live, isn't being included when spouses would be or are: They're not your spouse. If you want them to be treated like a spouse, you have three avenues to achieve that: Get engaged, move in together, or get married.

People will say, "You shouldn't be judging our relationship!" but in fact, that's what they're asking you to do. With an engagement, cohabitation, or marriage, THEY are the one declaring how serious that relationship is.

If you're dating only, no matter how long it is, you are asking other people to make some OTHER judgment about how serious your relationship is. Because you have not used the three signals that our culture recognizes, and now you are asking them to use their decision and not your declaration (because your declaration says the opposite, actually--you've dating a long time and haven't gotten married; what do your actions say about how serious you are?)


...

Quote

Quote

Exactly. I always say too that a couple's decision to NOT get married is one that comes with consequences socially, whether it is "fair" or not. For a great many people and institutions, unless and until people take the affirmative step to become legally joined in marriage, they are simply not as "committed" as those who have not taken that step.

You've been dating for 5 years? That means for 4 years at least, every morning the two of you get up and decide to not get engaged or get married, and at least 4 times (when your lease ran out), you decided to not live together. What do your actions say?

Quote

Me too. A few years ago a British soldier was killed on active service and his unmarried partner applied for a widow's pension and was refused it. She went to law, and ultimately the MoD caved in and gave it to her. I'm still uneasy about that. It's almost like marrying them posthumously with him not able to object (the way Mormons 'baptise' their long-dead ancestors - if I were a long-dead ancestor I would be fit to be tied about that). Every soldier going to a war zone must think about what will happen to his loved ones if he doesn't come back. The welfare officers must have spelt out in good time to the troops being shipped out to Afghanistan that 'widows' pensions are for widows - if you ever plan to marry your partner, think about getting a licence and doing it now'. But he didn't.

I would have much the same reaction.
Conservative Christians like to say that marriage is under attack from gay people who want to be able to marry. I think the institution of marriage IS under attack, but it's not from the people who say "marriage is special and we want to be able to be a part of it."

It's from the people who insist on having "domestic partnerships," or who want the financial or social perks of marriage without marrying. 
   There is some middle ground probably, and we're working it out as a culture. But if marriage means something, then it means something.

Re: your story of the widow:
In NYC, a cohabiting couple applied to purchase a co-operative apartment. With a co-op, you actually don't purchase an apartment; you never own it. You purchase shares in a corporation that are assigned to the apartment, and owning them gives you the right to occupy and modify (as well as the responsibility of upkeep).

Since you are essentially joining a business partnership, the other shareholders get the right to approve you as a business partner. So you have to have a certain financial strength (savings, earnings, etc.), credit score, personal reputation, etc.

In this couple's case, the woman had enough earnings and savings to qualify. They approved her as a buyer. The guy did not, and because they were not married, the co-op had to evaluate him on his own; he was rejected as a buyer. He WAS approved as a tenant, which meant he could live there.

The corporation said, "If you were married, we could count you as a single legal entity, and you'd both be approved. But since you're not married, and the man has no legal claim to the financial assets and income of the woman, we can't approve him.
    "This is a business decision based on legalities; we aren't judging him as an unfit person, and we'd be happy to have him live here."

The couple claimed it was discrimination against them on the basis of marital status and sued.
I hope they lost.

And we are LONG way away from eliminating the wedding breakfast!

The feeling I'm getting from all these quotes is that if you want to be taken seriously as a couple, and you want to have all the legal benefits of being married to your partner, then you need to be married. Which is fine, and that makes sense. What I'm trying to say is that in the disabled community some people cannot marry their partner because the government will take away their disability benefits. It's not that they don't want to marry their partner, it's that they can't, not without being punished for it. They seriously can't even live together with their partner because the government will punish them for that, too. The system is messed up, and that needs to change.  Perhaps our culture also needs to change a bit, too.

Quote from: Meg1079 on September 11, 2019, 10:05:44 am

Quote from: Jem on September 11, 2019, 09:37:48 am

I think for a lot of people the issue is expecting to be treated the same as married people when people have made the decision NOT to marry for whatever reason. I don't think anyone needs to validate or defend their choices to anyone else. I think they just need to own it.

It's kinda like people who say, "A degree is just a piece of paper. I know way more than this guy with a PhD and I never went to college." It could very well be true that the high school graduate is smarter than the PhD, or knows more about a particular subject. But the high school graduate is NOT a PhD. Pointing that fact out is not saying the high school graduate isn't smart. It is saying she is not a PhD.

For the most part, I don't see the need to justify my decision not to get married, especially to people that I don't really know. I've never had anyone not invite my other half to something because we aren't married. The people we know have always treated us as a social unit. I do feel badly for those in the disabled community who would love to get married to their other half, but can't because they need their benefits. If I had known that the government would take away my other half's disability benefits because we moved in together, I don't know if we would have moved in together. I think it's something that needs to change, but that's a government issue and not an etiquette issue!

But some days it does feel like people do need to defend their decision not to get married.  I'm seeing a lot of that attitude here: don't expect to be treated the same as a married couple if you choose not to get married. I've seen other people post (not necessarily here) that they would consider someone in a relationship single because they had not married their other half, even if they've been in a committed relationship for years. I'm only pointing out that some people are unable to get married (or even move in with their spouse) because of financial issues that are no fault of theirs.  Unless I've been misreading everything, in which case I apologize.

Regarding the green: I don't think that people who choose, for whatever reason, not to get married should be treated poorly or as though their relationships are not genuine. But I think even in your own examples people have chosen NOT to be married precisely because they DON'T want to be treated as a married couple. The entire reason to choose to NOT be married is to avoid being treated as a married couple. Being married simply is NOT the same as NOT being married.

Regarding the red, I personally would not consider a person "single" in the sense of "this person does not have a significant other," but I also would not consider them to be "married" if they are not. For government purposes I think a person would be considered "single," because there is no option of "well, I've been with my boyfriend for 10 years and we are committed to each other but we are choosing not to marry." Valid choices, but in fact a choice to NOT marry.

Unless I am somehow personally invested in the relationship, I don't really care what someone chooses. I just am accurate when describing it.

Regarding the purple, I personally don't feel I need to justify my choices to anyone other than people those choices affect (if then). So long as I am comfortable with my choices, I wouldn't feel the need to justify them to people whose opinion I don't value. So I guess if you feel the need to explain your choices (general you) to people that is totally fine, but I don't think there is a generally expected need for you (general) to do so. Just live and let live.

For the most part, I don't see the need to justify my decision not to get married, especially to people that I don't really know. I've never had anyone not invite my other half to something because we aren't married. The people we know have always treated us as a social unit. I do feel badly for those in the disabled community who would love to get married to their other half, but can't because they need their benefits. If I had known that the government would take away my other half's disability benefits because we moved in together, I don't know if we would have done that. I think it's something that needs to change, but that's a government issue and not an etiquette issue!

Quote from: Meg1079 on September 10, 2019, 02:46:15 pm

I wanted to come out of lurkdom to say that sometimes there is a reason people can't get married or live together. My other half has spina bifida and when we moved in together the government took away his disability benefits, saying that together our income was too high. My other half and I are lucky right now because both of us are working and have pretty decent benefits through our jobs, but others are not so lucky. I do know people in the disabled community who will never live with or marry their significant others because the government will take away what little benefits they have.  Not trying to be snarky, but just wanted to point out another side that abled-bodied people may not see.

I completely agree. This is a perfect example of what I meant by “There are many other kinds of cases that just about anyone would agree should be treated as social units.”

I'm so sorry, I went back to re-read your post and I see that now! After a while it feels like people are being bashed for not getting married, and I wanted to point out that there can be good reasons why. And, honestly, if someone doesn't want to get married "just because they don't", I respect that, too. If someone didn't want to treat my other half and I as a social unit just because we aren't married, I would have no issues cutting that person out of my life or, at least limiting contact. Luckily, the people we know don't seem to think that way.