The only thing I find weirder than couples who date each other for years without getting married are the couples who get married despite never wanting kids. Especially when neither person is religious.
I know some couples like this, and it doesn't make any sense to me at all.
maybe legal reasons like hospital visitation and property assignments or they are still serious about the formality of being committed to the relationship
Yes but then marriage becomes something more akin to a business partnership with negotiated costs and benefits. You gain hospital visitation, tax benefits, etc... You risk unfavorable disposition of communal assets if there is a divorce.
And I doubt any of these couples sat down with a lawyer and/or accountant to do the due diligence one normally would for a comparable business partnership.
Imagine seeing two people happily cohabitating, for an extended period of time, with no contactually obligation to one another, and then thinking “that’s weird”.
I'm with my girlfriend (3 year relationship now) because she's amazing and we complement each other in so many ways. We're considering children but it seems like it's not a must for either of us right now. I don't know man, she's incredible and that's why I want to be with her. Everything else is a bonus.
Even if you remove the religious aspect from consideration, it ignores the primary benefit for monogamy: to provide a more stable environment for procreation and rearing of young.
Otherwise why not just do what Leo does: catch at 18, release at 25?
Well the religious aspect is what turned it from "serial monogamy" into "committed." From simply being together until it no longer benefits, into a sealed deal until death.
Because if it was only for raising young, there would be little point at remaining together past 55~ when nearly all possible children are fully grown.
The only thing I find weirder than couples who date each other for years without getting married are the couples who get married despite never wanting kids. Especially when neither person is religious.
I know some couples like this, and it doesn't make any sense to me at all.
maybe legal reasons like hospital visitation and property assignments or they are still serious about the formality of being committed to the relationship
Yes but then marriage becomes something more akin to a business partnership with negotiated costs and benefits. You gain hospital visitation, tax benefits, etc... You risk unfavorable disposition of communal assets if there is a divorce.
And I doubt any of these couples sat down with a lawyer and/or accountant to do the due diligence one normally would for a comparable business partnership.
Imagine seeing two people happily cohabitating, for an extended period of time, with no contactually obligation to one another, and then thinking “that’s weird”.
I'm with my girlfriend (3 year relationship now) because she's amazing and we complement each other in so many ways. We're considering children but it seems like it's not a must for either of us right now. I don't know man, she's incredible and that's why I want to be with her. Everything else is a bonus.
That's the problem of turning a religious ceremony into a government label and romantic gesture.
It hollows it out into something people do without any real thought about why they do it, beyond bureaucratic benefits.
Even if you remove the religious aspect from consideration, it ignores the primary benefit for monogamy: to provide a more stable environment for procreation and rearing of young.
Otherwise why not just do what Leo does: catch at 18, release at 25?
Well the religious aspect is what turned it from "serial monogamy" into "committed." From simply being together until it no longer benefits, into a sealed deal until death.
Because if it was only for raising young, there would be little point at remaining together past 55~ when nearly all possible children are fully grown.