Hello ladies,
I joined RPW about a year and a half ago (time flies!) and I really enjoyed all the advice about being feminine, vetting a man correctly, etc. I wonder now if RP is for me. It might not be, I don't think an ideology is supposed to fit everybody, so please keep an open mind.
These past 5-6 months I started dating again after a one year relationship followed by a 1.5 year "monk mode".
The dating scene changed quite a bit from when I was 18-19. Maybe it's because I was dating 18-20 year olds back then and now I'm dating 25-30 year olds. The biggest change I've noticed is that men want sex very early on. It has happened multiple times that a man thinks I'm too much of a "goodie two shoe" (since my n count was 1) even though they mention that there's something nice about it. Overall they made it sound like the negatives outweigh the positives. I've talked to other men (whom I had nothing romantic going on with) who told me they would never commit to a woman before having slept with her. That sex is so widely available these days that they wouldn't commit before at least knowing if they'll be satisfied sexually in the relationship. To me that's understandable.
Now I know this could be manipulation to get me to sleep with them. But I wonder to myself. Since I don't want marriage or children, I don't exactly want what is considered a traditional man. I'd want a DINK lifestyle with my partner. So I wonder if this kind of man would truly care about a woman's n count or not.
I've been seeing this man recently. We had a great connection and we ended up having sex. I did it because it felt natural, not because I wanted something in return (commitment). We ended up parting ways because of some incompatibilities, but I think I would've felt much worse if I had sex with expectations than simply having it because it felt natural. I also think if I had sex with him for the goal of a relationship, I might've stuck around longer than necessary, simply because of the investment I'd made in him. Instead, I was able to cut my losses without hurting because I understood sometimes things don't work out and I didn't "lose" anything in the process. It was a nice experience while it lasted.
I guess my question is whether I'm better to sticking with a sexual strategy like a RPW would or to simply go with my gut more often. I know there probably aren't too many women here with a DINK lifestyle but I'd still be curious to hear your thoughts.
Thank you!
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
[deleted]
Laceandsilks 6y ago
Be polite or be quiet, and read the sidebar.
[deleted]
Laceandsilks 6y ago
Wrong again.
Women are allowed to comment on the male subs. What is not allowed is "woman here..." type comments, which carries over to RPW ("Man here...").
Read the sidebar
[deleted]
Ihatemost 6y ago
I wish I would meet some of those men. I've only ever met one childfree man but I wasn't attracted to him.
And alright, I'll keep that in mind. It wasn't my intention to sleep around, but I'll keep being selective.
[deleted] 6y ago
[deleted]
est-la-lune 6y ago
I bring it up right away too. That way, I don't become emotionally invested in someone I don't have a future with.
/u/Ihatemost: I know many of us are afraid to disclose our childfree status to potential partners, but if you take the risk then people may surprise you. :) The bonus is that you won't waste time on people who are incompatible.
Ihatemost 6y ago
To be honest it's what I've been doing. It sucks not going further than one or two dates with someone you get along well with. I know I need to keep doing it. Sometimes I just want to hide it so I can enjoy a little bit the courting phase.
est-la-lune 6y ago
I think it's normal! But, imagine how awesome it's going to be when you meet someone who's on the same page and get to experience the courting phase with him. :)
Location is also a huge factor. I live near a city, and had no trouble finding a guy who is CF. If relocation is possible, it may turn your dating life around 180º.
Ihatemost 6y ago
Yeah you're right. It's much nicer when you don't think in the back of your head that it could never work out.
I do live in a big city and it's probably why I still have hope. I know childfree is becoming a more common lifestyle but it's still pretty rare.
Ihatemost 6y ago
Will do, thank you :)
[deleted] 6y ago
Have you imagined the future? Have you imagined you at 32-35-40? Go hang with 35-40 year old single women and see what you think. You may find that the feminist lie that men and women don’t really need each other is something that brings unfathonable misery. Hardcore feminists hate and resent that men and women need each other but especially that women need men.
It sounds like you’re surrounded by cringy weak men. Are you in a really liberal area?
I travel widely and have a wide variety of friends. I have never ever seen a happy 35-40 year old single woman. Surely I would know just one?? Men in the same position and age are mostly miserable too - but they can get away with it for longer because of the nature of the sexual marketplace.
The good news is your only 22! You have time to make the realisations that will put your life on a good path.
rpMadler 6y ago
This is a demonstration of the truth of the red pill. It's a fundamental red pill concept (maybe THE fundamental concept) that traditionally men are the gatekeepers of commitment and women are the gatekeepers of sex, and that since so many Western women have abdicated that gatekeeper role there is little or no need for men to offer commitment.
The struggle for a red pill woman, as you've experienced, is to overcome the willingness of other women to offer no-strings-attached sex. This will require you to demonstrate significant relationship value in other ways, be clear with yourself (and be realistic) about what you expect from a partner (e.g., not wanting children), and (assuming your expectations are realistic) do not compromise on your minimum expectations and vet potential partners hard.
[deleted]
[deleted] 6y ago
My husband and I are "permanent" DINKs. I put permanent in quotes, because we have decided that if we were to experience an unexpected, but otherwise healthy, pregnancy that we would not terminate. My husband does not wish to get "the snip," so that will remain a teeny tiny possibility.
Personally, we decided to go the no kids route, because we don't want to change our lifestyle. I am very committed to my career and possess no maternal instinct. My husband fiercely guards his free time, and didn't want to be tied down by the needs of a child. Additionally, we are a FIRE couple, so we recognize the financial burden that comes along with reproduction.
Clearly, we are married. It seems you are against marriage because it does not live up to expectations (lifelong monogamy, happiness and love) and traditionally it was meant for reproduction in a controlled environment. We decided to go the marriage route, because it was cheaper and easier than getting the benefits of marriage without the marriage. We can file our taxes together (depends on the couple if this is a benefit or not), have joint health insurance without a penalty, make decisions for each other if one is incapacitated, it increased our social status, owning property can be easier, it simplifies things when one of us dies, etc. You can get a great deal of the legal benefits of marriage with a handful of legal documents, but honestly it was easier to just get a prenup and get married. Also, the divorce process is better defined than legal mechanisms for recouping lost funds from a romantic relationship that did not end in marriage.
So, how did this discussion come up while we were dating? I believe we were at an event where a child was having a full blown melt down, and I said, "How disgusting. Who wants to become a parent if you have to run the risk of having a demon like that thing. Though the parents are probably so terrible it doesn't have a choice." My husband laughed and said, "Do you hate children or something?" I replied, "Yes. I think they are sticky and stupid and there's no guarantee you get a good one. No thanks." He sighed a breath of relief and confessed that he felt the same way, but never said anything because he'd only seen me be nice to children and assumed I wanted to be a mother! Ha!
I do not believe that wanting the legal benefits of marriage and having a desire to reproduce are necessarily linked. I do not believe you should reproduce without the legal benefits of marriage (especially if you are a man), but I believe you can easily enjoy the legal benefits of marriage without reproducing. That's exactly how we view marriage, as a legal contract. Contracts can be broken and contracts can end. All of the other stuff (love, support, respect, monogamy) are all a part of our relationship, which existed before the marriage and was unchanged when we decided to have it legally recognized. Marriage will not fix a relationship that is problematic and built on a shaky foundation. It may strengthen an already great relationship depending on how much importance is placed on the act of getting married.
Here's what I would remember: (1) Happiness is key, and if being child free makes you happy then go for it. (2) Your opinion may change, but it may not. I get the "Oh your biological time clock will kick in, just wait" All. The. Time. Sorry mom, no it won't. I've hated children for the first 25 years of my life (including while I was one!), and I intend to hate them until I leave this earth. (3) You can have a traditional, RP relationship without having children. In fact, it is easier because you can devote more time to your partner when you don't a little creature always crying for your attention. (4) Signing a marriage contract is exceptionally simple. All you do is sign the thing in front of a judge. Boom! You've entered a marriage contract and have lots of new benefits! We had a wedding because we like to party, but all the contract requires is signing a sheet of paper. Marriage can be fun and simple if you let it.
tempintheeastbay 6y ago
Love the diversity of perspective. Quick question, out of curiosity - what is a "FIRE couple"?
[deleted] 6y ago
Financial Independence Retire Early
Ihatemost 6y ago
I'm very glad to have gotten such positive answers to my question. I was looking for new perspectives and your comment definitely offers one when it comes to marriage. I think this is something I could see myself changing my mind over if the right person came along.
I'm surprised you wouldn't terminate a pregnancy since you seem very opposed to having children, rather than just being on the fence. Why is that if you don't mind me asking?
[deleted] 6y ago
I believe that abortion should be a choice, but that men should have input. My Husband also believes abortion should be a choice, but does not believe he would be able to make the decision to terminate a healthy fetus. I am not sure if I would be able to make the decision to terminate, especially if my Husband was against it. I have thought about potentially putting the creature up for adoption if I don't feel attached to it after birth. I could simply tell people I was acting as a surrogate for a private couple. Its hard to get a contract as a first time vessel, but not impossible if you're in good health.
While I don't want a creature and I loathe other people's, I don't think I would necessarily make a bad parent. It would have two, highly educated parents in a happy and stable relationship and would have access to every opportunity life had to offer. It may be a struggle to love it, but I would hope I could find the ability.
Thankfully I am a perfect user of birth control, so I shouldn't ever have to make that decision!
thatscool22 6y ago
don't have sex until at least three months in. a guy who respects you will stay and a guy that doesn't will leave. the guys that leave aren't worth agonizing over.
there's many people who have long term relationships without kids or marriage. it's perfectly ok.
in our society today, nothing is natural. anyone who says something is "natural" is an asshat. women don't want kids, that's fine. women who want to stay single are fine. men who aren't assholes are fine. men who respect women and aren't red pillers are more common than you think. this red pill nonsense is not ok.
Ihatemost 6y ago
Three months seems like such a long time if I have a good connection with someone. It's an arbitrary number that doesn't necessarily fit for everyone. I'd have a hard time justifying this to a guy if I really like him.
thatscool22 6y ago
It can be any amount of time but not very soon in the relationship. Get to know a person. If you don’t know their favorite movie, maybe it’s too soon to fuck.
[deleted]
Laceandsilks 6y ago
You need to read the sidebar.
no 'man here' or 'my gf' type comments. Your sex is irrelevant and all comments should stand on their own
BewareTheOldMan 6y ago
don't have sex until at least three months in...
Is this rule applicable for every man or is it irregularly applied?
Men will have issues knowing that some men/other men had variable timelines as it relates sexual activity.
OP's observation: ...men want sex very early on and sex is so widely available these days...highlights this expectation and why it's so prevalent.
Virtually every male-dominated space discusses a general expectation of 3 x dates/a few weeks and sex. It's a topic of discussion among men...and not just over at TRP.
Not only that - there are some men who expect sex first and a relationship "might" follow if there's interest. Both techniques reference one of the major shifts in male dating strategies…
Laceandsilks 6y ago
It's up to every woman to figure out the give and take between physical intimacy and commitment.
I will say that the men that apply the 'sex within 3 dates' rule are disqualifying themselves, which does actually help a RPW more successfully vet incompatible men out.
I will also say that three months seems long. Another user pointed out that it should not take very long for an LTR to be established if it's something both people want and they are compatible.
Conservatively, I would say that 3 months to form an LTR should be the upper limit for a woman. Ideally, the woman should be seeing the man at least once a week for a date for the first two weeks, and after that, much more frequently. Spending more time together allows for more thorough vetting for both the man and the woman.
The men that get hung up on the minutia of a woman's sexual history display a level of insecurity, and 'tit-for-tat' mentality that makes him incompatible for a normal RPW.
It's really not difficult for a normal, decent woman with a clear vetting strategy and understanding of her flaws and assets to find a good man with compatible values and earn his commitment within a reasonable time frame.
There is sometimes a tendency for people to forget where RP theory begins and ends, and just how much of it is left for the individual to define and apply. RP says that men should prioritize sex, and women should prioritize commitment. These things are going to be in clear conflict with each other if the man doesn't want an LTR or marriage. It's a negotiation process for which there are no absolute answers that can be applied to everyone.
BewareTheOldMan 6y ago
Your response is insightful and good general strategy. Your technique allows for practical implementation - if properly applied.
When I discuss this with women in my family or other female friends, I advise them on how males are thinking in general and male expectations in relationships/marriage. I can pass your words to them as useable information - credit to you of course.
The only point of contention is the reference to male insecurity. I've never thought to question a woman's "number," but when speaking with other men and hearing their reasons I see where they rationalize their concern.
No need to hijack the current topic, but I may hit you later on what comes from my discussions with other men. It seems you may have an interesting perspective in this area.
Laceandsilks 6y ago
Glad I could help.
I will clarify that how a man reacts, approaches, and behaves around the topic of N count makes a big difference. A man that obsessively questions, and appears 'hurt' by a woman's history, especially if her behaviors are entirely normal or below average, he can come off as insecure and weak.
A man should be vetting for behaviors that generally go along with a questionable woman. Family history, mental stability, personal morals, how she behaves over a period of time.
TRP regularly says "you can never know for certain what her history is" and this is why 'watch what she does, ignore what she says' is so widely used. Men looking for an LTR and marriage face many of the same problems RPW members do. It comes down to vetting, having a plan, and being a good judge of character.
It is not 'wrong' for men to question a woman's history, or to wonder how she turned into the woman she meets. As with most things, it's more about how the man conveys those thoughts and questions. Some expressions will be weak and needy and put women off. Other expressions will be well considered and executed in a way that convinces a woman she should do all she can to earn the man's commitment.
Too often, men that vocally and consistently pick on a woman's sexual history run the risk of coming off in a negative and insecure light.
I hope that clarifies things a bit.
BewareTheOldMan 6y ago
Key Line:
"...how a man reacts, approaches, and behaves around the topic of N count makes a big difference."
I can see how nitpicking a subject ad infinitum is a problem.
Thanks.
girlwithabike 6y ago
None of us know what our life would be like if we did or did not have a different n-count. We can only tell you what the RP says about women's n-count, which you already know. You are going to have to take all of the opinions you get here and weigh them and make a decision for yourself.
Personally, I was in your boat around your age. I was unconvinced I wanted to have kids and I never assumed a life where I wouldn't be providing half of the household income. The dynamic between my husband and I developed over the course of our relationship and the decision to have kids came after marriage. Very atypical RP behavior but sometimes that's how it goes. Have caution about doing anything will sell out your future self because of what you think she is going to want. That isn't necessarily a statement for or against keeping a low n-count. It's just hard to be certain that future you is going to want the things that you think she will. Consider that when you are making any decisions with lasting ramifications.
Ihatemost 6y ago
I understand. Very good answer, thank you :)
fairydust91 6y ago
Soo true. Before I discovered the RP I was a feminist and thought sex without commitment was empowering. I'll just say that I am sooo happy I found the RP.
FleetingWish 6y ago
I think I can relate to your situation more than most. I do not want kids, and I don't find "marriage" to be a necessity to have what I want, which is simply being in a relationship with someone I love.
I think this echos my SO's sentiment fairly well. He see's sex as the fundamental basis of a relationship, however if all you're good at is sex, you will forever be a plate. But, if you have the skills that RPW teaches that make someone relationship worthy (rather than just sex worthy) then you can be upgraded.
I think RPW tends to not recommend this method to the fact that it is very high risk (you have to have the girl game to pull it off), but being in the situation myself, I would have to say it is very high reward as well.
lol_throwaway303 6y ago
Your n-count should be no ones business but your own, especially with someone new. It’s incredibly rude for a man to ask or talk about it early on.
It also might set you up as being plate material where it’s mentioned above that (leading with the n-count being a big topic) makes it out that you might be good for sex only, not relationship worthy. You’re more than that.
WhatIsThisAccountFor 6y ago
You do not want to get married, or do you only not want to have children?
What is your goal in dating? Do you care whether you two are exclusive or do you just want someone reliable?
In my experience, everyone that I know that does not want to get married at all, and does not want a long term exclusive relationship either. They would either prefer an open one, or a short term one.
Are you looking for an LTR? Because really the goal of an LTR is marriage, so if you are upfront about not wanting marriage, I can’t see many relationships progressing in a more serious matter. That might be what you’re looking for, but if it is not, then you need to understand what you are getting yourself into.
Short term relationships will generally be superficial and sexually fueled from the man’s standpoint.
Ihatemost 6y ago
Then what is the goal of marriage?
WhatIsThisAccountFor 6y ago
I can't tell if you're joking or this is an actual question... but I'll bite.
The purpose of marriage is indefinite security and commitment. The goal of marriage is different on a case by case scenario, but in most cases, that goal is to start a family
Ihatemost 6y ago
It was an actual question.
The theoretical purpose of a marriage should actually be definite, which is the rest of your life. A ltr is indefinite security and commitment.
There's not much security in marriage these days when divorce is so widespread. I would've understood your point a few decades ago but marriage vows aren't respected like they used to be. You might tell me "Yes but the man you would want to marry is one that would honor those vows". And that is true. But it's also the type of man who would honor commitment to me without the need of a legal contract.
As for commitment itself, studies have shown that more than 1/3 of married people have cheated on their spouse. Marriage doesn't magically make a person commit more. It doesn't change a person or a relationship. I've heard countless stories of people who thought things would be different once they're married. It's not. And these aren't all unhappy people. Some of them are very happy in their marriage.
I personally find that it's much more admirable to wake up every day and make the conscious decision of remaining with a partner because you want to rather than because you signed a legal contract.
I guess I can understand this for people who want children. If you make a commitment to raise a child for at least 18 years, you should make a commitment to stay with your partner through thick and thin. It might also provide some stability for the child. I don't think a marriage would improve that relationship though. It needs a solid foundation to start with.
WhatIsThisAccountFor 6y ago
I figured you were going to bring up divorce rates, so I changed what was "permanent" to "indefinite".
This is a different issue entirely. You're saying people expect marriage to change their partners, I'm saying people that look for marriage generally are searching for the things I mentioned.
Marriage is commitment for life. Maybe you are not interested in that, but the purpose is to both agree to be with each other for as long as you live. If you choose not to believe your partner on that promise, you should probably find a new partner.
Again, I'm not saying getting married will improve a bad relationship, I'm saying when you are looking for people who want to get married, they generally are looking for the same lifelong commitment that you are. When you are specifically looking for people that do not want to get married, they generally will not want to be with you for the rest of their life. If they did there are only positives to getting married from a legal standpoint. The literal only negative to getting married is if you eventually want to leave them one day.
I understand a lot of people want to be against the system and want to keep the government out of their relationships, but the government is going to be in your life regardless of what you do. There's no sense in trying to avoid them unless you plan to buy and live on your own private island. Marriage is the most sensible option money and legality wise if you plan to spend the rest of your life with your partner.
Ihatemost 6y ago
I do want something that will last the rest of my life. Perhaps it's just hard to imagine it since I've never felt this way towards anyone yet. I understand your point that if I seek someone who doesn't want marriage, chances are they don't want one relationship for the rest of their life. I wish things weren't so black and white. Thanks for your input :)
[deleted]
Ihatemost 6y ago
That's sweet, you're quite lucky :) I could see myself changing my mind on marriage if I ever love someone that much.
WhatIsThisAccountFor 6y ago
Things are never black and white. The mentality of women here does not always lead to long term commitment, and the mentality of women who are the complete opposite sometimes leads to life long, loving and fulfilling marriage. There are exceptions to every rule, but you should never live your life searching for exceptions. The purpose of this sub, and any advise/lifestyle based organization in general is to give others the best chance to find what you're looking for. I, and most other people on this sub believe that marriage is the ultimate form of long term commitment, and if that's what you are looking for, that should be the goal of your relationships. I and most women on this sub also believe that the red pill mentality is the best way to secure and attract that kind of relationship.
Go into things expecting the norm, but don't be against coming across the exception. If you expect the exception you will always leave disappointed.
fairydust91 6y ago
You might not want marriage but do you still want serious relationships with a man who takes you seriously and loves and values you? I am a feminist-turned-RP, aged 26 now, and honestly, no man wants a total newbie but men DO care about your n-count. So while you might not necessarily need to go into "monk-mode" I would also say that you probably shouldn't make a habit out of doing that. If he can't wait until you're "exclusive" then he should at least hang around long enough. Try to find a nice balance between sleeping around and sleeping alone 24/7. Neither is fun and you're a grown woman, I am sure you can figure it out. Don't talk about your n-count and don't stick to the same group of people.
Ihatemost 6y ago
Yeah I think this is the perfect balance, thank you :)
RubyWooToo 6y ago
Even if you eventually decide that marriage and children aren't for you, there are benefits to not engaging in casual sex that go beyond whether or not men will respect you afterward.
Every time you sleep with someone, you risk getting overly emotionally attached to a guy who might not be right for you (or even a good person!), catching or transmitting an STD, getting pregnant, or perhaps even limiting your dating options within a particular social circle (for example, if the guy happens to be friends with someone who might be a better fit for you).
While it's great that you had a positive experience with the last guy with whom you had sex, you should make decisions that effect your emotional and physical well-being on how to avoid the worst case scenario instead of assuming that everything will turn out for the best. I know that might seem glum or cynical, but I think it's the most realistic approach.
Ihatemost 6y ago
Yes, I understand and I agree. I don't regret this last experience but I didn't find that it was something I would want to maintain (that is, a casual relationship) once I saw that we weren't compatible. To prevent that from happening again I'll simply keep vetting better like I was used to doing before.
StepfordInTexas 6y ago
Slight highjack of the thread.
By saying you don’t want to get married, do you mean you don’t want a LTR?
And out of curiosity, why don’t you want to have children? As a married, mother of 4 I’ve never understood NOT wanting to have children.
Assuming you are looking for a LTR, just without the contractual obligations and ramifications of marriage, RP is about finding a quality partner and being a quality partner. I can’t for the life of me understand why it “wouldn’t be for you”. But perhaps that’s just my ignorance speaking for lack of understanding.
Ihatemost 6y ago
I do want a LTR. I just don't see the added value of marriage. It's a cost vs benefit situation to me. I didn't see any factual reason to get married since it doesn't help a relationship, but the costs are very high if things don't work out. Almostsurrendered's comment did help me see a new perspective on it though, but I don't think most people get married for the reasons she gave.
As for not wanting children, here are a few reasons below. I want you to know though that I don't think it's wrong for a woman to want children and that these are just my personal feelings when it comes to it.
I value my liberty more than anything. I want to wake up every morning and feel that what I'm about to do is a choice that I've made. Taking care of your child is not a choice, it's an obligation. And it's one you have every single day for two decades at least. The life of waking up early every morning, prep them for school, pick them up from school, drive them to some extracurricular activity, etc. every day sounds very unappealing to me. I also am a pretty introverted person so I need a lot of time alone and I also need a lot of silence. I get irritated by children screaming or crying.
You have no guarantee of what your child will turn out like. You can be a perfect parent and still end up with a child who does drugs or is a criminal. Your child could also be born or develop a condition like down syndrome or autism. When you make the decision of being a parent, you have to make the decision of being able to care for your child if something like this happens. I know it takes a huge toll on the parents and frankly it's not a risk I'm willing to take. You also have no guarantee that your child will be there for you once they move out or once you get old.
My biggest goals in life right now are career oriented, self-development and travelling. I don't think I'll achieve all these goals I set for myself by the time I'm 40 but let's say I do. I can see myself then wanting to give back to others, which I'd want to do through philanthropy. I realize that right now I'm young and selfish, and I can see that changing with time, but I'd want my help to go to bigger things, not towards raising one person. I could even see myself adopting more than having my own kid because I'd help a child already in need, I wouldn't contribute to the overpopulation and as an added bonus, I would maintain my body. I'll add that the idea of something growing in me freaks me out.
I really think it just boils down to ''motherly instincts''. No woman says she wants children for a specific reason. She just does.
edit: Why the need to downvote someone with a different point of view. It's not contributing in any positive way.
MxUnicorn 6y ago
This is the boat I'm in, as well (kind of). Don't want kids, don't really care about marriage. The tax benefits and boyfriend's insurance might be nice, though. I also grew up seeing my mother tied to an awful man and divorcing him ended up being a nightmare, so I was slightly afraid of marriage.
My boyfriend and I will still assume that we'll actually get married at some point (bare-bones civil ceremony thing, no wedding) for the already mentioned tax benefits, plus anything else that might come up - being legally tied to someone in the eyes of the law has its uses.
BewareTheOldMan 6y ago
...probably the best explanation and argument for NOT wanting to produce children I've ever seen expressed in written format.
I produced 3 x children (with the ex-wife) and got them all to adulthood and it took a lot a work. Doing it separately made a hard task more difficult, so I see your point.
As long as you truly feel this way and there's a 95-98% chance this is your sentiment throughout your lifetime, then it makes sense.
Other commenters mentioned something about N-Count…it’s a factor if you want a serious and long-lasting LTR - so there’s that for consideration.
I don’t want to get into the N-Count debate or hijack the discussion thread, but a woman who states that N-Count is solely her business and no one else’s is disingenuous and seems ashamed of her sexual past. It promotes the idea that it doesn’t matter if a woman has sex with 30+ men and she can still be somehow equal to a woman who has a count of one or two sexual partners.
It’s dishonest and contrary reasoning. Men who want a good woman will judge based on sexual history - whether she wants children or not.
franky19902 6y ago
It's worth remembering that the costs of a failed LTR often aren't that much different to the costs of a failed marriage.
Most long term LTR have the same assets as a marriage to divide, a similar entwinement of finances, a similar need to split social circles, a joint house with joint possessions.
(And often, children also, though obviously not for you)
And if you do the LTR properly then you'll have individual legal coverage for things that marriage automatically gives that almostsurrendered mentioned - e.g. legal documents for next of kin rights and rights to make medical decisions if one of you is incapacitated. Which would all need to be undone individually.
So it's not worth thinking about now, but when the time comes, remember that a mortgage can be more difficult and more expensive to get out of than a marriage!
BewareTheOldMan 6y ago
If a cohabiting couple is producing children, combining assets, finances, material possessions, and doing all these actions that bring them to near-marriage - what is the point of NOT marrying?
Every now and then someone references Kurt Russell/Goldie Hawn, but regular folks are not K&G. If those two separate and terminate the relationship they both will be fine regarding finances. Other than the emotional aspect of ending a cohabiting relationship, finances and asset division are major issues.
I ask because legal protections are not present if one person dies suddenly/unexpectedly. Marital rights are also ambiguous if a live-in partner becomes seriously ill. Those aspects were some of the reasons for legalizing homosexual marriage. Same-sex couples were denied basic legal rights and privileges normally associated/automatic with legally recognized hetero-marriage.
Why not just get married?
MxUnicorn 6y ago
I'm not invested in the idea of marriage - but this alone is enough to justify marriage IMO.
franky19902 6y ago
Well, that was sort of my point, because OP seemed under the impression that:
My point was, if you arrange a LTR to look after all the things you mention, with wills, and living wills, and legal documentation...
If things don't work out, you have to undo those things one by one. Whereas with marriage, a great swathe of benefits not only immediately apply on marriage, they also (mostly) automatically undo themselves on the dissolution of marriage.
So their idea that one big document is "more difficult" than multiple smaller documents is probably not accurate. (not to mention that employer and state granted things, it's not always possible to get those rights granted to a domestic partner)
Which, as you say, is why gay couples fought long and hard for the one big document instead of having to jump through many, many little legal hoops to protect each other.
parralelpancake 6y ago
well maybe to give the best answer it would help to know why you don't want marriage or children as that is unusual.
From the very small amount we get here it sounds like you might be avoiding the want of commitment because you are worried on some level about getting hurt. Psychologists call this self handicapping