I'm not getting married | RedPillWomen

RedPillWomen · 67 members

Feed Chat Forum Info

67 Members Public Tribe

This community was created as a harbor for RP minded women whose goal is to build a lasting and happy relationship with a great man.

Created by LuckyLittleStar

Forums.Red / RedPillWomen / LTR/MARRIAGE

anxietyhippie

Posted 4y ago in LTR/MARRIAGE - Permalink - Locked - 1.3K Views

Edit: Thank you for all of your opinions. I'm going to call him my husband and get us silicone wedding rings. Have a good day.

edit : I'm 100% okay with not getting married. I just wanted to know if others do the same in the red pill community and if I'm a weirdo for calling him my husband.

I've been with my boyfriend for almost 5 years. In the next two years, we plan to start trying for a baby and I had this idea that we would get married first but it turns out he doesn't want to. I'm going to stay with him as I'm okay with this and as long as we have paperwork to keep us from having issues with children and money in the future I'm happy. But I really wanted to be a Mrs. Is it okay that I call him my husband? am I still considered a housewife? Should I just hyphen ou kids' last name?

I'm pretty much asking am I normal lol realizes but my mom is not red pill she very much woke. His parents are the same. I strongly believe in our relationship and he and I both see nothing causing us to break up we are constantly working and growing and since we've really embraced our traditional roles we have been stronger and happier than ever. No arguments, no confusion, nothing just loves of smiles and support. My family doesn't really support it and his doesn't really seem cool with it either since I work for his business and take care of our home but we arent married.

Permalink

LuckyLittleStar 4y ago

I am locking this thread and banning/temp banning as necessary.

OP did not ask for opinions on whether or not she should get married. In fact, she explicitly stated that she is okay with not being married.

She asked for some advice on how to handle some minor things. Those are the topic of discussion.

RPW is a way of relating to men, that's it. It is not a lifestyle obligation.

For OP, ask your boyfriend what he wants to do about last names for children.

[deleted]

jzdelona 4y ago

Past a certain age and after being together for years it definitely feels dumb to be "boyfriend and girlfriend". And I hated calling my (now husband) my partner, it just sounds so vague like we were a gay couple or something. Nothing against homosexuality of course but I didn't like people drawing their own conclusions about my personal life. Marriage is so much more than just a piece of paper, and I definitely feel closer to my husband after we took the plunge. It is a lifelong promise of fidelity to each other for the world to recognize and I feel it adds a layer of trust, responsibility, and accountability to the relationship. Sounds like OP's boyfriend wants all the perks of a marriage without the accountability and protection it will give her.

LuckyLittleStar 4y ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/p0hfny/im_not_getting_married/h8809oz

LightOverWater 4y ago

Has a history of divorce in his family. This is not a good reason, as you are his woman, not his mother or his sister in law. Does he not trust his own judgement in choosing you? Does he not trust that his judgment in choosing a wife is better than those before him? Or ... perhaps some other thing is bothering him which we/you/he does not know.

I can only think he doesn't trust the system of marriage because you cannot foresee problems resulting in divorce in the future. In other words, nobody who gets married expects to get divorced because it is always due to unforeseen circumstances, yet the divorce rates are high.

If he sees NO reason for you two to split up, but fears divorce, it means he fears something that he knows has 0 chances of happening.

He probably fears the consequences of divorce even if he considers the chances low. Analogy: people buy house insurance because even if the chances of your house burning down are 1 in 10,000 you cannot afford the consequences.

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

Assume a man has a $1 million dollar house. There's a 1 in 3,000 chance (googled it) of his house burning down. This means there is a 0.03% chance of his house burning down and losing $1 million. For him, that chance is too high so he spends $30,000 on house insurance to protect himself.

Now let's talk about divorce.

Depending on his financial situation, RPW assumes a HVM, a divorce can easily cost him in the 7 figures. What are the chances of divorce? Somewhere between 1 in 3 to 1 in 2, or 33%-50%. He now has a 33%-50% of a $1m+ loss where he has no protection because there's no such thing as "divorce insurance." And remember, this is a person who considers 0.03% chance as too high.

As a divorce attorney once said, "Marriage is the most legally significant event of your life and you don't even get a pamphlet."

[deleted]

LuckyLittleStar 4y ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/p0hfny/im_not_getting_married/h8809oz

[deleted]

pearlsandstilettos 4y ago

RPW does not advise against marriage though. Men and women have different goals. We aren't here to help men achieve their goals

[deleted]

LuckyLittleStar 4y ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/p0hfny/im_not_getting_married/h8809oz

anxietyhippie 4y ago

I would have to disagree. I don't see it that way at all. Men usually don't have a say on if a child is born or not with the possibility of women getting abortions or saying they will and then getting child support out of the man. In fact, the more I look it up the more I find out that women actually initiate divorce over 90%. Divorce benefits women. Alimony, child support, the house, etc. I can be "protected" In other ways besides being married. I can be a domestic partner, we can have a power of attorney, he can put me on his life insurance we can also make a legally binding agreement that if anything happens to either of us blah blah blah or if we break up blah blah blah. I don't HAVE to get married. Many relationships that are non-marriage relationships last longer if you investigate them. Everyone I've known who has been married has gotten divorced and it's mostly the woman's fault for not communicating, making assumptions, and not trying to understand at all.

So I do see where you are coming from but there are other ways to protect myself besides marriage.

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

Men usually don't have a say on if a child is born or not with the possibility of women getting abortions or saying they will and then getting child support out of the man. In fact, the more I look it up the more I find out that women actually initiate divorce over 90%. Divorce benefits women. Alimony, child support, the house, etc. I can be "protected" In other ways besides being married.

Holy shit, would not have expected this here. If I could give you 1,000 upvotes.

If women want 100% control of abortion, then they should release the financial obligation of the father.

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

From all your comments under this post you seem to be a bitter man.

Can I ask why having important conversations means someone is a bitter man?

These are the exact conversations that should happen on gendered subs. Men and women cannot fully understand one another's perspective because we live different experiences. It's crucial for men and women to come together, communicate and eventually reach a compromise.

Are you saying that...

I'm saying that there's an imbalance between the rights of men and women when it comes to abortion. Women have 100% of the say when it comes to abortion, but men don't have any say in whether they are financially burdened.

Women are incentivized to have the child because most of the financial obligation rests on the man. There are grave consequences for the man like having to pay 30%-50% of his income for 18-22 years while also the risk of not having equal custody.

I'm fine with women choosing to have the baby as long as it means the man is not financially responsible for the child. Only then might women think twice about having an unplanned baby or having (unsafe?) sex and taking precautions around that. But for now, the deal is: you get a kid while someone else is paying for most of it. And if you think all that child support goes to the kid think again; I know many women who use a significant portion of child support on themselves.

Then you also have the cases of fraud. NBA players are advised to flush condoms down the toilet because a woman can impregnate herself, have a child that the man did not want, and go after him for money.

Then you also have cases where if a woman rapes a man he is still obligated to pay child support.

Then you have cases where you willfully enter a relationship with a single mom but she takes you to court trying to get you to pay for another man's kids (trying to get 2 men to support her).

Then you have cases of paternity fraud where she lies about them being your kids.

The underlying theme here is the courts believe its in the childs' best interest, while women retain 100% control and can choose to abuse it if they desire with the man's destiny completely in her hands.

[deleted]

anxietyhippie 4y ago

Facts! My body my choice removes the man's ability to choose what you do with his bodily functions and his livelihood. That's. Not. Fair. That's not 50/50. It benefits women marriage does the same. And that's not okay. Me not wanting to be on a piece of paper but providing him with the duties OF that piece of paper makes me some. terrible person and/or a pick me. Then i choose that since I have a happy relationship and will continue to!

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

I choose to have unprotected sex and no ability to do whatever I want with the mothers body!

Did you just completely disregard the fact that the woman is also choosing to have unprotected sex? As far as I know, it takes two people to make a baby.

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

This thread is: two people make a baby 50/50. One person has 100% control of the pregnancy.

Your point is?

That you're only looking at the woman's side.

If the father becomes the primary caretaker (which is a shit ton of work btw) then the absent mother

If she doesn't want the kid she has the option to abort. The father does not.

Further, if the father does want the kid and she doesn't, he has no say because she doesn't have to go through with a birth.

[deleted]

LuckyLittleStar 4y ago

No one asked you your opinion. She said she's fine with it.

[deleted]

LuckyLittleStar 4y ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/p0hfny/im_not_getting_married/h8809oz

anxietyhippie 4y ago

but its is just paper, if he and i never get married but share a home, income, businesses, and children but DO NOT have a piece of paper what does it matter?

-8

[deleted]

LuckyLittleStar 4y ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/p0hfny/im_not_getting_married/h8809oz

[deleted]

LuckyLittleStar 4y ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/p0hfny/im_not_getting_married/h8809oz

LightOverWater 4y ago

without the legal protections of marriage for myself and my children. No groom, no womb!

So a man needs to pay millions to have children... but ends up without the children? Raw deal.

EDIT: I see this wasn't taken favourably but I will take downvotes on this comment any day of the week. Men are not ATMs and fathers are not second-class parents.

-7

JadedByEntropy 4y ago

They're not his at all if there aren't papers

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

Only because that's your choice at the moment. The risk has completely transferred to protect you and "your" kids.

[deleted] 4y ago

You realize different countries all have different family laws, correct?

LightOverWater 4y ago

Usually by state/province yes. The laws aren't too far apart. Do you know of any states where the man is protected or the woman has a worse deal?

[deleted] 4y ago

I don’t live in the United States, you’re projecting everywhere. There are many countries where the risk is equal or the woman has the worse deal.

[deleted] 4y ago

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

If you're saying the protections exist no matter what... why does marriage matter?

The protections for marriage and children differ.

You can be not be married and have children: protections (risk) exist for children.

You can be married and not have children: protections (risk) exist for marriage.

You can be married and have children: protections (risk) exist for both marriage and children.

If you're saying protections for children always exist then being married shouldn't matter. The comment was, no groom, no womb... so why groom?

Married or not he will still pay for his child and visitation would be decided either way.

Yes I'm aware, however are the penalties fair? My point is, he can lose both the children and most of the income.

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

What I don’t understand is why anyone would intentionally put themselves at risk of having to deal with someone they’re not married to nor plan to be but share a human with.

I'm curious as to what you mean by "risk of having to deal with"? And do the risks differ for men and women?

He likes her enough to create a life and be linked forever, but not enough to risk his finances.

At that moment, sure. But she can withdraw any benefits she's giving him at any time and completely fuck him over for 20+ years. Her responsibility is lifted but his liability remains.

But either way married or not married they will have the same protections of the court. Marriage doesn’t make a difference or give the mother special privilege.

Depends on local laws. In many places, common law offers some of the protections that marriage (spouses) have, but not all. The protections for children, as far as I can see, are the same in either case.

Special privileges are conferred to the person who takes all/most custody of the children and to the lower income earner.

-2

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

Risk of having to deal with...

I'm not understanding the difference between being married or not. In both cases you can create a life with someone and have children. In both cases you can break up with your partner and not feel good about them, while having to "deal with" mutual ties.

This isn’t an unplanned pregnancy. This is going full steam ahead with creating a person.

Maybe I can help. Is your argument that an unmarried LTR has a much higher probability of separating than a married couple?

What benefits? What is she doing to benefit him that he could not plausibly find in someone else? Are you under the impression that you, she or I am unique or irreplaceable. We are not.

Another poster mentioned the benefits a wife offers:

She gave him a family, stability in the home, emotional support, she cooks, cleans, ect. That matters too.

I'd also add sex. But in all cases, a HVM can actually pay for nearly all of it on his own: cleaning services, any kind of meal, therapy, sex from many girls,(no payment needed), most kinds of support can come from friends/family. This actually plays into my point that a divorce and those duties shouldn't be worth multi-millions.

While she may find some support from a man; a woman is ultimately the care taker. He may be financially responsible for 18 years but he has a higher value as he ages where she does not.

This is some deep red-pilled thinking but at the end of the day it's theory/personal opinion and shouldn't support our laws. The idea of "what kind of romantic partner can my ex have in the future" should not play into these laws. There's always an opposing argument, for example many women will argue that women in their 30s 40s 50s are high value. There's no consensus on this and I don't think its grounds for a law (there would also be a burden of proof to declare someone's value before and after divorce in order to be valid). There's also the mens side: a man can lose 50%-70% of his income to his ex-wife... you're speaking about the downside for women while forgetting that man's life is ruined. He's no longer a HVM because his assets are bled dry and future women know this; who wants a broke guy who is paying their ex wife?

Anyways, I'll throw another discussion point: is a man more likely to separate from a common-law partner than a wife? I'm guessing that's the basis for reducing the female risks you outlined.

[deleted] 4y ago

A man is not more likely to separate from one over the other. A man will do whatever a man wants to do.

LightOverWater 4y ago

Why the commitment of a living breathing human but he can’t commit on a paper? Oh ok.

Because the paper is just a legal document that opens the man up to significant risk. A lot of this risk can lead to grave consequences, is out of his control, and thinking everything is fine today doesn't mean everything will be fine in the future.

I'll throw it back. Why can't you have a loving, monogamous, committed relationship without the piece of paper?

Note: I understand that these issues are not black or white and each relationship has its own dynamic and set of risks.

-5

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

Alimony exists because most men with housewives can go farther in their careers than men who do not and this was the cultural norm in the 19th century. The man would not have been able to make the money he did without the woman caring for the kids. She gave him a family, stability in the home, emotional support, she cooks, cleans, ect. That matters too. The woman deserves to have a safe future if her husband leaves her. She sacrificed her career for him. Although sahm is not a paid position, that does not mean she is a freeloader with no value. The mother who cares for the home works very hard and gives up a lot for her family.

I agree, but not in something like a 50/50 split.

Hypothetical:

Josephine Bezos starts a company in 1994 called Rainforest, an online book store. She marries Mike Tuttle, to become Josephine and Mike Bezos. Josephine works 100h weeks to grow her company to become a $1 trillion conglomerate, where her equity stake is worth $200B. Mike, never in a million years, could have done the same. While Mike should be entitled to a small proportion of financial support, in no way do I see a fair case where Mike is entitled to $100B.

She gave him a family, stability in the home, emotional support, she cooks, cleans, ect. That matters too.

Absolutely, but I personally don't consider Mike giving $100B of support.

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

It's a hypothetical to prove a point. I know it wasn't 50/50. The point is 50/50 doesn't make sense. I'm going to an extreme to figure out where you can draw that line.

MacKenzie Scott was awarded 4.2 Billion. Jeff Bezos current net worth is 193.3 Billion. That is just under 2.2% of his net worth. Surely NOT a 50/50 split.

She actually took 25% stake worth about $60 billion today, but since gave away some to charity.

Is 75/25 the magical fair number?

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

Because, I can have a relationship that is up to my standards with a partner who wants the same thing as I do.

This dodged my question.

And also, just because everything is fine today doesn’t mean it will be when that baby is 2, 4, 16. That is a much bigger commitment with a lot more risk than a piece of paper.

What if the man wants the children? He is every a bit a parent as the mother.

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

Actually I answered you directly. Try asking better questions.

Why can't ~~you~~ someone have a loving, monogamous, committed relationship without the piece of paper?

He should take that up with the court system; which he would be doing if he had been married or not.

And if the courts are biased against men with no recourse?

[deleted] 4y ago

Many people can have that. It appears that having the title and being married were important to OP.

[deleted]

LightOverWater 4y ago

My suggestion would be not to intentionally conceive children with someone whom you believe may one day hold them against you like pawns.

I agree that vetting is super important to reduce risk as much as you can but no one is the same person in divorce. No one knows how they will behave in a divorce in 10 years from now.

[deleted]

LuckyLittleStar 4y ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/p0hfny/im_not_getting_married/h8809oz

[deleted]

LuckyLittleStar 4y ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/p0hfny/im_not_getting_married/h8809oz

[deleted]

anxietyhippie 4y ago

Yes! He has a long family history of divorce. It is also built to benefit the women, not both parties. He doesn't trust the system.

[deleted]

anxietyhippie 4y ago

I’ll be home hundred percent down with a prenup but I own the business as well and will own the businesses from here on out so I see no need to get married as I don’t plan to leave lol

[deleted]

anxietyhippie 4y ago

Cant, you do those medical things with a power of attorney?

[deleted]

anxietyhippie 4y ago

No we do not but in the states around us we do and we have almost been together for 7 years so my state accepts it from other states.

[deleted]

Q-nicorn 4y ago

My husband and I were together 10 years before we married. We called eachother "Husband and wife" since like year 1 (and lived together the entire 10 years). We decided to make it legal when we got pregnant because I didn't have insurance with my job, and we wanted to make sure our children would carry his last name, as well as me to officially make it a family unit. Other than the legal documents, nothing has changed or even felt like it changed.

anxietyhippie 4y ago

I was talking to him about it a second ago actually and we were just saying that we will probably get married after we’ve been together for a longer time because it’ll just make sense by then but I feel like I’m protected regardless because I love him and I don’t wanna leave him lol. And we work together and we really do depend on each other I know that’s like cliché but whatever. So I feel good I feel like will probably do it later in life and I don’t mind changing my name before we actually legally get married I just wanted to know if other people there too. So I’m grateful that you posted and said that you do as well congrats on the baby as well!

Lando_620 4y ago

I'm of his mindset. Marriage is nothing but dangerous to men, and I'm not just talking about if/when the marriage actually ends. See the overly zealous nature of how a marriage will end offers up in itself a massive change in the dynamic even during the marriage.

See, marriage (or the inherited threat of divorce) risks your good behavior to maintain your female (follower) role, in that the legal rewards at the end can & as data suggests, is highly likely to, undermine your desire/drive to fulfill your role to your best ability.

Conversely, the punishment on his end in the legal event of divorce is likely to subjugate his leadership role in your dynamic during the marriage. The problem is that divorce or threat of gives massive authority to women in the relationship dynamic. The issue is the leader needs the authority. That change leaves the responsibility now of leadership but not the authority of it with him. That is a recipe for disaster.

I'm not saying you would succumb to this or that you two can't overcome this, but it is another struggle you will now have to fight against to maintain your partnership. Relationships are already a struggle requiring honest effort on both sides, do you both really want to place another challenge in your path?

anxietyhippie 4y ago

I agree. My boyfriend and I both see not much benefit to him and that's my issue. Our relationship is supposed to benefit both of us. If it benefits one of us and one has more power, so t speak, then it is not fair. Yes I let him lead and yes I follow but these are choices WE made together and it benefits us both. He worries about money and work. I worry about everything else because that's where I naturally fell in our relationship and it works.

The threat of divorce and movement of leadership is something I didn't even think of. I know most women end the relationship whether married or not and especially when children are involved, however, I do not plan to do that. Any and EVERY obstacle we run into we work out together and it has been that way for almost 5 years. We have gotten stronger with each year too. I posted this because I thought more people would share your point of view but I was incorrect. A lot of people have an issue with me wanting the title without the paper. I see no problem with it because I plan to continue to work and love this man as long as we both shall live there is just no paper saying if I get greedy and want to break up I'm entitled to what he built because reasons.

[deleted]

ManguZa 4y ago

I think it's perfectly normal. Husband and wife is how you consider each other, not what the society tells you authorize to do.

Men takes marriage very much more seriously than women, which is why they ask for divorce so much less often. It's a real commitment for them. It's something you should inspire (over the years if necessary), not demand before any real commitment.