Is this a red flag? Angry about not moving in.

[Anonymous]

What is a gigantic red flag is you using the getting the milk for free trope.

MYOB

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One of my female friends has been dating a man for about a year and a half. He's mentioned wanting to get married a couple times, but hasn't initiated a real conversation on it, set a timetable, talked about engagement rings, etc. which has frustrated her a bit.

The other day, he mentioned moving in together and she let him know she wasn't comfortable living together until after they were married. He was upset over this and implied requiring marriage before living together means she doesn't value him as a person.

I said that this seems like a huge red flag to me. He makes more money and doesn't need to be supported, but it feels like one of those "get the milk for free" things. Like he gets all the perks of a wife without any of the risk or responsibilities. And that if he valued her as a person, he'd respect her values.

Because that's exactly what this means. Look I'm feminist all day and twice on Sundays but casual talk of marriage with no real meat behind it, coupled with an invitation to shack up, do not spell commitment to me.

And yes, she can initiate these conversations. And no, there's no problem with people who want to cohabitate before engagement/marriage. But *she* doesn't want that and that's the point.

I'd skip all the "doesn't value me as a person" nonsense and keep it simple. If they've been dating for > a year and aren't in their 20's this thing is either going somewhere or it's not. Now does a wedding need to happen before moving in? I'd think not. But a ring and a date? Yep or I'd say it's been nice and keep it moving.

[Anonymous]

I would not get engaged to nor marry anyone I had not lived with, so no, your scenario does not make sense to
me

[Anonymous]

She has the right to want to be married before moving in with someone she’s dating.

But he has no right to “get mad” and yell at her for voicing her values.

Yes that’s a red flag. You can’t start yelling and getting angry at people when they communicate their perfectly reasonable thoughts. You listen, try to understand, communicate your view, and try to find a mutually agreeable solution. You will do this all the time as a couple and at work and with any future kids. Big red flag if he’s incapable of doing this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is a gigantic red flag is you using the getting the milk for free trope.

MYOB

OP. I don’t necessarily mean sex, and it’s not a judgement on women. What I mean is that he gets the perks of a wife - not just easier access to sex, but let’s be real, women tend to contribute much more around the house than men. So he basically gets a free cook, maid, household manager, and half the finances are covered, but without putting himself in the more vulnerable position of legally committing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is a gigantic red flag is you using the getting the milk for free trope.

MYOB

OP. I don’t necessarily mean sex, and it’s not a judgement on women. What I mean is that he gets the perks of a wife - not just easier access to sex, but let’s be real, women tend to contribute much more around the house than men. So he basically gets a free cook, maid, household manager, and half the finances are covered, but without putting himself in the more vulnerable position of legally committing.

EXACTLY. Kind of a raw deal for her, and the fact that the guy in this scenario took offence at her preferences/values screams total red flag to me. It's ok to want whatever you want - for both of them - but it isn't OK to get angry at your partner over it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we're going to use the woefully outdated concept of getting the milk for free, he presumable already is.

She is getting the sausage for free, but still wants to buy the pig.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it's a red flag when the person who doesn't want to get engaged wants to move in first. Usually, in my experience, that person doesn't really want to commit in the first place and wants to lower their bills instead.

My experience is the opposite.

Well, then we disagree. I think it's one thing to move in if both parties want to. It's another if one party pushes moving in over a bigger commitment.

Currently it looks like one of my friends is going to have to get the sheriff involved in getting her old boyfriend out of the house she owns. She owned it before he insisted on moving in, and then he proceeded to want her to wait on him and eventually quit his job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is a gigantic red flag is you using the getting the milk for free trope.

MYOB

OP. I don’t necessarily mean sex, and it’s not a judgement on women. What I mean is that he gets the perks of a wife - not just easier access to sex, but let’s be real, women tend to contribute much more around the house than men. So he basically gets a free cook, maid, household manager, and half the finances are covered, but without putting himself in the more vulnerable position of legally committing.

Wth would she do that??!?

Oh because if she plays along and does everything maybe she gets a ring? And he can keep being a lazy selfish @$$?

[Anonymous]

What if she moves in an puts up a chore chart or only does her half?

[Anonymous]

The red flag is his anger. Deal-breaker.

[Anonymous]

MYOB is DCUM's (or just a few prolific posters') favorite words.

Of course it's a red flag. He didn't get what he wants, so he threw a tantrum and gaslighted her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is a gigantic red flag is you using the getting the milk for free trope.

MYOB

OP. I don’t necessarily mean sex, and it’s not a judgement on women. What I mean is that he gets the perks of a wife - not just easier access to sex, but let’s be real, women tend to contribute much more around the house than men. So he basically gets a free cook, maid, household manager, and half the finances are covered, but without putting himself in the more vulnerable position of legally committing.

I wouldn’t, and I didn’t, make that legal commitment before actually experiencing living with her day in day out. If you feel this is some sort of zero sum game where you lose if he’s happy in the short term, you’re someone to avoid marrying.

[Anonymous]

Split the difference - they move in together when they get engaged. That's the compromise position for both individuals.

I cannot imagine going through a wedding and then immediately moving at the same time. Holy stress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of my female friends has been dating a man for about a year and a half. He's mentioned wanting to get married a couple times, but hasn't initiated a real conversation on it, set a timetable, talked about engagement rings, etc. which has frustrated her a bit.

The other day, he mentioned moving in together and she let him know she wasn't comfortable living together until after they were married. He was upset over this and implied requiring marriage before living together means she doesn't value him as a person.

I said that this seems like a huge red flag to me. He makes more money and doesn't need to be supported, but it feels like one of those "get the milk for free" things. Like he gets all the perks of a wife without any of the risk or responsibilities. And that if he valued her as a person, he'd respect her values.

Because that's exactly what this means. Look I'm feminist all day and twice on Sundays but casual talk of marriage with no real meat behind it, coupled with an invitation to shack up, do not spell commitment to me.

And yes, she can initiate these conversations. And no, there's no problem with people who want to cohabitate before engagement/marriage. But *she* doesn't want that and that's the point.

I'd skip all the "doesn't value me as a person" nonsense and keep it simple. If they've been dating for > a year and aren't in their 20's this thing is either going somewhere or it's not. Now does a wedding need to happen before moving in? I'd think not. But a ring and a date? Yep or I'd say it's been nice and keep it moving.

This. If she talks to him candidly and he still balks or pretends not to get it, then she needs to dump him because she'll never be the one he yearns for.