| People calling cohabitation with intent get married or avoid a blind divorce as "shacking up" need to get off their high horse and walk back to 2024. |
This^. |
|
OP, do whatever you feel is correct. Trust that you will be able to grieve your losses and move on no matter what happens.
Hoping the outcome will NOT be years of regret and despair with the only stupid prize being you "learned so much". Signed, Single, bitter, childless 50-year-old woman who moved in without a ring because some guy promised "marriage would happen 'soon'" Kidding. Signed, Married, happy, 50-year-old woman with two lovely kids, had them at 34 and 38. Moved in with their father after the wedding. Prior to him, wasted 5 years living with guy who said "marriage would happen 'soon." Married and 6-months later we divorced. And yes, the only stupid prize was I 'learned so much' and can drop it here for the consideration and judgments of strangers. Good luck. |
| I did, and many people I know who are now married did as well. But as others have said - have an exit strategy. I certainly did and my now husband knew it. I didn't threaten or anything, there was no ultimatum, but it was empowering to know that I could walk out at any moment. |
In this day and age, isn't that the reality whether you've been married for 30 years or lived together for 3 months? A better advice would be, don't comingle finances, have your own investments, take care of your career and happiness. A man in your life is a bonus, not a plan. |
NP- no. When you're married you can't just walk out at any moment. You'd need a divorce and there is so much that's comingled. And kids to think about. It's nothing like being single and living together. |
All that is needed for a divorce to happen is for one person to want it. That's it. Everything else is details. |
I would agree with you if it didn’t seem that the power dynamic of engagement is within the boyfriend‘s favor. OP herself said she’s been told “it will happen when it happens“, implying she has no control over the timeline or the eventuality of the engagement itself. Living together in the scenario sounds like him evaluating her and her being evaluated. I’m all for some social traditions, but I very much dislike this idea that an engagement and planning a life together is some surprise a man bestows on a woman. As women we all know how deliberate we need to be in choosing a life partner because it impacts our happiness, Our children, our financial future, etc. Treating this as a happy accident is not good footing to start on. I recognize that it takes some of the “Romance” out of it, but let’s be fair, those concepts are dated from a time when women were chattel. |
|
As someone who did it, and has been with their partner for 20 years.
If marriage is important to you, no. It doesn’t mean you can’t go on to have children, to live together forever, to build a life… you’re just not likely to get that ring, or that ring on the timeline you hope. If you have a timeline, stick to that and the next reliable step. |
When you don’t get married, you choose to be together every day. Also, like it or not, your lives do become commingled, but not as so legally messy. |
I agree with you! Women should 100% be involved in the engagement process. It should be a discussion, not a surprise. It shouldn't be looked at as a prize imo. We are both adults, we are both partners, we should both be involved. To me, moving in and living together was important for ME to decide if I wanted to marry this person. He had never lived on his own, so I feel like I was auditioning him . It was important for me to see if we were compatible and could handle it. If OP looks it at a similar way, it doesnt need to have an uneven power dynamic - especially if she keeps her condo, she holds all the cards as far as them living together.
|
| You expressed your timeline and he did not agree, so your going to move in? |
+1 |
So he wants to marry you, but only if you get through the probationary period? And "it will happen when it happens" - what does that mean? That would be a hard no from me. |
"Getting the government involved" has legal benefits. In general, men - including "good" men - will do as much or as little as they can get away with. |