7 yr relationship, no ring yet - am I wasting my time?

[Anonymous]

All the biological stop watch keepers are out in numbers.

OP, giving this guy an ultimatum is the worst mistake you can make in this situation. It will only lead to resentments later. All you need to do is make your own decision as to what will make you happy over the long term. Many women play the biological stopwatch game with men, only to end up living dull and mediocre lives together. I think the advice the men gave on this thread are the best. The advice about taking matters in your own hands will certainly get you married, but seriously, what kind of marriage? Can you see yourself married to this guy today if both of you repeated the vows now and sign?

Only you can answer, not anyone else who had ultimatums work for them. Today he wants time to save, tomorrow he wants time before having kids, next week he wants time to learn being a father and leave you with all the parenting stress, then you both resent each other, and no doubt he can rightly argue that you foisted your way on him.

A word to the wise is sufficient.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why is a ring that much of a difference to what you guys already have? Men and women think differently and this thread really brings this out. Women tend to take things personally when a man is madly in love with them, but puts breaks on 'legally joining assets and liabilities' (you women call it marriage but for men, we call a spade a spade). Let me explain.

I can totally relate to where your BF is coming from and going (not that I am attempting to interpret his actions or speak for him). I had something similar to yours and decided to get married after I completed my MSc, was stable in my career, and was more financially secure, so I could have some freedom just in case a baby came along early. After she gave her ultimatum (as some here are encouraging you to do) I decided to get married at the tender age of 28 yo. No fault of mine, the marriage ended soon after, and this was my high school sweet heart who I was together with for 10+ years. While there is not necessarily any parallel between the reasons for its failure and your circumstance (because I would have still been married today had she not betrayed me), you have to ACCEPT that both of you might NOT be compatible, despite the 'on the surface' reasons you gave to suggest otherwise.

The truth is men mature much later than women and the obligations and expectations of maintaining this relationship might be getting in the way of your BF pursuing his professional ambitions and coming into his own. Yes, you are at the stage where you are ready to make things official legally and settle forever, but your BF still has unresolved professional ambitions, and that is what makes you incompatible (despite the similar values, frequent sex, etc that you mention; which are just byproducts of human interaction anyway). At the core, both of you are steering down different routes. Yes he is in love and would do anything for you, but he has not come into his own person and you have to accept this, and help him to see this for himself, because he has conflicting emotions. I can also guess that privately he is stressing about all of this.

By age 30 I was divorced and have since completed a PhD and am now very much clearer what I want and what makes me happy. I remember while married there were so many expectations around having a child, buying a home, etc, which really conflicted with my inner guts. The truth is, men reach this level of maturity and stability in their mid 30s to 40s, unlike women who do in their mid 20s, not to mention the race towards childbirth and the proverbial biological clock. The fact that you guys have been together for so long as well didn't give him much room to find himself either. So my advice, if you really want to spend the rest of your life with this guy, just lay off and give him space. Call time on the relationship if you must, or reassure him that you do not want him to get married and then feel unfulfilled and then the both of you become roommates of FWBs in your young marriage. He seems to be at a very critical stage of his development and so I think you should understand and give him space to grow, WITHOUT ANY EXPECTATIONS on either side. Meaning, you both may or may not continue.

And for God's sake stop seeing it as wasting time! You have a good man it seems. The time you are spending or spent together gave you much emotional, physical/sexual, and possibly professional benefits as well. LTRs are never time wasters, they are learning curves and help us navigate different seasons in our lives. I sound like a father and I'm just 33 yo ...been through a lot and took a lot of ME time to understand life, so it follows.

All the best OP!

PP, while I appreciate your response, it's pretty presumptuous to speak for all men and women on the bolded point above. To many of us, male and female, marriage means a LOT more than "joint liabilities and assets."

Thanks for reading and commenting.

I really don't want to sound too academic and get into the history of world civilizations here but there are many different approaches to marriage in the world. There has never been one approach or definition throughout human history. Fortunately or unfortunately, we in the Western Anglo-American experience have relied on an approach which is derived from 17th and 18th Century Western European traditions (or earlier, don't quote me). Today, all it amounts to in legal terms is the joining of assets and liabilities. A marriage 'meaning a LOT more than' this, is no different than being in a serious and committed LTR, because today we don't necessarily need the law to help us remain committed to our partners. Our present approach to marriage was aimed at 'civilizing' what we now call 'common-law' unions so that two persons can have one legal personality for the purposes of property and family life. Hence women assuming the last name of the husband. (I should also add too that this is why there is the philosophical debate today about 'marriage equality' because it is viewed as unfair by some, to have the law privileging heterosexual unions while discriminating against homosexual ones).

So our approach to marriage, at the heart of it, is really a legal arrangement that evolved from centuries ago. So it is quite epistemologically safe to call a 'spade a spade'

Well, for all of your academic speak, you fail to acknowledge that for many people marriage is a religious sacrament in addition to a legal arrangement, and has been for a long time. THAT is the difference of which I speak.
And it's not immaterial to those of us for whom it matters.

...and for these 'people' there has still never been any single definition or approach to marriage. If you are intimating Christianity, then different Christian cultures have practiced marriage differently over time, and still do! Nowhere in OP's original post did she even allude to her being one of these 'people', so it's best to speak about marriage broadly and generally, rather than what it means to individual sub-cultures and religious cleavages.

I really don't want to detract from the real issue that OP raises so I invite you to do some more reading/research around the subject.

P.S. Sorry for the 'academic speak' but hard earned time and tuition fees have put me in the position to weigh in and hopefully help OP through this difficult time. So a debate here is not necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Religious sacrament is important. So is social conformity and convention. A cohabitating couple is not viewed in the same way as a married couple.

And contrary to belief, "common law" does NOT afford you the same rights as marriage. You have access to benefits, taxation, etc., but if something happens to your partner, you do not have automatic access to property, assets, power of attorney, and the like.

If you choose to live together get a lawyer and get it spelled out if you want to be treated as a married couple. It doesn't matter "how" you live. As a partner, you can put all the payments into a home, etc. and if your partner dies, have NO right to that home if it was solely in their name. This is unlike a married couple.

There are benefits of marriage, financially, socially, legally, spiritually. Don't be fooled thinking a spade is a spade. It's not. It's like a club and a spade - similar, but different.

Oh, I'm PP who has been waiting 11 years. I know of what I speak.

Well established fact, except that OP did not say she wanted marriage for these civil benefits. She was implicitly clear that she wanted marriage for love and emotional security. Obviously she is not getting emotional security now, with or without marriage, so the overwhelming advice is for her to call time on the relationship...no?

[Anonymous]

OP, I'm 31. My hairstylist told me recently that she regrets spending critical years 27-33 with the wrong guy. How it took an additional 2-3 years to get over him and truly be open again...please factor that into your relationship as well. Even if you walk away today, it will take time to heal.

Do you live together? Can you handle waiting around another year without a proposal? You won't get this time back.

[Anonymous]

If nothing after a year you should have moved on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just ask him to marry you if you want to. Enough of this acting like some helpless waif who just has to sit around and wait. Equality doesn't stop at the door of relationships. Don't fall back on tradition and traditional gender roles just because it helps you justify your passive role in a relationship. Women can make decisions too and take an active role.

I'm as feminist as they come, but I think this is a bad idea. Men like to be the pursuers.

Since when do women care about what men like? Only when it benefits them and gets them an expensive ring and gets them off the hook for having to be the one to make the big decision to propose. Falling back on traditional gender roles when it benefits you and crusading against them when it doesn't is shallow and hypocritical.

How about I explain my view this way: men are generally more reluctant to marry than women, but marriage benefits men much more than it benefits women. No sense to leading a reluctant man to the altar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why is a ring that much of a difference to what you guys already have? Men and women think differently and this thread really brings this out. Women tend to take things personally when a man is madly in love with them, but puts breaks on 'legally joining assets and liabilities' (you women call it marriage but for men, we call a spade a spade). Let me explain.

I can totally relate to where your BF is coming from and going (not that I am attempting to interpret his actions or speak for him). I had something similar to yours and decided to get married after I completed my MSc, was stable in my career, and was more financially secure, so I could have some freedom just in case a baby came along early. After she gave her ultimatum (as some here are encouraging you to do) I decided to get married at the tender age of 28 yo. No fault of mine, the marriage ended soon after, and this was my high school sweet heart who I was together with for 10+ years. While there is not necessarily any parallel between the reasons for its failure and your circumstance (because I would have still been married today had she not betrayed me), you have to ACCEPT that both of you might NOT be compatible, despite the 'on the surface' reasons you gave to suggest otherwise.

The truth is men mature much later than women and the obligations and expectations of maintaining this relationship might be getting in the way of your BF pursuing his professional ambitions and coming into his own. Yes, you are at the stage where you are ready to make things official legally and settle forever, but your BF still has unresolved professional ambitions, and that is what makes you incompatible (despite the similar values, frequent sex, etc that you mention; which are just byproducts of human interaction anyway). At the core, both of you are steering down different routes. Yes he is in love and would do anything for you, but he has not come into his own person and you have to accept this, and help him to see this for himself, because he has conflicting emotions. I can also guess that privately he is stressing about all of this.

By age 30 I was divorced and have since completed a PhD and am now very much clearer what I want and what makes me happy. I remember while married there were so many expectations around having a child, buying a home, etc, which really conflicted with my inner guts. The truth is, men reach this level of maturity and stability in their mid 30s to 40s, unlike women who do in their mid 20s, not to mention the race towards childbirth and the proverbial biological clock. The fact that you guys have been together for so long as well didn't give him much room to find himself either. So my advice, if you really want to spend the rest of your life with this guy, just lay off and give him space. Call time on the relationship if you must, or reassure him that you do not want him to get married and then feel unfulfilled and then the both of you become roommates of FWBs in your young marriage. He seems to be at a very critical stage of his development and so I think you should understand and give him space to grow, WITHOUT ANY EXPECTATIONS on either side. Meaning, you both may or may not continue.

And for God's sake stop seeing it as wasting time! You have a good man it seems. The time you are spending or spent together gave you much emotional, physical/sexual, and possibly professional benefits as well. LTRs are never time wasters, they are learning curves and help us navigate different seasons in our lives. I sound like a father and I'm just 33 yo ...been through a lot and took a lot of ME time to understand life, so it follows.

All the best OP!

PP, while I appreciate your response, it's pretty presumptuous to speak for all men and women on the bolded point above. To many of us, male and female, marriage means a LOT more than "joint liabilities and assets."

Thanks for reading and commenting.

I really don't want to sound too academic and get into the history of world civilizations here but there are many different approaches to marriage in the world. There has never been one approach or definition throughout human history. Fortunately or unfortunately, we in the Western Anglo-American experience have relied on an approach which is derived from 17th and 18th Century Western European traditions (or earlier, don't quote me). Today, all it amounts to in legal terms is the joining of assets and liabilities. A marriage 'meaning a LOT more than' this, is no different than being in a serious and committed LTR, because today we don't necessarily need the law to help us remain committed to our partners. Our present approach to marriage was aimed at 'civilizing' what we now call 'common-law' unions so that two persons can have one legal personality for the purposes of property and family life. Hence women assuming the last name of the husband. (I should also add too that this is why there is the philosophical debate today about 'marriage equality' because it is viewed as unfair by some, to have the law privileging heterosexual unions while discriminating against homosexual ones).

So our approach to marriage, at the heart of it, is really a legal arrangement that evolved from centuries ago. So it is quite epistemologically safe to call a 'spade a spade'

Well, for all of your academic speak, you fail to acknowledge that for many people marriage is a religious sacrament in addition to a legal arrangement, and has been for a long time. THAT is the difference of which I speak.
And it's not immaterial to those of us for whom it matters.

...and for these 'people' there has still never been any single definition or approach to marriage. If you are intimating Christianity, then different Christian cultures have practiced marriage differently over time, and still do! Nowhere in OP's original post did she even allude to her being one of these 'people', so it's best to speak about marriage broadly and generally, rather than what it means to individual sub-cultures and religious cleavages.

I really don't want to detract from the real issue that OP raises so I invite you to do some more reading/research around the subject.

P.S. Sorry for the 'academic speak' but hard earned time and tuition fees have put me in the position to weigh in and hopefully help OP through this difficult time. So a debate here is not necessary.

Okay fine. My point is that it is offensive to intimate that women ascribe romantic notions to marriage and men only think of it as a legal arrangement, when in my experience and I'm sure that of many others that is not true. And it IS germane to the conversation when considering the advice being provided.

Just so you know that this woman finds your hard earned time and tuition fees to have resulted in a bunch of obnoxious overgeneralizations that are borderline mysoginist in tone. "Religious cleavages?" Give me a break.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Completely disagree with 33-year-old man posting. It must be nice to have all the time in the world (almost) to have children, but that's not the reality for women.

OP, if you love this guy, you need to propose. Simple as that. Stop waiting and take matters into your own hands. If he says no, time to leave.

Speaking as a 34-year-old woman, what I have learned and what a wise older friend told me about life is that you don't wait until the "perfect time" for what you want. You might wait until it's practical or possible, but don't wait until everything is "just right." This is why so many men in LTR who get broken up with suddenly get engaged and married -- after they get dumped, they realize that waiting for the perfect time FAILED and they lost out. They don't make that mistake again.

Don't wait for the perfect moment to get married, have a baby, expand your family, buy a house. You can't get that time back. If you have the basics (financial stability, a good relationship, etc), you ARE ready. If he's not, time to move on.

(I should add, DH and I got married in our mid-20s and started having kids at 30, despite us both not feeling "perfectly ready" for either step, we were ready enough. Looking back, I am glad I followed my friend's advice and didn't drag my feet on the things that were important to me.)

Men drag their feet because they are having a great time being single and don't want to be tied down. Then they get dumped and panic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Religious sacrament is important. So is social conformity and convention. A cohabitating couple is not viewed in the same way as a married couple.

And contrary to belief, "common law" does NOT afford you the same rights as marriage. You have access to benefits, taxation, etc., but if something happens to your partner, you do not have automatic access to property, assets, power of attorney, and the like.

If you choose to live together get a lawyer and get it spelled out if you want to be treated as a married couple. It doesn't matter "how" you live. As a partner, you can put all the payments into a home, etc. and if your partner dies, have NO right to that home if it was solely in their name. This is unlike a married couple.

There are benefits of marriage, financially, socially, legally, spiritually. Don't be fooled thinking a spade is a spade. It's not. It's like a club and a spade - similar, but different.

Oh, I'm PP who has been waiting 11 years. I know of what I speak.

Well established fact, except that OP did not say she wanted marriage for these civil benefits. She was implicitly clear that she wanted marriage for love and emotional security. Obviously she is not getting emotional security now, with or without marriage, so the overwhelming advice is for her to call time on the relationship...no?

Exactly. Mr. Smarty Pants Ph.D., take note. A lay off your tiresome lectures.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Men drag their feet because they are having a great time being single and don't want to be tied down. Then they get dumped and panic.

Oh please. Women are like buses. If you miss one, there's another coming in 10 minutes.

[Anonymous]

Tldr

Short answer: yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Why is a ring that much of a difference to what you guys already have? Men and women think differently and this thread really brings this out. Women tend to take things personally when a man is madly in love with them, but puts breaks on 'legally joining assets and liabilities' (you women call it marriage but for men, we call a spade a spade). Let me explain.

I can totally relate to where your BF is coming from and going (not that I am attempting to interpret his actions or speak for him). I had something similar to yours and decided to get married after I completed my MSc, was stable in my career, and was more financially secure, so I could have some freedom just in case a baby came along early. After she gave her ultimatum (as some here are encouraging you to do) I decided to get married at the tender age of 28 yo. No fault of mine, the marriage ended soon after, and this was my high school sweet heart who I was together with for 10+ years. While there is not necessarily any parallel between the reasons for its failure and your circumstance (because I would have still been married today had she not betrayed me), you have to ACCEPT that both of you might NOT be compatible, despite the 'on the surface' reasons you gave to suggest otherwise.

The truth is men mature much later than women and the obligations and expectations of maintaining this relationship might be getting in the way of your BF pursuing his professional ambitions and coming into his own. Yes, you are at the stage where you are ready to make things official legally and settle forever, but your BF still has unresolved professional ambitions, and that is what makes you incompatible (despite the similar values, frequent sex, etc that you mention; which are just byproducts of human interaction anyway). At the core, both of you are steering down different routes. Yes he is in love and would do anything for you, but he has not come into his own person and you have to accept this, and help him to see this for himself, because he has conflicting emotions. I can also guess that privately he is stressing about all of this.

By age 30 I was divorced and have since completed a PhD and am now very much clearer what I want and what makes me happy. I remember while married there were so many expectations around having a child, buying a home, etc, which really conflicted with my inner guts. The truth is, men reach this level of maturity and stability in their mid 30s to 40s, unlike women who do in their mid 20s, not to mention the race towards childbirth and the proverbial biological clock. The fact that you guys have been together for so long as well didn't give him much room to find himself either. So my advice, if you really want to spend the rest of your life with this guy, just lay off and give him space. Call time on the relationship if you must, or reassure him that you do not want him to get married and then feel unfulfilled and then the both of you become roommates of FWBs in your young marriage. He seems to be at a very critical stage of his development and so I think you should understand and give him space to grow, WITHOUT ANY EXPECTATIONS on either side. Meaning, you both may or may not continue.

And for God's sake stop seeing it as wasting time! You have a good man it seems. The time you are spending or spent together gave you much emotional, physical/sexual, and possibly professional benefits as well. LTRs are never time wasters, they are learning curves and help us navigate different seasons in our lives. I sound like a father and I'm just 33 yo ...been through a lot and took a lot of ME time to understand life, so it follows.

All the best OP!

PP, while I appreciate your response, it's pretty presumptuous to speak for all men and women on the bolded point above. To many of us, male and female, marriage means a LOT more than "joint liabilities and assets."

Thanks for reading and commenting.

I really don't want to sound too academic and get into the history of world civilizations here but there are many different approaches to marriage in the world. There has never been one approach or definition throughout human history. Fortunately or unfortunately, we in the Western Anglo-American experience have relied on an approach which is derived from 17th and 18th Century Western European traditions (or earlier, don't quote me). Today, all it amounts to in legal terms is the joining of assets and liabilities. A marriage 'meaning a LOT more than' this, is no different than being in a serious and committed LTR, because today we don't necessarily need the law to help us remain committed to our partners. Our present approach to marriage was aimed at 'civilizing' what we now call 'common-law' unions so that two persons can have one legal personality for the purposes of property and family life. Hence women assuming the last name of the husband. (I should also add too that this is why there is the philosophical debate today about 'marriage equality' because it is viewed as unfair by some, to have the law privileging heterosexual unions while discriminating against homosexual ones).

So our approach to marriage, at the heart of it, is really a legal arrangement that evolved from centuries ago. So it is quite epistemologically safe to call a 'spade a spade'

Well, for all of your academic speak, you fail to acknowledge that for many people marriage is a religious sacrament in addition to a legal arrangement, and has been for a long time. THAT is the difference of which I speak.
And it's not immaterial to those of us for whom it matters.

...and for these 'people' there has still never been any single definition or approach to marriage. If you are intimating Christianity, then different Christian cultures have practiced marriage differently over time, and still do! Nowhere in OP's original post did she even allude to her being one of these 'people', so it's best to speak about marriage broadly and generally, rather than what it means to individual sub-cultures and religious cleavages.

I really don't want to detract from the real issue that OP raises so I invite you to do some more reading/research around the subject.

P.S. Sorry for the 'academic speak' but hard earned time and tuition fees have put me in the position to weigh in and hopefully help OP through this difficult time. So a debate here is not necessary.

Wow, you are dumb. Taking a simple issue -- does he or does he not want to commit and going on and on

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP I made a rule that after 2 years, men should know if they want to marry you and if they haven't proposed after year 3 they're gone.

I'm a dude and I think this is eminently reasonable. You know after two years whether or not someone is a long term fit or not. Let me put it this way: if you don't know the answer is yes, with a great deal of certainty, after two years, it's highly unlikely you will ever feel that certainty. It takes three months for people to reveal themselves (it's hard to keep a mask on longer than that) - after a year, you probably know them well. After a second year to make sure you think you can work together, you've got your answer. If ambiguity remains, then that means the answer is NO. Tossing in a third year as a margin for error seems plenty generous.

OP: Ordinarily my advice would be to step up and propose yourself, but after seven years, he's in stasis - doesn't want to face change (either moving forward to marriage or being alone) - and is likely to just say yes to avoid change. That's a terrible reason to marry and one sees lots of divorces that started this way: someone who really didn't want to get married but went ahead with it because they were afraid to face being alone or the pain of breaking up.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with starting a relationship being very clear that you are looking for someone to get serious with - just eliminate all the dabblers and toe-dippers up front.

+1 and when you don't waste years, it does not hurt so much when 3 months later he marries someone else, who is a better fir. Who has all these years to wait?

[Anonymous]

Man here, not sure if this has been raised.

It took me 6 years to propose. My wife did give me an ultimatum, so to speak. She said she wanted to get married and have kids. We were 31. I was in no rush but she said she wanted to have kids and be married and if I wasn't going to do that she needed to move on. If it were up to me, I would have waited, I had neither marriage or kids on my timetable. Anyway, I had a choice, and I chose to propose. 10 years and 2 kids later, we are going strong.

You need to figure this out soon. I am sure some trolls have stated this in cruel terms, but the truth is I know lots of single never married women in their mid-30s who lament missing out on marriage and kids. They are awesome, attractive, great catches, but there really aren't a lot of single, never married men left in their 30s. The common denominator for these awesome women is they spent way to long in a dead end relationship in their 20s when the dating market was loaded with eligible men.