"Living together" doesn't soothe the pains of divorce

It is almost a truism in my generation - "A couple should live together before they marry to test-drive the relationship." Even among some claiming the cross of Christ, it has become a de facto arrangement for many (the excuse usually being reduced expenses of cohabitation). But ethicists and theologians have warned for years that cohabitation is just like a marriage - without the assurance of actual promises or the protection of law. Now, we have proof in a new study which shows that cohabitating couples who split have all of the same pain and problems of divorcing spouses, but without any of the social or legal protections that married couples have available to them.

"I don't think there's any difference in how I felt after the fact, because it felt like it was a marriage," Emerson says. And when they broke up, "it still felt like it was a divorce."
Cohabiting is a significant emotional attachment, and when you break up, "it's going to hurt a lot," says Scott Stanley, co-director of the Center for Marital and Family Studies at the University of Denver. "By cohabiting vs. marrying, people aren't avoiding that aspect of pain."
And because cohabiting has become so widespread — more than 60% of couples who marry today live together first, studies have found — the number of court battles between former partners and the number of cohabitation agreements have increased during the past five years, according to the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.

There's a reason marriage was created - to provide a stable foundation for family, and to protect those willing to give up their own lives for those they love. Modern cohabitation has not improved upon it.

Single Men Don't Fear Marriage

There is a common assumption in modern American culture about single men. They're all immature boy-men who flee from commitment like Japanese extras from Godzilla. But a new study appears to put the lie to this sterotype, showing American men want families just as much as their female counterparts.

Single men are, on the whole, as likely to want to get married as single women, the survey found. They are more likely than women to be open to dating people of a different race or religion, more prone to falling in love at first sight, more eager to combine bank accounts sooner and more likely to want children. (That distant choking sound you hear is thousands of women finding this news hard to swallow.)

...Men's greater inclination toward parenthood, however, seems to hold across every age group. While more than half the single men ages 21 to 35 wanted kids, only 46% of the women did. After that, the difference widens further, and not just out of biological reality. Only 16% of childless women in the still fertile years from 35 to 44 wanted kids; 27% of the men did. Plus, more women than men were prepared to say definitively that they were skipping parenthood.

Hat tip to CRChair for this article. It makes this single man feel better that he is not alone.

Iran's "Marriage Crisis"?

I have been so busy with things at work that posting has been light this week. We discussed this interesting article from Time.Com at GNO this week on the upcoming Iranian elections, and how youth are beginning to really change that country.

These days, the phrase "marriage crisis" pops up in election debates, newspapers and blogs and is considered by government officials and ordinary Iranians alike to be one of the nation's most serious problems. It refers to the rising number of young people of marrying age who cannot afford to marry or are choosing not to tie the knot. By official estimates, there are currently 13 million to 15 million Iranians of marrying age; to keep that figure steady, Iran should be registering about 1.65 million marriages each year. The real figure is closer to half that.

Why does this matter? Because Iran's government cannot afford to further alienate the young people that comprise more than 35% of its population.

Will these kinds of issue topple Ahmadinejad? And if so, will it mean anything in a country where the Ayatollahs are the Supreme Court? It should be an interesting time to observe Iran.

A priest's advice on finding a spouse

It is funny how UNcommon it is to find COMMON sense in the world. But here is advice from a celibate, unmarried priest on what to look for in a spouse. It comes not from direct experience, but from watching happy and miserable parishioners. Funny how simple and logical it all is.

“Don’t marry a problem character thinking you will change him. He’s a heavy drinker, or some other kind of addict, but if he marries a good woman, he’ll settle down. People are the same after marriage as before, only more so.

“Take a good, unsentimental look at his family — you’ll learn a lot about him and his attitude towards women. ...I remember counseling a pious Catholic woman that it might not be prudent to marry a pious Muslim, whose attitude about women was very different. Love trumped prudence; the annulment process was instigated by her six months later.

What do our married (and formerly married) readers think? Good advice? Do you have any more for we singletons?

California Court Rules Ban On Gay Marriage Unconstitutional

Here in California we have a great process that allows us to keep our legislators in check. If we want a law and the legislature keeps dragging its feet, we can put it on the ballot, vote for it, and make it law. It's "government of the people, by the people, for the people." Back in March of 2000, California passed Proposition 22 which amended state law to read "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or
recognized in California." 61.4% of the people who voted on the proposition voted yes. Unfortunately, since it is only law and not part of the Constitution, it is still subject to the courts. Well, the top court in California has had its say and has deemed the ban on gay marriage unconstitutional. Now, I am against gay marriage, believing that, by definition, marriage is between one man and one woman, but I am also upset at how the will of the people were subverted by the courts. The system of checks and balances is a great thing... by having the courts able to declare a law unconstitutional, it is a check on the legislature. The problem I have is that the courts, instead of being "for the people" have decided to legislate from the bench not only overriding the people's will, but "creating law" as well - getting rid of the check and balance system. The next step for traditional marriage proponents will most likely have to be a constitutional amendment, which means more spending to "change" the law back to what it "is".

Information on Prop 22 taken from ProtectMarriage.com and the Official California Legislative Information site. Disclosure: ProtectMarriage.com is a former customer of my company prior to the sale of that part of our business.

Irony in Marriage and Unfaithfulness

This is both sad and amazing. Amazing because of the coincidence, and sad because of the wrong lessons drawn from it.

Sana Klaric, 27, and husband Adnan, 32, from Zenica, poured out their hearts to each other over their marriage troubles, and both felt they had found their real soul mate.

The couple met on an online chat forum while he was at work and she in an internet cafe, and started chatting under the names Sweetie and Prince of Joy.

They eventually decided to meet up - but there was no happy ending when they realised what had happened.

Now they are both filing for divorce - with each accusing the other of being unfaithful.

Sana said: "I thought I had found the love of my life. The way this Prince of Joy spoke to me, the things he wrote, the tenderness in every expression was something I had never had in my marriage.

Am I the only one who thinks they are drawing EXACTLY the wrong conclusions from this? The problem: A marriage where you think you married the wrong person. Then you discover EXACTLY the kind of person you are looking for, and it turns out to be your spouse! Shouldn't the next logical thought be, "Hey, maybe this IS the person for me, and I need to do what it takes to make this marriage work."? After all, if you can fall in love twice with the same person, it proves they are the kind of person you are made for.

But maybe this is merely the rants of a single romantic who has no idea how relationships actually work.

When is married, married

It seems that Charlize Theron has gotten married. This would not normally be news, but the way she got married is the interesting part. Theron and her 7 year boyfriend simply decided they were married, got rings and are now calling themselves married. So, the question is - are they really married. In terms of the law, clearly they're not. But in social and moral terms, I'd say they are married. Marriage at its very base is two people saying that they are committed to each other and love each other and want to spend their lives together. You can add a religious context to that as well as a legal component, but those are both 'plug-ins' to the base of what marriage is. They have taken the base of marriage and left out the other 'plug-ins'. Not to be pessimistic about this, but what happens if they 'divorce'? California has some interesting laws about common-law marriages (which is where I believe this marriage belongs), so the 'divorce' question might be answered by those laws - none of which do I actually know. I certainly hope that they never have to answer that question. Best of luck to them especially since they live in a world where only 10% of marriages last - or at least that's the way it seems.

Update: According to Wikipedia California does not sanction common-law marriages. So, I guess that is not an option for Mr. and Mrs. Theron.

What is a "Civil Union" and how does it differ from "Marriage"?

Something often lost in the Same-Sex Marriage debate, is the question of what exactly a so-called "Civil Union" is. FactCheck.Org has up a great article that lays out exactly what he difference is, and why it is too much for some and not enough for others.

Other federal areas in which couples in civil unions don't have the same rights as married couples include immigration (a partner who's a foreign national can't become an American by entering into a civil union with someone) and veterans' and military benefits (only opposite-sex spouses have a right to pensions, compensation for service-related deaths, medical care, housing and the right to burial in veterans’ cemeteries). Gay couples, however, may actually benefit when applying for programs such as Medicaid or government housing that require low-income eligibility. A spouse’s income is included in such applications, but a same-sex partner’s income is not.

Very interesting and enlightening. It may change my opinion about which is the right way to go on this issue.

Woman-Speak Translations for Men

I am neither married nor currently in a relationship. So, I have no significant woman in my life to check with on this. But somehow, I suspect this post could have saved many relationships. Men and women both speak English here in the USA, but that does not mean they speak the same language.

1. Fine: This is the word women use to end an argument when they are right and you need to shut up.
2. Five Minutes: If she is getting dressed, this means a half an hour. Five minutes is only five minutes if you have just been given five more minutes to watch the game before helping around the house.
3. Nothing: This is the calm before the storm. This means something, and you should be on your toes. Arguments that begin with nothing usually end in fine.
4. Go Ahead: This is a dare, not permission. Don’t Do It!

Married bloggers, if it is safe to do so, please educate me on whether these would have been useful in your pre-marriage counselling.

I am single, but my married friends tell me this is true