Getting married and blowing off your friends without warning, C/D S/D

I've known a few different men who get submerged when they get into a new romantic relationship - like they are unable to have a relationship with a new partner and maintain their friendships, social cliques, etc. I don't know why this is, but I've noticed it a bunch (the above story probably being a most dramatic example of it).

being in a relationship vs not being in a relationship is a big change

Oh sure, that's true. But if you've been dating for a couple of years before you get married, then the marriage itself shouldn't make much of a difference.

Don't feel the need to register my relationship with the government or any other institution.

― everything else is secondary (Lee626), Tuesday, March 6, 2012 9:42 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this is an all time challop

I'm pretty sure Bill Cosby had a standup bit about this? Wife turns on her husband saying "that is the LAST time your nitwit friends are setting FOOT in this house" etc.

"just as long as you're both happy" is my attitude

I couldn't be in my relationship without registering it with the government. xxpost

the thing about not registering your relationship with THE MAN is that if something happens to one of you, it suddenly becomes much, much harder for the other person to be there or to settle up affairs in the event of death

like, if we weren't married and I died, my share of our assets could and would revert back to my parents instead of my wife, who would basically either have to buy my parents out of our home, our car, etc, and any insurance/retirement money would get split down the middle

not a particularly nice thing to do to your life partner at a time when they are grieving IMO

(this is also why I think marriage equality is a no-brainer)

xpost

well, as a colonel i'd expect nothing less

:)

With a new baby this is WAY more understandable

Xpost

DJP is reminding me of how pension entitlements and boring financial stuff are the main reason why so-called-Mrs The Real Dirty Vicar and I really ought to get married sometime.

I mean so-called-Mrs The New Dirty Vicar, obv.

My sister has been engaged to the same guy for almost 10 years, but for some reason they've decided not to get married. Not so much a choice, as they haven't got round to it and don't see the big deal. Which is fine in one sense, but they've got 3 kids, and it makes me kind of anxious from a financial perspective, if something happened to one of them.

I haven't had anyone cut me out of their life because they got married, but I did have one friend cut me out her life when she went back to her abusive husband. I have tried emailing her but she's never responded -- I don't know if she feels embarrassed or that she'd be judged for her choice, but I just want to know if she's okay.

about the only good thing with kids is that you can unambiguously put all the assets in a trust in their name with the other parent as an executor, but then that means a situation where the kids can yank everything away from the other parent when they hit 18/21/25/whatever age they come into full ownership of the assets in the trust

I have a very good friend who cut me off completely after new relationship started. Mutual friend informed me that new boyfriend is kind of a loser (although polite and friendly enough to my lost friend) and that I was cut off as preemptive strike because I wouldn't have liked him and she didn't want to deal with that. Even though I kinda see the logic, still sucks.

that's some brutally pragmatic life management

yeh wtf

Are you Jack Donaghy?

the fact they are married with kids leads me to pause at times before contacting them. raising children or even just being married is potentially massively time-consuming. it's projection, but if i were in their shoes i feel like i would be desperate for any spare shards of alone-time not involving family or work that i could possibly gather up

I'm married and have kids and I have run into this a lot. WTF people. If you want to hang, contact them!! Then if they are too tired/whatever then they will say so!!!! Like, I've actually experienced this ish in reverse for the most part - I am eager for spare shards of non-family hanging out but suddenly (in some people's minds) I've become this different animal, this dad-man, who surely wouldn't be down for [x]. But it's more necessary than ever!

^ this is kind of my problem with the overall thesis of this thread

Like, Saturday afternoons with my kids is not really when i want to hang out with you. Thursday night, now we're talkin. But I think you find this a lot with people who don't have kids. This idea that kids totally CHANGE YOU, man, that suddenly you're neutered in some indefinable but permanent way, that you have become a hater of all fun that doesn't involve, I don't know, making your own pickles and planning vacations. And that maybe there is even something correct about this. Sad, but correct. Cause you're like, a DAD now! There is a great FEAR attached to kids and what they'll do to you. I know, I had it. And then it turns out, actually you're the same person, and kids go to bed at 8pm.

Yes. When n/a and his ladywife were about to have their child, I contacted the wife and told her I was planning on keeping in touch with her after a grace period for settling in/hosting family. The same goes for you, jaymc, should the occasion arise. I mean, I'm sure it helps that I'm not like "HEY LET'S GO OUT AND GET WASTED ON MONDAY NIGHT! I'LL MEET YOU AT THE BAR AT 10!!!" but am pretty cool with parent and kid-friendly scheduling and events.

I don't think I cut anybody out of my life when I got married but I did when we started dating. I think it was related to a shift in priorities or maybe just interests. We started dating in my late 20s and I was growing exhausted by my party party funtime friends, who seemed content to live in the same small college town and go to the same bars and play in the same terrible bands and have the same crappy jobs. I didn't really cut them out so much as slowly detach (it helped that I moved to three different states during the detachment process). So, kind of what n/a said.

the thing about not registering your relationship with THE MAN is that if something happens to one of you, it suddenly becomes much, much harder for the other person to be there or to settle up affairs in the event of death

like, if we weren't married and I died, my share of our assets could and would revert back to my parents instead of my wife, who would basically either have to buy my parents out of our home, our car, etc, and any insurance/retirement money would get split down the middle

not a particularly nice thing to do to your life partner at a time when they are grieving IMO

(this is also why I think marriage equality is a no-brainer)

― Vaseline MEN AMAZING JOURNEY (DJP), Tuesday, March 6, 2012 11:58 AM (5 hours ago)

DJP is reminding me of how pension entitlements and boring financial stuff are the main reason why so-called-Mrs The Real Dirty Vicar and I really ought to get married sometime.

― The New Dirty Vicar, Tuesday, March 6, 2012 2:08 PM (2 hours ago)

You can make sure this doesn't happen by writing a will, a living trust, and other such legal documents (if you're in the US this book is a worthwhile guide). But yeah, there are some legal protections that are only available to married people, at least in the US and UK (some parts of Canada and all of New Zealand are more enlightened, where discrimination based on marital status is illegal). It should be noted however that there are several financial disincentives to getting married as well - indeed, there are people (mostly women) in jail right now who would not be in any legal trouble at all if they weren't married to their tax-evading husbands.

And while marriage equality is a no-brainer, that equality should be amongst singles & marrieds as well as opposite-sex & same-sex. For example, the county-operated pool and gym I'm gone to for the last 10+ years used to charge about $300 yearly membership fee for individuals, or $400 for families. "Families" of course meant yourself, spouse, and kids that lived in the same home - so if I lived with my gf and she wanted to join up, we'd both have to pay $300, and thus be penalized $200 for being single ($600 vs. $400 if we were married). They fixed that several years ago; now there's a "two people, same address" option that costs the same as a married couple (your kids are always allowed in free), but I'm fairly certain the change was made because gays and lesbians raised a stink about it, which sparked widespread disapproval in this fairly liberal town. Same-sex marriage isn't legal in my state (yet - it's up for a vote later this year), but I wonder if there'd be as much outrage at this sort of this if it were only unmarried hetero couples being discriminated against. I hope legal same-sex marriage doesn't become an excuse not to eliminate all the discrimination the legal system still has against single people, who of course may or may not actually want to be single.

the problem is that if you aren't married, it is easier for your family to contest those documents/arrangements

tbh going to jail because your spouse screwed with your taxes doesn't make sense, that seems to me to be precisely why probation exists as an option in our judicial system

Not married, but one of my friends has disappeared completely since he shacked up with a girl named Sprinkles and her kid. Apparently she's really jealous that he dated one girl in the group prior to her, and all of his old friendships/relationships.
None of us has seen him since August or so, except for a wedding in October and for an hour on Thanksgiving Day. The disappearance hurt some feelings, but I guess I'm cold because my reaction was 'eh, if he wants to let her control his social life and cut off all his friends, fuck him.'

Sprinkles? oy

I hope legal same-sex marriage doesn't become an excuse not to eliminate all the discrimination the legal system still has against single people, who of course may or may not actually want to be single.

tbh, I think society does have something at stake in encouraging people to get married, which is why there's systemic favoritism towards married ppl over singles.

Her last name is the singular and she started getting called Sprinkles in the Army, at least it's not a stripper stage name or anything.

Have you ever found a copy of Sprinkles in the Army in the woods?

tbh, I think society does have something at stake in encouraging people to get married, which is why there's systemic favoritism towards married ppl over singles.

Somehow the institution of marriage has survived tens of thousands of years without being artificially propped up by the government. Really, I think even without subsidies, many ppl will want to get married anyway. And I think society is best off letting people decide whom to marry on their own. If we have lots of people getting married just so they can get on their spouse's health insurance plan or get a tax break, we'll have loads of weak marriages between ppl who didn't really have a good relationship to build upon, and frequent marital breakdown and divorce. I don't think that's in society's interest.

I wasn't claiming that the institution of marriage needs government incentives to stay propped up.

So what sort of "systemic favoritism" are you referring to?

I think society does have something at stake in encouraging people to get married

Call me dense or contrarian but I've never understood why.

I mean, its not like it makes/helps people *stay together*. Not anymore anyway.

people (mostly women) in jail right now who would not be in any legal trouble at all if they weren't married to their tax-evading husbands.

They or their lawyers must not have heard of the IRS's Innocent Spouse Relief

if society has "something at stake" in promoting marriage, why not just automatically grant marriage benefits & obligations to all couples who produce offspring? like, having kids = being married. benefits/obligations could be cut off or redirected when/if the couple decided to separate or reproduce with other partners.

Somehow the institution of marriage has survived tens of thousands of years without being artificially propped up by the government.

I'm sure we both agree about numerous codified (healthcare, visiting rights, tax rights) and non-codified (cultural legitimization) examples of favoritism from which the institution of marriage benefits. I don't think they exist, though, because they're being used to artificially prop up that institution. I think they exist because marriage is central to our experience of society (no doubt because of its own entrenched privilege in the last few thousand or more years of human history), and remakes society to self-perpetuate. I think society, as it exists, has an interest in that perpetuation, and that is why these incentives exist*.

Really, I think even without subsidies, many ppl will want to get married anyway.

I agree.

And I think society is best off letting people decide whom to marry on their own.

I agree. I don't think society should tell people who they should marry, or who they can't marry.

If we have lots of people getting married just so they can get on their spouse's health insurance plan or get a tax break, we'll have loads of weak marriages between ppl who didn't really have a good relationship to build upon, and frequent marital breakdown and divorce. I don't think that's in society's interest.

I think that's an interesting argument, though I don't really know how to judge the value of it. It doesn't feel historically true to me, but for all I know it very well may be.

*I also think marriage is malleable and has looked many different ways historically - and it will continue to shift and change. I think we're in the middle of a huge shift right now in how we envision marriage re: same sex marriages. In a lot of different cultures there has been sui juris marriage, and I think that's a really great way of thinking about human relationships. It's not really so common in the US today, though, since so many laws require formal legal documentation of marriage, afaik.

if society has "something at stake" in promoting marriage, why not just automatically grant marriage benefits & obligations to all couples who produce offspring? like, having kids = being married. benefits/obligations could be cut off or redirected when/if the couple decided to separate or reproduce with other partners.

That's a kinda awesome idea, I think? Modified sui juris?

i'm writing a letter to arby's about it as we speak

contenderizer connects

Somehow the institution of marriage has survived tens of thousands of years without being artificially propped up by the government.

tens of thousands of years? really?

http://media1.break.com/dnet/media/2011/4/21/31f2233d-923e-4197-b439-b1783c69be02_thumb.jpeg

also, ppl have got married for societal&economic reasons since like always! ppl getting married for tax breaks or immigration or w/e is nothing new, it's only the social acceptability of divorce (and ALSO of a single person constituting a household) that's currently at quite a high.

Yah dont christians like blathering on about how they invented weddings, wedding @ caana and all that crap.

maybe i am making this up in my head.

> why not just automatically grant marriage benefits & obligations to all couples who produce offspring?

There's a http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=106182,00.html,000 per child tax credit, and other perks.

Mordy, I suppose my vantage point is from someone who grew up surrounded by shaky relationships - just about every married couple amongst my family and friends either ended in divorce, or (far worse IMO), settled into a rut but stayed together anyway, probably out of inertia as much as anything.

In my experience, marriage leads to complacency. You know that getting divorced is difficult and expensive, so you stay married, but you don't have to keep your relationship vibrant because the marriage contract holds you together, and before you know it, it's "I love you but I'm not in love with you", which evolves into 'I don't even really love you all that much anymore, but at least we get along ok, so we'll stay put'. I see it and hear it all the time. I've heard so many women complain of how their husbands don't woo them anymore, how they don't do those instinctively romantic gestures like they did back when they were just dating. I'm like, "of course he doesn't - he doesn't need to. You're married!". I hear it from the guys too. "My wife used to be such a hottie, but now she never works out and eats all the time and is overweight". Hey dude, you're married, it's not like your wife needs to look pretty to attract men anymore. (I'm sure there's lots of examples that aren't appearance-related, but that's the last one I actually heard so I'm using it).

When you're not married, and there's nothing keeping you together except that you want to be, that sort of complacency never sets in. And that, paradoxically, is what holds us together.

$1,000 per child tax credit. (boy did I screw up that link....)

Lee, that can happen... but it's by no means true of all marriages. Do you really not know anyone who actively enjoys their marriage and is having a great time even after many years?
That appearance thing is kind of offensive. Most people I know aren't in as wonderful shape at, say, 30 - typical marrying age- as they were at 21, married or otherwise.
I sure as hell didn't get married to be brought flowers all the time and be 'allowed' to get fat.

The appearance thing happens anyway, its called Getting Old.

Two of my best friends from high school still live in my home town, and I really only see them/catch up with them when I'm home, which is maybe once every 3 or 4 years. But we're all pretty much able to pick up where we left off, it hasn't really hurt our friendships as far as I've been able to tell. Neither of them are really online all that much, and have jobs that kinda preclude much phone talking. I don't mind it so much.

I am a very active and involved friend -- it's just tiring to be the one who always has to make all of the moves. I gave up trying hard maybe 5 years ago; now I give medium effort and the results are the same, so it could be my problem for throwing so much energy at the wall.

"could be" = is

I did learn that moving countries placed most of the responsibility of staying in touch on me, since everyone else's life was pretty much unchanged, they sort of adapted pretty quickly to me not being around, and it was my job to say hey I'm over here missing you guys what's up, etc. I was never that kind of friend before that, so it was a big adjustment. But fuuuuuck it helped me so much with homesickness etc.

All my friends either post on ilx or twitter and that ambient awareness of them is how I keep in touch.

i misread as "ambien awareness" O_o

even "it's been a couple years" check-ins are rarely earthshaking and mostly like ah good the world still spins on its axis

Guilty lols. At Christmas, I saw my college best friend for the first time in over 10 years. Apart from the fact that she went back to school again for something else, lost a parent, got married, bought a house, and had a kid, nothing had changed at all.

I never feel the need that I must catch up with a specific friend if I haven't interacted with them in awhile. And most ppl I interact with pretty much know not to expect that from me.

well that's just it, though, right? I take a get a lot of comfort from knowing that ____ will still be ____ when I see them next, regardless of what has transpired. It's a maybe selfish way of reaffirming that I am still basically the same dude I thought I was, yes, this person still recognizes me and I them

xp

Yeah, I can totally deal with that -- I'm ok with that, in fact -- it's the "I miss u" waaaah bs in between self-affirming visits or w/e that I just don't know how to answer. If you miss me, why don't you try to talk with (not to) me more?

i'm a phone-hater too, i find it...mentally tiring, and also a bit...alienating? frustrating? i feel the physical lack of the person i'm talking to and miss them more (but if it's a person i find tedious it makes them MORE tedious and space-filling). i don't find that with emails or internet communication at all.

which friends i hang out with irl is scarily dependent on which friends use my favoured social media - since i got on twitter my social circle has veered towards those of my friends who are also regular users.

people drop out of and come back into social circles all the time, i don't think that's a big deal - there are friends i value and care about who i haven't seen in years because life happened (relationship-related or not). however when i sense this happen -

And when someone in a relationship discards their friendships it sends out a certain message. The message is "I've found something that makes me happy now and that's all that matters". Kind of a self-absorbed attitude.

- and it does happen, and it's a different thing...i don't take kindly to that.

I've probably lost long distance friends due to hating talking on the phone, but my close friends and I have hardly ever talked on the phone, except to make plans.

also have to say that the idea of the sealed-dyad relationship where you only want to see the other person and you want to see them ALL THE TIME is my idea of hell. i need my space and i need space for my friends and i need a lot of both. relationships would come a definite third.

fourth behind work as well

(this is why i'm single)

so you live in a very large warehouse loft y/n

ha i meant space as in...time

though physical space is crucial too, i don't really feel like the idea of living with a partner appeals. i like the tim burton/helena bonham carter model of separate, adjoining houses

in the vast emptiness of space

I don't mind talking on the phone, I just hate making phone calls.

Having a stutter makes phones conversations painful for both me and the other person, I've even lost job opportunities because of it.

:(

my Dad stutters, I totally understand that.

I'm good in person but on the phone I sometimes can't even get a word out.

i am probably guilty of this :(
i still go out to shows and see some friends that way, but the idea of going out for drinks after work has become foreign to me. kinda sucks sometimes.

I did learn that moving countries placed most of the responsibility of staying in touch on me, since everyone else's life was pretty much unchanged, they sort of adapted pretty quickly to me not being around, and it was my job to say hey I'm over here missing you guys what's up, etc. I was never that kind of friend before that, so it was a big adjustment. But fuuuuuck it helped me so much with homesickness etc.

Yeah this is so true. I actually quite enjoy just emailing a person with a 'hey! what's up!' if they pop into my head. I will defend Facebook forever as well for the 'ambient awareness' (although I'm p sure at least two not-very-close friends have had secret babies in the last 6 months or so)

lol secret babies

kinder otm -- Facebook has been awesome for letting me stay in touch with a wider circle of friends than I would have if it was just me and email, and the 'ambient awareness' is def key where distance is a factor.

I've definitely withdrawn from most of my friends in the past several years (except work friends of course, since I see them all the time). It wasn't getting married that caused this, though. I think it was my job getting more demanding. Then I felt like my first priority for whatever "free time" I had left ought to be to my wife. Next priority (very recently) is preparing for the new baby! Third priority is doing chores/fixing things around the house. Fourth priority is to family (which means I don't see them too often), fifth is to friends (who I almost never see now), and finally, the last priority is to myself (downtime, hobbies, etc. which I never EVER have time for anymore). So yeah, I barely ever see my friends anymore, but that's only partly, indirectly due to getting married. It's more about growing up and having way more responsibilities than I used to. It doesn't help that they are all busy/married/growing up too, and our free time hardly ever occurs at the same time. And even if it does, I'm usually too tired from the workweek to even make an effort anymore.

Facebook just irritates me anymore because it's just a constant reminder of all the people I should talk to because it's so convenient and easy now, but I'm ignoring them because I'm too busy/tired/etc. or they've changed, or I've changed, or I'm horrified at something they posted, or whatever. Before Facebook, there were so many people I wished I could get back in touch with- now, I'm Facebook friends with all of them, and I can see some of what's going on in their lives, and maybe they can see some of what's going on in mine, but that's about as far as I want it to go. Since I don't have time to contact everyone that I feel like I should, it makes me not want to contact anyone. It's just too overwhelming.

You don't have to write long paragraphs every time, you know. A line or two reminds people that you care!

Hahaha, for a horrifying second I thought you were chiding me for the long-ish posts! But you're right, I should make more of an effort, and it wouldn't take much.

and if that means blowing other friends off, eh, i'm okay with that.

!!! very good friend to have