Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    Sounds like you are between a rock and a hard place.
    
    It is always a tough decision when you have to make it but your
    statement about syaing no so many times is true.
    
    Probably the toughest part of two people living together is just
    the very definition "two people". No two people are enough alike
    to be perfect matches so give and take is encouraged.
    Try a little give and take....or ask him too.
    

    
    Re .0, it doesn't sound like the problems in your relationship would
    be any different if you were married.  I was married for 12 1/2
    yrs., divorced, and have now been living with my "boyfriend" (SO,
    whatever) for 1 1/2 yrs.  I would never marry anybody again without
    living with them first.  I don't think I would ever have married
    my ex-husband if we had lived together for awhile first.  I think
    living together is the best of both worlds - you get to be together
    all the time (or as much as you want) without the horrible and strange
    expectations and legalities of marriage.
    
    I think it's wonderful that co-habitating is accepted by just about
    all of society today.  Fifteen or twenty years ago many people would
    have thought women were tramps or sluts if they lived with a man
    without being married.  Even my *mother* accepts it now.  The greatest
    aspect of this, to me, is that it gives people a chance to spend
    a couple of years (which may be great years while they last) with
    people that they wouldn't really *want* to marry and risk the
    possibility of forever with.  Twenty years ago I would probably
    have felt I had to pass up the great relationship I'm having now.
     (A profound thanks to the sexual revolution for making this possible!
       :-)  )
    
    As far as the problem of you wanting to go more than him, I sympathize
    because it would drive me crazy too.  But, it wouldn't be any different
    if you were married, except that he might feel he had a right to
    tell you not to go out - and then it would be worse.  
    
    Lorna
    

    	On living in sin (or so they said at one time)...
    
    		Yes, I'm going to have to agree with that.
    	It only makes sense (to me anyway) that if you plan
    	to get married eventually (speaking for those so 
    	inclined), it would SEEM to make sense.  Personally,
    	I would want to.  I'd hate to get married to anyone
    	I couldn't live with.  
    
    		From past experience, I've known a lot of
    	friends that have gotten married, went about their 
  	marriage the best they could and eventually (usually
    	two years later), they would get divorced for one
    	reason or another.  There was one exception though,
    	and they live in Mass. after seven years of marriage.
    
    	
    					Phil
    
    	ps...is one out of seven not bad?
    
    	

    re .0
    
    You don't say if it bothers him that you go out with your friends
    without him.  If it doesn't, then you shouldn't feel guilty about
    it.  In my case, my husband is a night person who enjoys going to
    visit his friends all the time.  I don't have a whole lot in common
    with his friends, and I tend to fall asleep (I'm usually in bed
    by 9, so it's tough for me to do a late night out).  It wouldn't
    make sense for him to stay home with me if I'm just going to be
    asleep, so we've made some agreements that it's fine if he wants
    to go over his friends, I just prefer that it not be on a week-end
    so we get some time together (our Friday night ritual is to snuggle
    up on the couch and just watch tv or a movie, and if I fall asleep,
    that's fine with him).
    
    Also, there are lots of things that I like to do that he doesn't,
    so it doesn't bother him if I make plans to go do whatever.  There
    aren't a bunch of activities that we both like to do, but some of
    our particular favorites are close enough so that we can do them
    at the same time.  For instance, he loves to sail and has a sailboat.
     I hate it, but I love to lie on the beach, so we usually go down
    to the beach together.  I enjoy the sun and he goes out sailing.
    He comes back every now and then so we can take some walks on the
    beach, but then goes back out.  Other times, he sails me over to
    a different beach, we have lunch, he sails, and comes back for me.
     These kind of compromises seem to work great since we both get
    to do what we like together even though the activities are not the
    same.
    
    We also lived together for 1 1/2 years before we got married.  I
    would highly recommend it to anyone considering marriage.  We made
    quite a few adjustments during that period, but we also learned
    a lot about each other, and were able to enter the marriage with
    more realistic expectations.  We both felt a change after we got
    married.  It's hard to describe, but it was like we were closer.
     I think it's just that there was that commitment once we were married
    that we didn't quite have while we were living together.  Of course,
    everyone is different, and you might feel just as committed to each
    other living together as being married, but I thought I'd let you
    know what we felt about it.
    
    Cathy
    

    re .0
    
    You don't say if it bothers him that you go out with your friends
    without him.  If it doesn't, then you shouldn't feel guilty about
    it.  In my case, my husband is a night person who enjoys going to
    visit his friends all the time.  I don't have a whole lot in common
    with his friends, and I tend to fall asleep (I'm usually in bed
    by 9, so it's tough for me to do a late night out).  It wouldn't
    make sense for him to stay home with me if I'm just going to be
    asleep, so we've made some agreements that it's fine if he wants
    to go over his friends, I just prefer that it not be on a week-end
    so we get some time together (our Friday night ritual is to snuggle
    up on the couch and just watch tv or a movie, and if I fall asleep,
    that's fine with him).
    
    Also, there are lots of things that I like to do that he doesn't,
    so it doesn't bother him if I make plans to go do whatever.  There
    aren't a bunch of activities that we both like to do, but some of
    our particular favorites are close enough so that we can do them
    at the same time.  For instance, he loves to sail and has a sailboat.
     I hate it, but I love to lie on the beach, so we usually go down
    to the beach together.  I enjoy the sun and he goes out sailing.
    He comes back every now and then so we can take some walks on the
    beach, but then goes back out.  Other times, he sails me over to
    a different beach, we have lunch, he sails, and comes back for me.
     These kind of compromises seem to work great since we both get
    to do what we like together even though the activities are not the
    same.
    
    We also lived together for 1 1/2 years before we got married.  I
    would highly recommend it to anyone considering marriage.  We made
    quite a few adjustments during that period, but we also learned
    a lot about each other, and were able to enter the marriage with
    more realistic expectations.  We both felt a change after we got
    married.  It's hard to describe, but it was like we were closer.
     I think it's just that there was that commitment once we were married
    that we didn't quite have while we were living together.  Of course,
    everyone is different, and you might feel just as committed to each
    other living together as being married, but I thought I'd let you
    know what we felt about it.
    
    Cathy
    

    
    	
    	Re .2 - Whats an example of a horrible expectation of marriage?
    
    	I feel that it only makes sense to live together also, especially
    if you are serious about having a relationship. You really find
    out what the other person is *like* over a lot of time (together).
    Having two different "Home bases" is certainly more casual, as you
    would miss a lot of the details.
    
    	  What I dont understand is why people become soooo mellow,
    I remember I did. Is it because you're "all set now"?
    
    	Joe Jas
    

    
    My wife and I lived together for 9 1/2 years before we married.
    And we've been married now for 5 1/2 years.
    
    Why did we live together so long before marrying?  I dunno. I think,
    no, I know it was my decision. I wasn't sure I wanted to be married
    to anyone, and there were things I wanted to accomplish before I
    was married.
    
    It was difficult on my wife, to say the least, we seperated a couple
    of times because I wasn't ready to make the commitment. Although,
    in my defense, I always told her that she was the one I wanted to
    go through life with, that I wasn't ready for marriage yet, and
    may never be ready.
    
    To make a long story short, a person grows(matures?) alot in 9 1/2
    years, values change, etc.  I had accomplished most, not all, the
    things I wanted to do before marriage. And I realized I could not
    have done as much without her being there, her support.  So, I popped
    the question. It was great, she didn't expect a thing.
    
    To say I was a nervous groom would be an understatement. As soon
    as I put the tux on, I broke into a cold sweat, turned white, and
    passed out! When I came around, I got sick to my stomach! No, I
    had not been drinking that day or the night before, it was just
    nerves.
    
    Anyhow, I'm glad we got married. It's better than living together,
    because we made the commitment to each other.
    
    
    Ray

    I'm really glad that you people took the time to share with me your
    experiences.  As for #.7 I think that I feel the same way that you
    did before marriage, I'm just glad to know that you do someday out
    grow it.
    
    I think alot of being scared to commit to someone has alot to do
    with the divorce rate.  May parents split when I was about 9, my
    boyfriends parents are split, and it seems like almost everyone
    we know are breaking up.  The only relationship that I know of that
    was made in heaven is my grandparents, with which I live for 5 years.
    They never had a fight in the 45 or so years that they were married,
    and were in fact made for eachother, kind of hard to compete with
    for anybody!  I think alot of people will be affected by today's
    high divorce rate.  Any opinions?
    
    Debbi

    I think you have two real issues. 
    
    The first is how separate the two of you are going to be. Being married
    or not has no bearing on that. If one of you wants to go out alone,
    then you have to settle that whether you're married or not. Some people
    are very happy having extremely separate lives. Others are inseparable.
    As long as you're (both) comfortable with the way you are, what else
    matters? 
    
    The other issue is that of living with someone. Living with someone
    else is one of the most difficult things a person can do. Period.
    Married or not. You should ignore the divorce rate. Your relationship
    is not a rate, it is a single instance. Your relationship will succeed
    or fail independently of what anyone else does. Thinking about the
    divorce rate is a lot like looking down while tightrope walking. It
    does no good and can make you lose your balance when you were doing
    just fine before. A wise woman I know once said, "Life is like a
    bicycle; it looks unstable, but as long as you keep moving, you won't
    fall down." 
    
    In my opinion, there's only one good reason for getting married:
    because you want to. If you don't want to, don't. If you do, do it. You
    don't have to have reasons. You don't have to make sense to anyone else
    (with the possible outside exception of your intended). I think too
    many people try to be rational about matters of the heart. Love isn't
    rational. Never has been. If it were, there'd be no dumb love songs, no
    love poetry, no Italian opera or Broadway musicals. Only accountants
    and lawyers would fall in love. Go where your heart leads you, keep
    moving, and don't look down. 
    
    	Jon

While on the subject, what follows is a brief journal review which i did 
for my Psych class last year on Cohabitation.  Several times in my past, 
this subject has come up.  While strongly advocating this type of alternative 
lifestyle at one time, my views have changed and i'm no longer sure if i 
agree that cohabitation without the bonds of marriage is good for me.  It's 
certainly a subject that has no right or wrong answers (although morally,
i suppose) and in some instances it may be best for some couples.  
Note that this study is somewhat dated and i believe that there has been 
a steady decline of cohabitation occurring, today.


	   RELATIONSHIP QUALITIES OF THOSE WHO LIVE TOGETHER
	Michael D. Newcomb - Alternative Lifestyles - Winter '83
       Reviewed by James C. Mikelis  7-Oct-1985  Psychology PY101
      

ABSTRACT
To  conceptualize  and integrate the many studies conducted on  cohabital 
relationships during the past 10 years.  To determine possible causes for 
the apparent increase  of cohabitation and to examine differences between 
couples who have not cohabitated.

	
POSSIBLE REASONS
        More permissive sexual mores.   
	Easier access to contraception.  
	Greater tolerance by society.  
	Changed traditional roles of women by feminist movement.  
	No 'til death do us  part'  commitment.  
	Liberalization of dormitory regulations for students.

	
TYPES OF COHABITATION
Three types as defined by LEWIS et al. 1972:  
        (1) Temporary or casual
	(2) Preparation for marriage
	(3) Alternative to marriage.      

	
STRAVER (1980) conducted 150  interviews  with 75 unmarried (heterosexual 
and homosexual) couples and categorized  each  couple into 6 relationship 
types:
        (1) Traditional Role 
	(2) Complete Togetherness 
	(3) Togetherness With Tendencies Toward Independence 
	(4) Independence 
	(5) Living Apart Together 
	(6) Open Group
	
	
COMMITMENT
Budd  (1976) and Johnson (1973) found that  married  couples  reported  a 
greater  dedication  to  continuing  their  relationship than cohabitors.  
MONTGOMERY  (1973) feels that a steady increase in commitment  is  needed 
for  cohabital relationships to survive.  He found that satisfaction  was 
inversely  related to the number of perceived barriers to termination for 
both cohabitors and non-cohabitors.  Contradictory results, however, have 
been  reported when looking at  relative  levels  of  commitment  between 
partners.

	
SATISFACTION
Research has indicated that married and cohabitating couples have similar 
levels  of  satisfaction but cohabitors are more  satisfied  than  dating 
couples.    Methods  used  for determining these findings  have  included 
single-item  self-report ratings (Yllo 1978), standard indices of marital 
adjustment (Newcomb & Bentler 1980) as well as behavioral and observation 
techniques (Cole 1976).

				  Page 2

	
SEX ROLES
Newcomb  &  Bentler  (1980) found that women who cohabitated premaritally 
described themselves  as  significantly more masculine than women who had 
not cohabitated before marriage.  The converse is true for men.
				  
				  
SEXUAL BEHAVIOR
Studies indicate that  8%-31%  have  sexual  relationships outside of the 
dyad (Bower 1975) studying  126  cohabiting  individuals.  More prevalent 
for males (31%) than for  females (19%).  The majority choose monogamy as 
a reflection of commitment (MONTGOMERY 1972).  All research findings have 
indicated that sex frequency is greater for cohabitating couples compared 
to  married  couples.    Other  topics  analyzed  include  "Problems  and 
Conflict", "Love and Romanticism", "Persistence of the Dyad".


CONCLUSION
In general, more research should be conducted to try  to  understand what 
creates the differences rather than study the actual differences in a co-
habital relationship.  Most of the research was conducted on college sam-
ples with a small number  of  subjects.  A broader based understanding a- 
mong non-students is  needed.    Much  confusion  still  exists regarding 
whether cohabitation is a  factor or a reflection of pre-existing differ- 
nces observed.  I feel that the factors contributing to the quality, emo-
tional closeness and fulfillment in a relationship are more important and 
needs more careful study than whether a couple cohabitates or not.

    Guess you don't really know what you'd do till faced with the decision,
    but I don't believe I'd EVER get married again without living with
    the person first for some long period of time.  And maybe I'd just
    want to go on living with them and NEVER get married.  "Rest of my
    life" is (I hope) a looooooong time!
    
    						Pat

RE:  .14

"Test drive first"?  Gee, that sounds so calculating and mechanical.  Are you 
saying if it doesn't handle well on the road, you'll try a different model?  
					:-)

RE:  .0

I've got no strong feelings either way on co-habitation prior.  I'm not adverse 
to it, and probably would prefer to co-habit first, but think it really depends 
on the relationship.  It might not be necessary, but frankly I can think of 
more reasons to do it than not do it.  Cast my vote as a qualified "yes".

Steve

    A dear departed friend of mine said to me once
    "Kerry if you want to know what someone is really like just go
    on a two week vacation with them, far enough away from home 
    surroundings to make constant exposure to that person necessary."

    It is veritbly impossible to gauge someone's character with out
    living with them.

        

    
    	I think I can identify pretty well with .0, as I'm involved
    	in the same type of thing right now.  My girlfriend moved in
    	with me about 4 months ago, right when we were really getting
    	serious about each other.
    
    	We do plan on getting married, but not for a couple of years
    	yet.  I understand what you mean about evenings out.  I enjoy
    	going out for a few drinks after work, whereas she does not
    	drink at all.  She doesn't mind my going out alone or with
    	some friends though, so it works out pretty well.
    
    	All in all, I think living together first is the best thing
    	two people can do.  That's when you'll really get to know
    	them, at their worst, as well as their best.  As long as my
    	folks don't find out, that is....  :-)
    
    
    			Having fun in the sunny South,

    				      -Rich

    RE: .17
    
    	I'm confused.... What difference will a signed peice of paper
    	make? You inflect that (correct me if I'm wrong) you won't be
    	able to do the things you're doing now after you get married.
    	Will she be able to go out alone or with friends after the marriage
    	and will you be able to go out for a couple of drinks? I guess
    	the fact of changing your lifestyle the day after you sign a
    	paper confuses me.. ie: Today we are living together and we
    	are free to do our own thing. Tomorrow we'll be "married"
    	and things will change.
    
    	I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you live together
    	then fine, act like you're married up until the time you are
    	and after you get married.. Just signing a peice of paper and
    	saying "I do" shouldn't have made a big difference other than
    	making ones Mom more comfy. The process of changing your lifestyle
    	should just begin sooner if you live together before marriage
    	and not the day after the wedding.
    
    	I, for one, think that marriage is a risk REGARDLESS of whether
    	you live together or not.. People married 25 years still get
        divorces.. A successful marriage should be based on two people
    	wanting that marriage to work and not on whether or not you
    	found that he/she has bad breath in the morning or smelly feet.
    
    							mike

    RE: .8   The notion that signing a piece of paper makes no difference
    
    While it varies somewhat from state to state, that piece of paper
    has *SIGNIFICANT* implications, both financially and socially. I
    certainly didn't understand them when I got married, and wasn't
    willing to listen when friends tried to explain.  As a standalone
    issue, the implications of a marriage certificate aren't too
    complicated, but these implications *MAY* become entangled with
    other issues, like autonomy, power, dependence, to create a mess
    that *MIGHT* not have evolved had both parties taken the time to
    understand the legal implications of marriage and known what they
    were getting into.

    I'm really glad that this subject has gotten so much attention!
    
    RE: .18
    
    I myself do feel that the "piece of paper" does mean alot.  I'm
    happy just living together right now, but certainly am not ready
    to make the life long commitment.  I certainly do not want to go into 
    marriage before I'm a 100% ready for it.  I don't think that it
    changes the way or the amount you love eachother except for bringing
    you closer.  But if your not ready for it then I think it would
    rip you apart!  The feeling of being trapped would destroy a relationship!

    
    Getting married has more implications than just signing a piece
    of paper - if in no other way, the legal ones can kill you, as
    I am learning to my dismay.  True, in some cases cohabitation can
    cause you legal/financial problems, but they're by no means as
    rigid as those when your marriage breaks up.  A few gray hairs is
    the least cost I am paying now....
    
    					Joe

    
    
    	Wow, looks like I picked the wrong words to use! Believe me,
    	I understand the legal aspects of "the piece of paper"
    	completely. That's NOT the issue I was addressing.. What I'm
    	asking is why the difference in lifestyles before and after
    	that signing or "I do'ing"??  As *I* see it, if *I* was living
    	with someone (which I wouldn't but that's another kettle of
    	fish) I would act like I was married with the only difference
    	being that it wasn't "legal". I'd work on the relationship just
    	as hard and my lifestyle would become more of a "married"
    	lifestyle.(ie: no more all-nighters with the guys) Can you now
	see what I'm getting at?
    
    							mike

    
    	Re .18:
    
    	Sorry to have confused you.  I don't believe I implied that
    	things such as individual freedoms will change after "getting
    	that piece of paper".
    
    	My girlfriend was recently divorced after almost 3 years of
    	an unhappy marriage.  Her feeling is that she really didn't
    	know that much about her former husband before they got
    	married, ergo she wants to be a little more cautious this
    	time.
    
    	I feel that by living together, you get to know a person
    	much better than if you just date for a long time and
    	then get married.  You really don't know someone until
    	you spend 24 hours a day together for a while.  Sure, people
    	get divorced after many years of marriage, even those who
    	did live together beforehand.
    
    	This is a purely subjective statement, but I believe that
    	the chances of her and I staying together for the rest of our
    	lives are greatly improved by our living together now.
    

				-Rich
    

    
    When my wife and I were first living together, probably the most
    difficult issue we faced was, ironing out the rules of our
    relationship. I would expect that most others cohabitating, would
    find the same situation. We decided that there were no hard and
    fast rules, each situation would be addressed individually, and
    from there general guidelines developed.
    
    If I wanted to go out, and wanted her to go, I'd invite her. If
    she didn't want to go, hey, I understand, I'd give her a kiss, and
    tell her I'd see her later - no big deal. The same was true when
    she wanted to go out.   The *real* problem occurred when there were
    conflicting plans, when I wanted to do something and we had made
    previous plans to do something together, and *I* forgot. Then it
    became a matter of negotiation, and now 15 years later, it still
    becomes a matter for negotiation.
    
    One of the ways we managed the me/us issues, was to keep our finances
    separate.  I paid the rent, she bought groceries. I paid the gas,
    she paid electricity. We still do it this way today, although, now
    that we're married we do have some shared charge cards. However,
    if she charges something, she's responsible to pay for it. In this
    way we've been able to keep financial issues from becoming a problem.
    
    The only difference for us between being married and living together,
    was a deeper sense of commitment to each other, we live our lives,
    separate and together, the way we want to live.
    
    Maybe it's just respect and trust, we never had to worry about head
    games.
    
    Ray
    
    

Associated Press Wed 05-NOV-1986 04:57                           Cohabitation

   Appeals Court Upholds Ordinance Against Unmarried Couples

   ST. LOUIS (AP) - A man and woman cannot continue living together
in the home they bought because they aren't married, a state
appellate court ruled in upholding a 48-year-old ordinance in a
fashionable suburb.
   Either E. Terrence Jones or Joan K. Horn must move within 90 days
if they remain unmarried, the Missouri Court of Appeals said
Tuesday, upholding St. Louis County Circuit Court Judge Robert G.J.
Hoester's February ruling.
   The panel also upheld the right of Ladue to ban residents from
living together if they are not related by blood, marriage or
adoption.
   Jones, 45, a special assistant to the University of Missouri-St.
Louis chancellor, and Horn, 49, a consultant, bought their home in
1981 and contend their marital status is none of Ladue's business.
They contend the ordinance violates both state and federal
constitutions.
   Jones and Horn said they lived together ``as a family'' with
their children from earlier marriages.
   ``The matter is in the courts, and it's a matter of privacy,''
Jones said Tuesday, disclosing the two will appeal further.
   ``A man and a woman living together, sharing pleasures and
certain responsibilities, does not per se constitute a family in
even the conceptual sense,'' Judge William H. Crandall Jr. wrote in
the appellate decision.
   ``To approximate a family relationship, there must exist a
commitment to a permanent relationship and a perceived reciprocal
obligation to suport and to care for each other.''
   Ladue's ordinance, which dates to 1938, was revised most recently
in 1977. Court documents show the muncipality has forced residents
in violation of the ordinance to move six times since 1982.

    Remind me never to step foot in the state of Missouri.  Mass
    finally has the right idea when they voted to repeal the seat
    belt law.
    

       	       Awwwwww, who wants to live in Missouri anyway?  
               
           					

    If it is illegal to bar someone from a neighborhood because of the
    color of their skin (and it certainly SHOULD be illegal to do that),
    then how can it possibly be illegal to bar someone from a neighborhood
    because they have a roommate of the opposite sex?  That's GOT to
    be unconstitutional!  Surely it is!
    
    							Pat

    Actually, if the description of the ordinance given in the
    previous note is accurate, it would seem that even two people
    of the *same* sex cannot share a house.
    
    --- jerry

    The current state of the Constitution (as I understand it) is that
    laws which use "suspect" categories are invalid, but laws where
    the categories are "reasonable" are not invalid.  Thus a law forbidding
    people to live in an area based on gender, race, religion or national
    origin is using a suspect category and is invalid.  A law forbidding
    people using a marital or age category may be invalid, but may be
    valid if the categorization is related to a real, legal purpose.
    
    Since this is not SOAPBOX, I will not rise to the bait of
    "discrimination should be illegal".  I'll just mention that not
    everyone agrees on that matter.
    					-John Bishop

Take the easy way out, adopt each other! :-)

It's probably less hassle...

Jim.

    RE: .34  (Jim)
    
    >Take the easy way out, adopt each other! :-)
     
    This has been tried, and can lead to even more problems...
    The problem with this is that if you become sexually involved with
    the adopted person, you are suddenly guilty of incest - which may
    make you subject to several years of imprisonment - even though
    you are both of age and not related, and no force used.
    
    This is not an easy way out....
    
    Elizabeth
    

Bob, have you checked with lawyers in all fifty states?

Take a hike.

    A news flash - the radio reports this morning that Gov. Mike
    Dukakis signed the repeal of Massachusetts' 200-year old law
    against cohabitation, saying "Living together should not be
    a crime."
    				Steve

    
    Thanks for the info, Steve!!  Not that I have any plans of
    testing it just yet....   ;-)
    
    				Joe

    I am a 30 year old female who has never been married planning on
    relocating with my boyfriend when he returns to the states after
    his military assignment in Greenland (next May).  Anyway he gave
    his grandmother's diamond once and backed out because he had cold
    feet.  He wants to live together before we get married.  I on the
    other hand, would like to get married first.
    
    MY JUSTIFICATION:
    ----------------
    
    I have been involved with a married man when I was 18 for 3 years,
    then I lived with a man for 3 years who had been married and divorced
    3 times and was dead set against it.  The other man I had a long-term
    relationship with was supposedly separated but ended up getting
    his wife pregnant when he went home to see the kids.  Anyway, to
    make a long story short, All my life the possibility of marriage
    has not been there, now I as a result I am anxious to get married.
    Yes, I am also ready to get married and want to marry him.  I've
    known him 7 years, we were best friends first, although we've only
    spent about a few weeks together at a time before.
    
    I think that if I move in with him first, he'll never marry me;
    after all "why buy the cow, if you can get the milk for nothing".
    I am going to demand a 6 month engagement, which can be broken
    if we find we are impossible roommates.  I have to put a time
    limit on it because I'm not getting any younger, you know?
    I only have so many child-bearing years left biologically speaking.
    
    Another issue they may be addressed here is how long do you have
    to live with someone before you make a decision to marry?
    
    Kim
    

    A)  Why do you feel that you have to justify your feelings?
    
    B)  We're not talking about a commodity (milk) here.  We
        are talking about a relationship.  One should get married
        because one wants to, not because one has been coerced.
    
    C)  What right to you have to "demand" anything?  You can state
        your feelings and your intentions and live up to them.  You
        cannot force anyone else to agree.
        
    
    
    What do I think?  It doesn't matter.  It's what YOU think that 
    counts.  What are your values ad what do you want?  How can you
    compromise in this situation without compromising your own values?
    What will work for you?  What brings you happiness?  Decide what
    you want and then decide how to achieve those goals.
    
    P.s.  Like all advice, this is much easier said than done!!  Good
          luck, I can tell that this is very very important to you and
          that you have already done much soul searching.
    
    

    re: .41
    
    I believe that it is very easy to slip into a "content" state when
    co-habitating.  You're both together, and you presumably both like
    it.  Thus, there is very little incentive to change things.  If
    one person doesn't want to get married, and the other person has
    no particular incentive to get married (i.e. likes things just as
    they are), why should they get married?
    
    You're asking for opinions, so I'll give mine.  You've stated that
    marriage is what you want with this fellow.  Check out where you
    stand.  Is marriage what he wants?  Why is it that he wants to
    live with you first?  Is he unsure of compatibility in terms of
    day-to-day living, or does it go beyond that? If marriage is what
    you want, and if marriage is basically what he wants (after a
    brief "test" of compatibility), then put a time-limit on it (both
    of you must agree to this).  After some period of time (a few
    months, perhaps, or half a year, or whatever you feel is
    appropriate), if things are still going well, then plan the
    wedding.
    
    Some of my opinions come from personal experiences and some are
    the opinions of my sister, who has lived with more guys than I can
    remember (okay, I exaggerate - at I did forget the count).
    
    Personally, while I haven't in the past, I now question the need
    to live together if marriage is the intent of both parties. I
    agree, day-to-day living can be a *LOT* different than "dating",
    but if the two people are *TRULY* committed to one another, and
    *TRULY* love one another, I think differences can be worked out.
    Both people must make *SURE* of how they feel.  If they're both
    *SURE* marriage is what they want, what's the purpose of living
    together?

    Why live together when you could marry?
    
    Well, if the couple have roughly similiar incomes, then there's
    a big tax hit if you marry.  We're paying N-thousand dollars for the
    privilege of being legally married each year.
    
    			-John Bishop

        I don't think living together will necessarily help you to
        decide that you are ready to marry. The situations are
        different. What I do think you must do is not get married before
        your first real big fight. It is absolutely vital that you both
        know that you will fight "fair", that you agree on what fighting
        fair means. Too many married people don't know how to fight. It
        is a real contributor to failed marriages. 
        
        JimB. 

>        What I do think you must do is not get married before
>        your first real big fight. It is absolutely vital that you both
>        know that you will fight "fair", that you agree on what fighting
>        fair means. Too many married people don't know how to fight. It
>        is a real contributor to failed marriages. 
        
	I agree!  You also need to find out whether you (and/or he) ever DO 
	fight - or does he (and/or you) just avoid, evade, sulk, whine....
	or (worse) get violent, threaten suicide, run away physically.

	Not to say that either of you might, but you don't need to find this
	out AFTER you've married (assuming lifetime commitment variety :-)

	Fighting isn't bad; think of it as a form of communication.  And you
	need to be able to communicate with someone you're marrying, over 
	things you agree on, things you disagree on, and feelings in general.
	If you can't communicate on even one of these areas now, you may be 
	(and probably are) setting yourself up for trouble later.
		-hh

     
>     What I do think you must do is not get married before
>     your first real big fight. It is absolutely vital that you both
>     know that you will fight "fair", that you agree on what fighting
>     fair means. Too many married people don't know how to fight. It
>     is a real contributor to failed marriages. 

      I guess my ex S.O. and I were doomed anyway then.  We were together
    for 1.5 years and we never had a BIG fight!  Sure, we had some
    disagreements, but we were always able to settle them in some calm
    manor without ever raising our voices, much less fighting dirty!
    I recognize your point, but I think it is a little strong.  I may
    be a little nieve, but I like to think that there are a few
    relationships out there like mine.  We never officially cohabitated,
    but this past summer, I didn't get a whole lot for my rent money!
    
     Then again, myabe we just never stumbled across the topic that
    would cause WW III.  I guess we had enough disputes that I realized
    how we fought!  I don't think having a real big fight is necessary
    to learn this!!
    
    Ron_whos_SO_moved_too_far_away_to_keep_our_relationship___Sigh!

>	... You also need to find out whether you (and/or he) ever DO 
>	fight - or does he (and/or you) just avoid, evade, sulk, whine....
    
    It is not question of "if" but rather "when".  Sooner or later two
    individuals are going to find out that they are not extensions of one
    another.  There would be many many instances where the differences of
    opinions could lead to resentments and subsequent fights.

    The reason for the fights could be trivial to serious.  They might span
    a range of topics involving money, jobs, cleaning, parents, sex,
    friends, acquaintances among other things. 

    If the couple think that their marriage is going to be without any
    arguments, they are setting up themselves for a failure at the onset of
    the first real fight.
    
- Vikas    

    
    
    	Whenever people came in to see me and the first
    	thing out of their mouths were:
    
    	"Oh, 'x' and I get along very well, we NEVER fight!"
    
    	I would begin to question just how happy they are.
    	
    	It would occur to them, very shortly, that this was
    	as drastic as saying they fought ALL the time.
    
    

    After almost 25 years of marriage, I believe quite strongly that
    ' fighting ' is unnecessary...........
    
    Differences, contrary ideas, emotions, anxiety, etc.  all are
    part of the relationship....  Knowing and learning how to form
    an intimate, enduring realtionship with out the necessity
    for 'fights' is valuable.  
    
    You can disagree and let your partnmer know you disgaree without
    entering into an argument that leads to difficulty from which it
    is hard to escape.
    
    
    Just one man's opinion.................
    
    

    I agree with .50.
    
    My wife and I have learned overthe years to avoid fighting by 
    constantly communicating with each other. We used to fight
    like cats and dogs the first couple of years we knew each other.
    Gradually we came to realize that the fights happened when
    suppressed feelings eventually exploded to the surface. Hence,
    we are able to nip things in the bud. I think any successful
    marriage is built on communication and taking responsibility
    for your end of things (making an effort to make it work).
    
    -Dave

        I suppose I can believe that fighting is unnecessary, but only
        if someone like the author of 129.50 (Mr. Iwanowicz, I believe)
        can tell me that after 25 years of marriage not only do they
        believe that fighting is unnecessary, but that they've never
        done it. 
        
        My experience is that successful marriages are more like Dave
        Clark's description in 129.51, where they used to fight, but now
        have found out why they happen and worked out ways to avoid
        them. It is certainly the case that you can live without
        physical fights or without knock-down drag-out verbal fights, or
        without anyone ever having to sleep on the couch or without
        enforced periods of celibacy or periods of no talking or
        whatever aspect of fighting you want to cite. 
        
        What I don't believe you can avoid is extremely deep emotinal
        disagreements in which one party or the other feels hurt for at
        least a while. What I was trying to say in my earlier note is
        that it is important HOW you go through these periods. Your
        style of "fighting"--of comminicating and settling these
        things--has to mesh. It is important that the way that each
        person deals with these things is acceptable to the other. This
        is what I meant about "fighting fair".
        
        When you are married you are very vulnerable to your spouse, and
        what you need to know is that each of you can recognize the
        things that will hurt the other other in intolerable ways and
        that even in your deepest emotional distress you won't do those
        things.
        
        Yes, it is by far better to nip these things in the bud. It's
        just that I don't know anyone who has from the outset of their
        marriage known both themselves and their spouse well enough to
        never let a situation get out of control, to never disagree to
        the point where someone was hurt. It may be possible to never
        conflict--never "fight" in the general sense--with your spouse.
        I've just never seen it.
        
        I have seen any number of relationships fail because one person
        or the other did the unthinkable, the unacceptable in the heat
        of a fight. What is unacceptable to one person may not be to
        another. 
        
        Marriages should be made with the knowledge that you can endure
        through times of extreme stress. This knowledge, as far as I
        know, come only from experience. If you marry when things have
        always been rosey, when you've never experienced conflict or
        stress, you're very unlikely to know whether you'll make it
        through the 7 year hump, or whenever your trouble comes.
        
        JimB. 

    RE: .51, .52
    
    As we, My wife and I, both say to engaged couples with whom we work
    in their preparation for marriage, arguing takes on many forms and
    people view 'fighting' differently.  We have no magic nor panacea
    for a successful relationship - but, we have not had any 'fights'.
    
     A couple of times we [ the longest was 24 hours ] stopped talking
    to each other over an issue that soon was resolve.  Our strong feeling
    is that our ability to be open to each other and care more for the
    other than our individual self is essential.  At least, it is our
    way....  and it is work... and it means telling the kids that we
    came first.... and it means coming making the marriage the most
    important aspect of our individual lives... and we make it a point
    to go away each year for a long weekend and be completely alone
    ... no matter what's going on t home .. [ almost ]...
    
    Many things bring us happiness in life - our kids, little pleasures...
    
    Being together doing nothing is our biggest............
    
                But, the future is the future....  we take each year
    as it comes ....
    
                            Mike Iwanowicz
    

    WOW, I am the author of note #41, I came back to this note a day
    later and look how many responses.  Anyway, I'm still wondering 
    if there's any feedback to how long you need to live with a person
    before you know if you can live together?  Any opinions out there?
    

        In my lexicon, if you've refused to talk to each other for 24
        hours, you've had a fight. If you don't like the word, call it a
        tiff or a spat. Whatever it is you shouldn't get married until
        you know how you interact when you've had a big one. 
        
        JimB.

    How long do you have to live with a person to know if you
    can/should live with the person?   For the rest of your
    life, or until the relationship ends.  Whichever comes
    first.
    
    

    re .57:
    
    those of us in the reliability field refer to that type of thing
    as "type I censoring of data".
    
    -Dave

    
    
    re: 41
    marriage is no longer an important issue.
    and noone can predict how long they'll be *in love* with another
    person.
    	2 years?
    	10 years?
    	20 years?
    	and it doesn't matter...
    	because people are changing/growing more and faster these
    days we should not make promises *forever*.
    	just enjoy the relationship for as long as it lasts.
    	and don't worry about how long it will last.
    	

    re .59
    I agree.  I've known people who lived together for years, got married
    and were divorced within the next few years.  Life has no guarentees.
    People are going to do what they want to do anyway.  Sometimes we
    have to take risks to achieve anything important.  I say live together
    for awhile and if you want to get married,.. get married.  But continue
    to live each day as it there were no other to follow.

    re.45 Very good point! Fighting fair is the true test.
    
    Re. demanding 6 mo engagement.. Would you rather he married you
    for your sake and resent you for pushing? I got married ahaed of
    the time frame we had first planned december -vs- following may
    because my wife wanted it that way. I wasent until a year after
    we were divorced that I realized that I resented the fact the date
    was pushed forward. I felt pressured and resented that fact.
    
    Serve no wine before its time,jerry