Quote from: Snake on February 03, 2015, 03:20:48 AMQuote from: Epsira on February 03, 2015, 02:42:04 AMQuote from: Snake on February 03, 2015, 02:35:35 AMQuote from: Val 'Ketam on February 03, 2015, 02:08:17 AMQuote from: Snake on February 03, 2015, 12:45:26 AMQuote from: Epsira on February 03, 2015, 12:41:33 AMQuote from: Snake on February 02, 2015, 07:32:40 PMQuote from: Statefarm on February 02, 2015, 07:24:13 PMBut I'd try to bring in two incomesWhy?Splitting economic burden can factor in longer marriages. I'm a proponent of individual choice, so I agree with the concept. In my head the marriage last until we both die. I still believe that when you marry, that's it. Unless someone dies, you're with them until that point. My significant other would have to understand and agree to that.It's a personal choice in that regard."Til death do us part" implies when one of the two dies. But hey, I could easily see someone never marrying again after losing the love of their life.I've been told I have antiquated notions of romance before because I believe in "the one" (or, "the few"). So I would only really marry someone if I thought they were one of "the few", and if they died I don't think I would be able to survive, let alone find another "one".Anyways, we're getting off topic and I'm getting sad about things that haven't even happened.I also believe that there's few people whom I could have successful romantic relations with. But I'm also content if that person doesn't exist, because to a certain extent that sentiment is characterized in mind. If I actually met someone like that I don't think I'd marry them, and certainly not have children.I'm someone who doesn't take marriage very seriously despite it retaining relevancy.Sorry to derail more.Blame my rampant weebism.I'm sorry, you confused me. You're saying that if you met someone who could be "the one", you wouldn't be with them?[While I do enjoy the deralied conversation topic, but it's not relevant to the OP. I'm sure we're bound to get some more romance-themed threads as we near VDay.]If I met this dream person I'd be happy having a relationship with them, but if they don't actually exist I'm okay with being solitary. I think I'll be making a few of those threads soon enough.
Quote from: Epsira on February 03, 2015, 02:42:04 AMQuote from: Snake on February 03, 2015, 02:35:35 AMQuote from: Val 'Ketam on February 03, 2015, 02:08:17 AMQuote from: Snake on February 03, 2015, 12:45:26 AMQuote from: Epsira on February 03, 2015, 12:41:33 AMQuote from: Snake on February 02, 2015, 07:32:40 PMQuote from: Statefarm on February 02, 2015, 07:24:13 PMBut I'd try to bring in two incomesWhy?Splitting economic burden can factor in longer marriages. I'm a proponent of individual choice, so I agree with the concept. In my head the marriage last until we both die. I still believe that when you marry, that's it. Unless someone dies, you're with them until that point. My significant other would have to understand and agree to that.It's a personal choice in that regard."Til death do us part" implies when one of the two dies. But hey, I could easily see someone never marrying again after losing the love of their life.I've been told I have antiquated notions of romance before because I believe in "the one" (or, "the few"). So I would only really marry someone if I thought they were one of "the few", and if they died I don't think I would be able to survive, let alone find another "one".Anyways, we're getting off topic and I'm getting sad about things that haven't even happened.I also believe that there's few people whom I could have successful romantic relations with. But I'm also content if that person doesn't exist, because to a certain extent that sentiment is characterized in mind. If I actually met someone like that I don't think I'd marry them, and certainly not have children.I'm someone who doesn't take marriage very seriously despite it retaining relevancy.Sorry to derail more.Blame my rampant weebism.I'm sorry, you confused me. You're saying that if you met someone who could be "the one", you wouldn't be with them?[While I do enjoy the deralied conversation topic, but it's not relevant to the OP. I'm sure we're bound to get some more romance-themed threads as we near VDay.]
Quote from: Snake on February 03, 2015, 02:35:35 AMQuote from: Val 'Ketam on February 03, 2015, 02:08:17 AMQuote from: Snake on February 03, 2015, 12:45:26 AMQuote from: Epsira on February 03, 2015, 12:41:33 AMQuote from: Snake on February 02, 2015, 07:32:40 PMQuote from: Statefarm on February 02, 2015, 07:24:13 PMBut I'd try to bring in two incomesWhy?Splitting economic burden can factor in longer marriages. I'm a proponent of individual choice, so I agree with the concept. In my head the marriage last until we both die. I still believe that when you marry, that's it. Unless someone dies, you're with them until that point. My significant other would have to understand and agree to that.It's a personal choice in that regard."Til death do us part" implies when one of the two dies. But hey, I could easily see someone never marrying again after losing the love of their life.I've been told I have antiquated notions of romance before because I believe in "the one" (or, "the few"). So I would only really marry someone if I thought they were one of "the few", and if they died I don't think I would be able to survive, let alone find another "one".Anyways, we're getting off topic and I'm getting sad about things that haven't even happened.I also believe that there's few people whom I could have successful romantic relations with. But I'm also content if that person doesn't exist, because to a certain extent that sentiment is characterized in mind. If I actually met someone like that I don't think I'd marry them, and certainly not have children.I'm someone who doesn't take marriage very seriously despite it retaining relevancy.Sorry to derail more.Blame my rampant weebism.
Quote from: Val 'Ketam on February 03, 2015, 02:08:17 AMQuote from: Snake on February 03, 2015, 12:45:26 AMQuote from: Epsira on February 03, 2015, 12:41:33 AMQuote from: Snake on February 02, 2015, 07:32:40 PMQuote from: Statefarm on February 02, 2015, 07:24:13 PMBut I'd try to bring in two incomesWhy?Splitting economic burden can factor in longer marriages. I'm a proponent of individual choice, so I agree with the concept. In my head the marriage last until we both die. I still believe that when you marry, that's it. Unless someone dies, you're with them until that point. My significant other would have to understand and agree to that.It's a personal choice in that regard."Til death do us part" implies when one of the two dies. But hey, I could easily see someone never marrying again after losing the love of their life.I've been told I have antiquated notions of romance before because I believe in "the one" (or, "the few"). So I would only really marry someone if I thought they were one of "the few", and if they died I don't think I would be able to survive, let alone find another "one".Anyways, we're getting off topic and I'm getting sad about things that haven't even happened.
Quote from: Snake on February 03, 2015, 12:45:26 AMQuote from: Epsira on February 03, 2015, 12:41:33 AMQuote from: Snake on February 02, 2015, 07:32:40 PMQuote from: Statefarm on February 02, 2015, 07:24:13 PMBut I'd try to bring in two incomesWhy?Splitting economic burden can factor in longer marriages. I'm a proponent of individual choice, so I agree with the concept. In my head the marriage last until we both die. I still believe that when you marry, that's it. Unless someone dies, you're with them until that point. My significant other would have to understand and agree to that.It's a personal choice in that regard."Til death do us part" implies when one of the two dies. But hey, I could easily see someone never marrying again after losing the love of their life.
Quote from: Epsira on February 03, 2015, 12:41:33 AMQuote from: Snake on February 02, 2015, 07:32:40 PMQuote from: Statefarm on February 02, 2015, 07:24:13 PMBut I'd try to bring in two incomesWhy?Splitting economic burden can factor in longer marriages. I'm a proponent of individual choice, so I agree with the concept. In my head the marriage last until we both die. I still believe that when you marry, that's it. Unless someone dies, you're with them until that point. My significant other would have to understand and agree to that.
Quote from: Snake on February 02, 2015, 07:32:40 PMQuote from: Statefarm on February 02, 2015, 07:24:13 PMBut I'd try to bring in two incomesWhy?Splitting economic burden can factor in longer marriages. I'm a proponent of individual choice, so I agree with the concept.
Quote from: Statefarm on February 02, 2015, 07:24:13 PMBut I'd try to bring in two incomesWhy?
But I'd try to bring in two incomes
Anyway, I'll ask something relevant to the topic.Do gender roles in marriage retain importance?
What is your opinion on stay-at-home dads?
