Beta Marriage?!?!

gladyscf

On my way to work this morning I heard this little gem being discussed on the radio.

http://time.com/3024606/millennials-marriage-sex-relationships-hook-ups/

Isn't dating someone the beta part? Is this going to make the PPD a normal thing now because well, "the first one wasn't real!" 

AddieCake

We had a recent poster of similar thinking. They got married and would decide later if they wanted to "get married all the way. "

mysticl

AddieCake said:

We had a recent poster of similar thinking. They got married and would decide later if they wanted to "get married all the way. "

You mean the one who had a green card marriage only it didn't work and he had to leave the country anyhow?  Nothing like having a second wedding claiming the first wasn't "real" to bring Immigration down on your head for committing fraud.  

gladyscf

AddieCake said:

We had a recent poster of similar thinking. They got married and would decide later if they wanted to "get married all the way. "

Are you fucking kidding me?

Maggie0829

People are fucking dumb.  Period.

Sugargirl1019

This article is so disgusting, it makes me want to throw up! I love my H and cannot even fathom going into this marriage thinking "well if he makes me mad, we won't be married in 2 years and I can move on" WHAT THE FUCK IS THE POINT OF DATING.

What are people turning marriage into? Have we no motivation, pride, morals, determination to make this relationship work no matter what? Your mindset going into marriage needs to be "I'm going to be with you forever and I will do everything it takes to make our relationship work" or else guess what. You're. Not. Ready. For. Marriage!

Bubblegum5586

I am a little confused by this still. This "beta" marriage... do you legally get married? Then decide if it works?

That just seems like what dating and engagement is. H and I lived together 4 years before getting married. Went through a lot of ups and downs together and individually and still love each and want to be together every day. Having that time to "test" our relationship was key to us and to give us the confidence that we want to be together forever and know we will have good times and can work through it in the bad times. 

So back to my confusion... why do you have to actually get married to test it out? You can live together, combine finances, get a pet etc... live like you are married.... BEFORE you get married (although I do get some religious and other beliefs may not allow that.... but I would assume those same people wouldn't believe in getting married and be ok to call it quits in 2 years when the "beta period" ended....)

sarawifenow

If this is what society is coming to, then

AddieCake

That's the one, Mysticl!

raissyrais

And the gay community is bringing immorality and invalidity to the sanctity of marriage??! I mean come on. Just date longer and get to know one another. That whole marriage thing is becoming a serious joke. It's disturbing for people who actually believe in and respect their vows and know all the work it takes to make a marriage work! Society is doomed I tell you, doomed!

cborries

I read an article a couple years ago about another country (maybe Mexico?) wanting to do something similar to this.  Instead of being married forever, the couple would essentially have to 'renew' their marriage license every X amount of years.  If it's not renewed, they were no longer considered married, and they wouldn't have to go through the divorce paperwork.

I don't know my feelings on this topic just yet.  I am extremely liberal, and to me, the only difference between before my wedding day and after my wedding day was that I signed a piece of paper telling the government that I'm married.  I hate to see people take commitments so lightly, but at the same time, I think some people get married or stay married for the wrong reasons.

But, I'm just adding to the discussion.  Please don't hate me!

scrunchythief

Ugh the psych part of me is crying in a corner from the methodology of that survey.  The only option they had that didn't have non-monogamy or built in renewals was "'Til death do us part-divorce is illegal."  I wonder what the results would have been if there was an option to pick the system we have now.  

Also, how would you work out property splitting and child support/custody after the "trial period" ended?  From what I've seen that's the part that makes divorce more complicated.  And if you didn't want any of the legal protections of marriage for those things, why get legally married at all?

Inkdancer

Traditionally, this is what a handfasting was. You had a trial marriage for a year and a day, after which you could decide to stay together or not. But that was when the government had no real investment in whether you were married or not. I don't think it is appropriate in modern times. Just date for longer. Sheesh.

manateehugger

scrunchythief said:

Ugh the psych part of me is crying in a corner from the methodology of that survey.  The only option they had that didn't have non-monogamy or built in renewals was "'Til death do us part-divorce is illegal."  I wonder what the results would have been if there was an option to pick the system we have now.  

Also, how would you work out property splitting and child support/custody after the "trial period" ended?  From what I've seen that's the part that makes divorce more complicated.  And if you didn't want any of the legal protections of marriage for those things, why get legally married at all?

Glad I wasn't the only one who noticed this. Grad school made me a methodology snob. And this is just idiotic - you're either married or you aren't. Even if you didn't "renew" your marriage in the example PP posed - you still are no longer married, and dissolution of assets and custody of children is still an issue unless there was a prenup in place. 

And I didn't feel like I "just signed a paper" the day after I got married. I felt like I had publicly declared my intent and commitment to stay joined to one person for the rest of my life, spiritually and legally. I was my husband's wife. That was huge to me. 

mrs4everhart

Societally speaking, and I'm just making some broad generalizations and observations, but how can a generation who were brought up in a society with an over 50% divorce rate supposed to take marriage seriously? Serious in an until-death-do-us-part kind of way? I'm not casting aspersions on divorced people, I'm divorced. I'm not saying that many people didn't do the right thing by divorcing. But when you (plural you) and just about everyone you know comes from a divorced or blended family, who is teaching these kids that marriage is (supposed to be) forever? 

I'm 38 and even when I was growing up my parents who are still together (first marriage for both) were in the minority. I'm not saying these things to be insulting, I just think these types of things are some of the unintended consequences of a society who deems so much as disposable. I think marriage as a concept will continue to evolve and I suppose we'll find out if that's a good thing or not as it happens. 

mysticl

Many years ago I read an article about a state that was proposing two different types of marriage licenses. One was the traditional license they already offered. The other one had a limited divorce option. You could not have a no fault divorce. If you wanted one you had to show cause (i.e. abuse, adultery, something major). I don't know what ever became of it.

manateehugger

STBMrsEverhart said:

Societally speaking, and I'm just making some broad generalizations and observations, but how can a generation who were brought up in a society with an over 50% divorce rate supposed to take marriage seriously? Serious in an until-death-do-us-part kind of way? I'm not casting aspersions on divorced people, I'm divorced. I'm not saying that many people didn't do the right thing by divorcing. But when you (plural you) and just about everyone you know comes from a divorced or blended family, who is teaching these kids that marriage is (supposed to be) forever? 

I'm 38 and even when I was growing up my parents who are still together (first marriage for both) were in the minority. I'm not saying these things to be insulting, I just think these types of things are some of the unintended consequences of a society who deems so much as disposable. I think marriage as a concept will continue to evolve and I suppose we'll find out if that's a good thing or not as it happens. 

I just have to say that it is utterly not true that divorced parents can't teach a kid that marriage is supposed to be a lifelong commitment. My mother went through an awful marriage and divorce; that doesn't mean she can't teach me from her mistakes, her life, to show me that marriage is supposed to be a wonderful lifelong thing. I think I was more cautious, more dedicated to forming a healthy relationship because I knew the lessons of my mother's life. 

Sure, people treat marriage flippantly, but there are those who don't and still find themselves divorcing. And I think some of those people have valuable lessons for the rest of us. 

scrunchythief

mysticl said:

Many years ago I read an article about a state that was proposing two different types of marriage licenses. One was the traditional license they already offered. The other one had a limited divorce option. You could not have a no fault divorce. If you wanted one you had to show cause (i.e. abuse, adultery, something major). I don't know what ever became of it.

I heard about something like that too, called a covenant marriage, in Louisiana if I'm remembering correctly.  You were required to go to marriage prep classes first, though I don't remember if there were any government incentives for choosing that kind at all.  I think the marriage prep classes were a great idea, especially in that case and probably should be required for everyone.  

Also, if I'm remembering from my psych classes correctly, the 50% divorce rate statistic is outdated.  Most studies actually show a decline in the divorce rate for current first marriages.  Now, the rates for second, third, etc marriages can get higher than 50%.

mrs4everhart

PDKH said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

Societally speaking, and I'm just making some broad generalizations and observations, but how can a generation who were brought up in a society with an over 50% divorce rate supposed to take marriage seriously? Serious in an until-death-do-us-part kind of way? I'm not casting aspersions on divorced people, I'm divorced. I'm not saying that many people didn't do the right thing by divorcing. But when you (plural you) and just about everyone you know comes from a divorced or blended family, who is teaching these kids that marriage is (supposed to be) forever? 

I'm 38 and even when I was growing up my parents who are still together (first marriage for both) were in the minority. I'm not saying these things to be insulting, I just think these types of things are some of the unintended consequences of a society who deems so much as disposable. I think marriage as a concept will continue to evolve and I suppose we'll find out if that's a good thing or not as it happens. 

I just have to say that it is utterly not true that divorced parents can't teach a kid that marriage is supposed to be a lifelong commitment. My mother went through an awful marriage and divorce; that doesn't mean she can't teach me from her mistakes, her life, to show me that marriage is supposed to be a wonderful lifelong thing. I think I was more cautious, more dedicated to forming a healthy relationship because I knew the lessons of my mother's life. 

Sure, people treat marriage flippantly, but there are those who don't and still find themselves divorcing. And I think some of those people have valuable lessons for the rest of us. 

I didn't say it was impossible. And I did say I was speaking in broad generalizations. 

I don't think that divorced people are completely unable to teach lessons, even if it is from the "don't make the same mistakes I made" school versus the example setting school. 

But you can't teach children there's nothing wrong with divorce (by saying "hey, your (divorced) family is normal just like everyone else's) while simultaneously teaching that marriage is "forever" - those two things run counter to each other. I wouldn't advocate teaching children there's something "wrong" with the family they come from, but it's a little hard to teach that marriage is forever, while stating divorce is okay too. Which one is it? As a whole I think society has made that choice rather apparent. To teach that divorce shouldn't be an option is to say that families of divorce are "less than" and that's just not going to go over well at this point in the game. 

I had the example of two people sticking it out no matter what for parents and still ended up divorced. So if my parents and others like them are clearly representing a minority at this point, how is their example of what marriage is "supposed" to be supposed to be the prevalent mindset? 

mysticl

scrunchythief said:

mysticl said:

Many years ago I read an article about a state that was proposing two different types of marriage licenses. One was the traditional license they already offered. The other one had a limited divorce option. You could not have a no fault divorce. If you wanted one you had to show cause (i.e. abuse, adultery, something major). I don't know what ever became of it.

I heard about something like that too, called a covenant marriage, in Louisiana if I'm remembering correctly.  You were required to go to marriage prep classes first, though I don't remember if there were any government incentives for choosing that kind at all.  I think the marriage prep classes were a great idea, especially in that case and probably should be required for everyone.  

Also, if I'm remembering from my psych classes correctly, the 50% divorce rate statistic is outdated.  Most studies actually show a decline in the divorce rate for current first marriages.  Now, the rates for second, third, etc marriages can get higher than 50%.

Yes, I'm pretty sure that was it.  I don't think there were incentives it was just an option.  

I've also read that there are so many factors involved in divorce that you can't just issue a blanket statistic for the divorce rate either.  Age plays a big part so the rate for young couples is much higher than the rate for people who wait.  

mellowmarshmallow

I came here hoping this would be an article about fish weddings. Oh the disappointment.

Maggie0829

STBMrsEverhart said:

PDKH said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

Societally speaking, and I'm just making some broad generalizations and observations, but how can a generation who were brought up in a society with an over 50% divorce rate supposed to take marriage seriously? Serious in an until-death-do-us-part kind of way? I'm not casting aspersions on divorced people, I'm divorced. I'm not saying that many people didn't do the right thing by divorcing. But when you (plural you) and just about everyone you know comes from a divorced or blended family, who is teaching these kids that marriage is (supposed to be) forever? 

I'm 38 and even when I was growing up my parents who are still together (first marriage for both) were in the minority. I'm not saying these things to be insulting, I just think these types of things are some of the unintended consequences of a society who deems so much as disposable. I think marriage as a concept will continue to evolve and I suppose we'll find out if that's a good thing or not as it happens. 

I just have to say that it is utterly not true that divorced parents can't teach a kid that marriage is supposed to be a lifelong commitment. My mother went through an awful marriage and divorce; that doesn't mean she can't teach me from her mistakes, her life, to show me that marriage is supposed to be a wonderful lifelong thing. I think I was more cautious, more dedicated to forming a healthy relationship because I knew the lessons of my mother's life. 

Sure, people treat marriage flippantly, but there are those who don't and still find themselves divorcing. And I think some of those people have valuable lessons for the rest of us. 

I didn't say it was impossible. And I did say I was speaking in broad generalizations. 

I don't think that divorced people are completely unable to teach lessons, even if it is from the "don't make the same mistakes I made" school versus the example setting school. 

But you can't teach children there's nothing wrong with divorce (by saying "hey, your (divorced) family is normal just like everyone else's) while simultaneously teaching that marriage is "forever" - those two things run counter to each other. I wouldn't advocate teaching children there's something "wrong" with the family they come from, but it's a little hard to teach that marriage is forever, while stating divorce is okay too. Which one is it? As a whole I think society has made that choice rather apparent. To teach that divorce shouldn't be an option is to say that families of divorce are "less than" and that's just not going to go over well at this point in the game. 

I had the example of two people sticking it out no matter what for parents and still ended up divorced. So if my parents and others like them are clearly representing a minority at this point, how is their example of what marriage is "supposed" to be supposed to be the prevalent mindset? 

I think what should be taught is that marriage is a very significant commitment that should not be taken lightly.  And even though marriage should be a lifelong commitment, that sometimes things happen in life that unfortunately do not allow for that, but again getting a divorce is just as serious a commitment as deciding to get married.

Children should be taught that both marriage and divorce are huge choices that constitute a lot of thought and reflection and communication, not something that should be rushed into.

Unfortunately since divorce has become so prevalent in our society and young adults tend to look up to celebrities who (unfortunately) get divorces quite often and get married quickly and often it makes it seem that marriage and divorce are no big deal.  And it isn't like marriage and divorce and the huge decisions both are, are really taught in school so all kids and young adults have to go on are celebrity news and these silly wedding shows that only show the fun parties and dresses that make up a stereotypical wedding.  So if the parents aren't teaching their kids certain values then where else are they supposed to learn about it?

falsara

Dating is supposed to be the trial period that the article is talking about.  However western society has pushed the idea that you need to reach milestones and achievements within certain time frames, and that we need to keep up with the world around us.  We move so fast though our day to day lives, that we often ignore the things that we ought to slow down and enjoy.  Getting married is seen as a milestone by those that the article surveyed.  They just want to reach the next milestone in their life, they don't care about what that milestone is about, or the emotions or feelings that are supposed to be present when reaching the milestone.  They don't care about the commitment that is inherent in the idea of marriage.  If they would slow down and enjoy all the different stages of their relationships versus just treating them as a hoop to jump through so they can achieve a milestone, their ideas on a "Beta Marriage" would probably be different.

ETA: typo