From personal experience, titles are only really necessary in relationships when you don’t trust or know where you stand with the other person. If you know how they feel about you, then is there a need for “boyfriend” or “girlfriend”? Sure, it’s nice to introduce someone as your significant other, and it makes those awkward introductions of “friend sorta…” a moot worry. But does that really affect your relationship?
I think titles give people a false sense of security. Even if someone is your boyfriend, fiance or even husband, that doesn’t prevent them from cheating or having a deeper connection with someone else. That, and choosing the wrong fit from the beginning, seem to be the biggest reasons why people get divorced. In the U.S., you’re more likely to get divorced than you are to stay married. (A sad statement, for sure.)
As hard as a break up can be, do you want to be with someone who’s interested in another? Why stay in that type of relationship and force yourself to compromise? Yes, children, and sometimes pets, make that separation harder. In the long term, breaking up might be the best solution.
If you’re not worried about the outside chance that he/she will find someone else, then what other reason would you really want the title? Social standing? Feeling special? Those are social influences. (You don’t need a title to feel special; gestures and romance achieve the same goal.)
We should focus more on enriching the bond, instead of letting outside judgment affect us, particularly since no one really understands what goes on in that relationship except the people in it (and sometimes they can’t even see the full picture).
So say adieu to social pressures and overlook the shocking gasps from your judgmental friends. Wave bye-bye to titles. They don’t contribute to your actual connection.
.
Postscript. The picture above is the first Google image result for “relationship.” It’s disheartening that the word has such a bad reputation.
Marriage: Tax Benefits, duh.
Society really doesnt have much to do with it. What if you’re a stay at home mother and you become pregnant with your second child? Perhaps you and your partner are very tight on money, and you are both living sort of paycheck to paycheck. Especially with two children this makes this scenario that much more possible, because, well, children are very expensive. Marriage insures you can use your partner’s health insurance to take care of your children together, as well as your own health. This article is sort of a utopian ideal that is not necessarily practical to the great majority of the population (see: middle and lower class).
Thanks for your opinion. I respectfully disagree. By your definition, marriage is a legal contract between two people that is approved by the state. However, this post discusses the title, not the contract. Of course there are benefits to marriage. The LGBT community has been arguing that for years and not just the feeling of being a second-class citizen. By being married, a couple receives the same right as family members and often more so, e.g. inheritance usually goes to the spouse and offspring before other relatives.
This entry has nothing to do with “utopia.” It’s based on the theory that titles don’t guard you from relationship problems. Instead, it projects a false sense of security.
You’re more than welcome to disagree, (and I’m actually happy that you do). This is my personal take.