Marriage survey

Post Reply New Topic

1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes
4. No

1. Did...I think it makes it easier if you ever plan on having kids, otherwise it seems to confuse people and makes for alot of questions. I still feel it should be a choice though, and not a requirement.

2. No. I probably would have bolted if I had to get married in front of an audience, I was having a major meltdown as it was with the family at the JP's office.

3. Did. If I had to do it again I probably wouldn't.

4. Did (not my choice the first time)...but would again. People can sometimes change in a heartbeat, it's sad but true.

As someone whose mother didn't change her name, I never had this confusion myself. I was more confused at why the mothers of my peers changed their names.

1. That's a hard one. Normally I'd say no cos not only do I take pride in my last name but I'd feel like it was taking away something that belonged to me...silly I know.

On the otherhand, it would be confusing....I mean what would are last child's name be?

2. Yeah....but that would cost. So I guess it depends on the situation.

3. Yes...and I think this is important. It's like testing your partner and yourself to see if you have what it takes to stay in a relationship and be fully commited to do whatever it takes for better or for worse.

...I hope no one confuses or contributes that last part of my sentence of (worse) to abuse. As no relationship is right when there's any form of abuse going on including financial.

4. No, I think it's a very very risky idea. You're risking your financial security into a "glump" where your partner might abuse his/her "right". I mean you can't just trust someone before you marry them. It could be your money they're after or it could be abused. I don't see the reason for this unless you're officially married. Then if something were to happen, you get the legal right to take back what was yours that wasn't compromised in the first place on your behalf.

would you:

1. Change your name after marriage- depends on my future husbands name. if it was something wacky and weird sounding, like Burrito De La Manana, then yeah. otherwise I'd just stick to mine (and a nice last name it is)
2. Have a wedding ceremony- no. quick wedding in Vegas with only a couple of best friends as witnesses is the only option I'm ready to go for
3. Be "engaged" prior to marrying- doesn't matter to me
4. Have a prenupital agreement- yes, even if the guy was the wealthy one

I'm extremely pragmatic, a-romantic and I don't care about traditions and social constructs, nor do I have any family that would pressure me into anything like that. I'd probably be open to some compromise, but not regarding the wedding ceremony, that one is out of the question.

1. Yes, I've changed my name
2. Small party with close friends
3. Only as in not getting married next day after proposal . But we've been living together for an year and a half already.
4. No, but I wouldn't have minded

Been married twice, and am currently mulling over a proposal from my current BF, so...

First time-
1. Change your name after marriage- Yes
2. Have a wedding ceremony- Very small, informal one, with only a handful of friends and his mum
3. Be "engaged" prior to marrying- Not 'officially', and not for long. I was 18 and impulsive, and jumped on the idea.
4. Have a prenupital agreement- I had never even heard of such a thing at the time.

Second time-

1. Change your name after marriage- Yes, though not for the same reason as the first time. I married this guy pretty much SOLELY as a business partner/father to my children (who I never ended up having). It was for the latter reason I changed my name....as others have said, I wanted to have the same name as my children.
2. Have a wedding ceremony- Not one, but two. One in Long Island, orchestrated by his family, one in Ireland, orchestrated by mine. What a massive waste of money.
3. Be "engaged" prior to marrying- Of course. We were soooooo 'by the books'.
4. Have a prenupital agreement- No, although I regret the hell out of it to this very day. Divorcing him wouldn't have been half the living hell it was had I insisted on one.

Current ideas-

1. Change your name after marriage- I don't see the sense in it. I'm back exclusively to my maiden name, have yet another professional degree (the one I'm USING!) in that name, and cannot have children at this point. I've also seen way too much legal annoyance come from having multiple legal names....it's just confusing.
2. Have a wedding ceremony- As I said about marriage no2, it's a huge waste of money. We're not rich, and neither are our families. Oh, and speaking of families, I'd rather not give mine yet another excuse to get in my face.
3. Be "engaged" prior to marrying- I won't turn down a ring, but after my last two official engagements (one that resulted in the last marriage, the other resulting in the most abusive relationship of my life), I have little use for such formalities.
4. Have a prenupital agreement- Yes. God yes.

Wow, I've become jaded.

1. Change your name after marriage
Yes I changed my name after marriage, it made all documentation easier.

2. Have a wedding ceremony
We had a nice ceromony in a church, I like the old fashioned thinking of marrying only once so wanted it to be a special day.

3. Be "engaged" prior to marrying
It is always get to know someone very well before making a committment like marriage, so being engaged seems the most sensible thing to do.

4. Have a prenupital agreement (if it's legal in your country)
If I had a lot of money it would make sense, but I have nothing so it doesn't make sense to do so. I also hope marriage is for life

1. Absolutely not. I see that as extremely sexist. Also, my last name goes with my first name way too well for me to change it.
2. Probably not. I wouldn't wear white, wear a veil, let my father walk me down the aisle, or play the bridal march, so what would be the point? Also, I find them stupidly expensive and unnecessary. I imagine pressure from my family and the groom's insistence that we have one would probably force me to participate, but don't expect me to smile in the pictures.
3. I see no reason to disagree with that.
4. I'd insist on a prenup. With the divorce rate at what it is, it's illogical to assume that "forever" really means forever and I need to keep myself protected.

1. No, definitely not.
2. Sure, but a non-traditional one.
3. Sure.
4. Depends on my financial situation at the time.

How old were you when you got married?

Maybe marriage isn't for you, if you wouldn't even smile for the pictures.