Commitment issues? (A general discussion)

[reinventmyself]

I have a 29 year old son who is doing something similar. He has a girlfriend who is 31 and she has their whole life planned out for them all the way down to the name of their kids. Her intentions are more than clear.

 

My oldest son has always been a little reluctant about commitments. Not to be confused with being reluctant about women. He's always been lucky with the ladies and I often wonder if he'd ever settle down.

 

I asked him a couple weeks ago what his intention was and he admits that he is in love with this girl but marriage `really wasn't on his radar'

In that moment, what would have been the obvious response from his mother might have been `maybe you ought to tell her'

But I bit my tongue because the long thoughtful silence between us, spoke for itself.

 

As a parent of young adult males I know I have no leverage and I all I can do is sit back and see how this plays out.

This is his life lesson to learn.

 

Oh . .and she makes more money than he does. Had to throw that in.

[Blue Spiral]

Everyone here knows about my situation. I originally wanted a relationship without marriage, and now I want something else.

 

I don't think it's wise to forbid discussion of certain causes, though. I mean, when someone asks you why people don't live on the moon, and you aren't allowed to mention its lack of air, well...

[Ms Darcy]

It seems insincere to me to say you want marriage but allow a situation where you know your partner does not want it and to stay in it so long.

 

In all my experience with men who were looking for commitment, at various levels as the end goal, they have been rather ruthless in getting it or getting out. Because they know what they want, know they can back it up, and that is what commitment is all about. And they want that person who is going to be able to give it back.

 

I agree with much of what you say but I don't think it's about insincerity. You mention men who were looking for commitment being rather ruthless. I think women who are looking for commitment, but don't say it explicitly or walk away when it's not forthcoming, can sometimes struggle with wanting an end goal and fear. As another example, women in the workplace. I have seen time and time again women - with the same or better skill sets as men - NOT negotiate their pay or ask for raises. And yet the men will negotiate, haggle, ask, and ask and ask. Time and time again. What's that about?

 

I think it's a bit of fear. I think the fear is losing the relationship one cultivated for so long.

[itsallgrand]

That's a very valid point.

 

I was thinking about my reply, because this is a topic I've been thinking about a lot lately and is close to home right now. What you are describing, that fear of sticking ones neck out and losing what you have and being vulnerable, it's exactly what it feels like to fear committing to a relationship. At least, for me!

 

But if someone says one thing, and does another, scared or not, is there not inconsistency there and some reason to be taken less seriously - as perhaps not fully sincere in what one says, what one can give, what one can promise? And isn't that part of the heart of committing - you have to put some faith in it, risk, be vulnerable, and consistently do what you say you will do and be present for whatever is currently happening. The more commitment, the more 'being there' is required.

 

What is up with that? I don't know. Maybe there is more conditioning on women to get along at all costs, to protect relationships. And maybe there is more conditioning on men to protect their own interests. I'm only partially concerned with that, and mostly concerned with how it plays out on individual levels.

 

The other thing I thought of in regards to that though is that there can be a lack of skills, and that gets in the way between what someone wants to be doing and whta they are actually following up on. If someone does not know how to negotiate for their own interests, that's going to be a problem and messy for them even if they really want to. And if someone is lacking skills in intimate relationships of the committed kind, that can be a problem too even if the person really wants to. There is a bigger learning curve, and more room for mistakes.The person would need to actively prioritize learning those skills. (Like how I am trying to learn about real healthy compromise, for example).

[notalady]

That's some excellent and varied perspectives guys!

 

I do see fear sometimes drive the lack of desire to commit, and also as the cause for women staying in a relationship that isn't going where they want it to go.

 

There was also a good point made about sometimes the ones not wanting to commit is simply not wanting to commit to the next level to that particular person due to having doubts about that person/the relationship. But then why would they stay in a relationship with someone they have doubts about rather than move on and find someone else? Could it also be driven by fear?

 

Guy friend #1 was actually in a LTR (lived together) for 3 years or so and broke up nearly 2 years ago. I remember him mentioning he was very happy after becoming single. That's probably true until this day, hence his lack of desire to get into a LTR (not just with this girl but in general, as he stated). However as humans, one also crave connection and companionship, despite how much one may enjoy their independence and freedom, which is how these casual arrangements and quasi relationships come about.

[Batya33]

Well sure there is fear of being alone "what if I don't find someone as ____ as he is", etc. And of course it's easier to stay in the comfort zone than to venture out there, fear of making a mistake -regretting the break-up and then it's too late, etc.

[notalady]

I just had another thought. If this was back in the old days (actually even modern day in some of the more traditional societies, eg Asia), these long term live in couples would've gotten married first before living together and the issue of "she wants to get married but he doesn't" wouldn't even be an issue to begin with. They might still have whatever problems they have now, but they'd also work on it as they do now (or even more committed to working it out, I don't know). Without that marriage commitment first and when dealing with problems (could be big or small), one may think, well this isn't exactly a perfect relationship and I'm not happy 100% of the time, I wonder if I can find that with someone else, hence a reluctance/hesitance to take it to the next step.

 

So as someone else pointed out earlier, it is perhaps also a result of societal changes.

[saluk]

That was me! Yeah when the process was (and for some people it still is) court->marry->live-together-forever, with divorce being extremely shameful: it may be more restrictive, but it is certainly a lot clearer. You just follow the formula, and boom, instant 40 years of sadness lol. Not only are modern mores more flexible... but everyone is following a slightly different pattern. And many don't even KNOW what pattern they are following.

[abitbroken]

People commit when they are ready to. Then they go look for the right person

 

Women tend to think in terms of "we have put this much time into the relationship, so X is the next step (officially the girlfriend, meeting the parents, engagement, what have you)" and men don't think the same way (for those that do want a commitment. They seldom start dating a woman when they are not ready for a serious relationship and if she sticks around long enough, she becomes his wife unless it is simply logistical (is not ready because he is in college with no job). On the contrary, he tends to break it off with the woman he met when he didn't want anything serious, or is single, and then goes out and looks for the potential wife or a woman who is otherwise a match and not Miss Right Now.

 

I think its okay, especially when very young, to simply date. But date different people. Figure out what you like and don't like. Its when someone is exclusively dating someone and then drops the bomb that its not serious - when clearly they are exclusive for quite awhile, is a little disingenious in a way.

 

That's how I see it, at least. There are men who are truly commitment phobic. I am not talking about men who are actively making a choice "I want to be single for the rest of my life and am happy about that" and are upfront and make sure they are only dating women looking for FWB, but men who are commitment phobes - they pursue women and come on strong, then bail. They often walk, talk and sound like a man who does want to commit and then flies the coop or does something to hurt her or sabotage it.

 

If a woman is a man 10 years with no commitment, its really part her fault for not having boundaries, not expressing her needs, and not willing to walk away at some point when she's had enough. If her goal is marriage, she can't make him want that, or think that time in counts. She should be honest with herself and be willing to pull the plug. Not in a pushy way and show him rings, but upfront, know what she wants and when he is not delivering by not having the same goals, she finds someone else.

[Sportster2005]

When a man wants a woman nothing will keep him being with her.

 

Commitment issues are a contrivance. Not to be confused with emotionally unavailable. Which is often explained as commitment issues.

[Rosti87]

When a man wants a woman nothing will keep him being with her.

 

Commitment issues are a contrivance. Not to be confused with emotionally unavailable. Which is often explained as commitment issues.

 

Agreed. One can be in a commitment with a person who is emotional removed/unavailable. To me that is worst than being on you own. There is nothing lonelier than being in a relationship when your partner is not emotionally connecting to you.

[Heather Dawn]

I agree with much of what you say but I don't think it's about insincerity. You mention men who were looking for commitment being rather ruthless. I think women who are looking for commitment, but don't say it explicitly or walk away when it's not forthcoming, can sometimes struggle with wanting an end goal and fear. As another example, women in the workplace. I have seen time and time again women - with the same or better skill sets as men - NOT negotiate their pay or ask for raises. And yet the men will negotiate, haggle, ask, and ask and ask. Time and time again. What's that about?

 

I think it's a bit of fear. I think the fear is losing the relationship one cultivated for so long.

 

 

And I think it's sometimes a foolish decision to end a relationship because of this.

 

If you're in a truly healthy, functional, loving, committed relationship that works for you both, and you know in your heart this is the person for you, then why throw that relationship away to be miserable without that person simply because they have conflicting beliefs or feelings about the institution of marriage? (Again, assuming it's not a commitment issue, and the relationship is strong and happy.)

 

Look, I'm pretty sure my boyfriend has a proposal planned for our trip to Europe in March because he's done a lot of hinting (and it would be very like him to do this in our dream location) - but if not, I'm not going to leave him. We'll have been together for four years by then - the four happiest years of my entire life. Why would I give up such happiness? I want to marry him, but I would rather be with him and unmarried, than without him.

[Batya33]

Yes that works for you because of your personal mindset about what marriage means. To others- like me- it is a type of commitment, a goal, that is top priority so that I would not have gone on another date with a man who told me that in general he did not want or did not value marriage. Happiness is also personal -I would never have been happy long term with a man who did not want marriage and family (generally and at some point specifically with me). To me marriage is not just an "institution" -it's an integral part of long term commitment to each other and potentially to family. And yes the legal and financial benefits are also attractive but not a main motivating factor (if any motivation). If one person wants marriage and the other does not very often the couple have commitment issues between them -they are incompatible on that point.

 

Hope the proposal is lovely!

[Hermes]

Many many people get married, many others decide to co-habit. It is a choice, and nothing wrong with that.

 

Sure, there are commitment-phobes, who cannot commit to anything, regardless of whether it is marriage or co-habitation. But this has nothing to do with the type of person who simply PREFERS to remain single. A preference in this case

 

The worst case scenario is when the commitment-phobe is somehow wrangled and waltzed into a marriage, and is not even emotionally available to the other spouse, and life becomes a living hell.

[Hermes]

 

 

An excerpt: (I've highlighted the last sentence of the paragraph as I believe that is at the heart of the matter)

 

"These emerging issues have led marital researchers to ask, “What gives?” What has changed about the nature of marriage since the 1970s that makes it less appealing to some, less satisfying to others, and generally less stable? Some researchers have blamed the ease with which we can get divorced, the general decline in Americans' desire to marry, or the decline in respect for the institution, despite the fact that most Americans still express a desire to get married and remain optimistic about their chances for a happy union (Cherlin, 2009). However, there is another potential explanation: Maybe we are simply expecting too much of our marriages without investing enough time and effort into our relationships to make these expectations achievable."

 

and

 

"We now expect that our spouses facilitate not only our needs for closeness and connection, but also our needs for personal growth and fulfillment. Although we have become less reliant on our partners in some ways—for example, it is less common today, compared to previous decades, for couples to rely on only one partner to provide a livable income—we have become more reliant on our partners to meet our needs to feel self-esteem and self-actualization. Our spouses are not only partners in the daily task of providing for and managing a household, they are also expected to be our best friends, caring confidants, passionate and adventurous lovers, intellectual challengers, and biggest cheerleaders."

 

No spouse (or partner) should IMO, be under that kind of pressure.

[Rosti87]

Indeed. That is way too stressful.

[Hermes]

People all too often enter marriage (and indeed partnerships) with totally unrealistic expectations -- not just of the "other" but sometimes of themselves.

 

No one is the bionic woman or the bionic man, all-seeing, all-patient, all knowing. Nor are they supposed to be.

 

Enmeshment with the "other" is not, repeat not, a marriage, or a partnership, or anything remotely healthy.

 

That really is an excellent and common-sense article:

 

Another excerpt:

 

"First, we can reduce our expectations of our marriages. For example, perhaps we can reconcile ourselves to the idea that friends or colleagues may better meet our needs for support and encouragement at work than our spouses.

Second, we can invest more time and effort into our relationships by spending more quality time together (note the use of the word quality—spacing out in front of bad television may not qualify)."

[TMifune]

Marriage makes projection easier for those who are inclined to project.

 

Our entertainment culture sends this message that marriage should the source of your fulfillment and the source of your joy. This is complete BS. Marriage should boost your fulfillment and joy.

 

But that message let's people off the hook for their own emotional problems. Instead of saying...."why aren't I happy?" and digging into themselves and you know, actually growing as a person, they can just hurl it in their partner's face. "I'm not happy, you're not making me happy!" and a relationship crumbles because even if,.....even if you were able to just infuse this person with happiness, to give them joy as a gift (and who wouldn't for the person they love if they could). Even if you could do that it would be horribly horribly unhealthy for both of you if you did.

 

Nice to see you again, Hermes!

[reinventmyself]

I saw an interview with the singer Bonnie Raite several years ago. She lived with her bf for several years. The journalist asked why they never married and her response was that things were fine just the way they were and besides she always wanted to know she always had the option to make that grand gesture or walking out the door if she needed to. That a piece of paper shouldn't define their commitment. The message was that without legal obligation a couple might treat each other better knowing the option to leave was just that much easier.

 

This was several years ago when cohabiting wasn't as common as it is today. I was so impressed with her attitude at the time and it really stuck with me.

 

I read only a few years ago that the two got married after being together for possibly a dozen years. (don't quote me. I didn't do my homework)

They divorced maybe 2 or 3 years later.

[DoF]

I think you are forgetting that women are 50% of the work force, and many are making more than men.

 

Think of what I said as an extra bonus. I doubt women are being forced to pay alimony or child support like men do.

[Batya33]

I didn't want to be married because of societal pressure- like many many people I'm not under that degree of influence of "society" or "culture" or the like. I definitely can relate to why people would not want to be married- just as valid a choice and yes often brave depending on their culture/background. I think a person who rationalizes away a desire to marry so as not to lose a long term partner might have commitment issues.

[Hermes]

Most couples nowadays (unless inordinately wealthy) both spouses go out to work. It is how it is. (Mortgages, childcare, insurance, you name it). Also, in the professions if a woman has spent 6 or 7 years of her life (not to mention the cost) of studying for a career, then naturally she would want to practice in that profession.

However, this situation is normal nowadays because it is NECESSARY. Nothing to do with one earning more than the other. In general terms, and at certain levels, women are still paid less than men.

[Batya33]

Most couples nowadays (unless inordinately wealthy) both spouses go out to work. It is how it is. (Mortgages, childcare, insurance, you name it). Also, in the professions if a woman has spent 6 or 7 years of her life (not to mention the cost) of studying for a career, then naturally she would want to practice in that profession.

However, this situation is normal nowadays because it is NECESSARY. Nothing to do with one earning more than the other. In general terms, and at certain levels, women are still paid less than men.

 

Inordinately wealthy or:

 

The spouse staying home saved a nest egg to be able to do so or

The cost of child care would equal the spouse's salary (or be more than) so it ends up not making sense to work outside the home.

 

For example. I didn't have 6-7 years invested in a career - try almost 15 plus 3 years in a different career (and grad school) but my being a full-time mom worked best for our family despite my not being inordinately wealthy. But I had started saving for the possibility over 10 years before I had a child or was married -i wasn't even in a serious relationship when I made the choice to have the option of full-time mom by saving $ in case my future husband didn't make a sufficient salary. Perhaps unusual (also unusual that I didn't marry or have a child till I was in my 40s). But I wouldn't assume that having a full-time parent requires inordinate wealth -many people simply cut out luxuries/cut corners so that they can have that type of arrangement (and yes I plan to return to work full time at some point).

[Hermes]

Batya, where I come from, I don't think I know one married couple where both are not going out to work. And that crosses the various age groups.

Both my own parents worked, and that was a different generation, earlier. And even with both working, and depending on the socio-economic group, and cutting those corners, they still both need to go out to work.

 

If someone wishes to stay at home (one of the spouses) that is absolutely fine, there is no criticism implied. I am just stating how things are right now for people.

You have your way of doing things, Batya, others have theirs.

 

And no you are not that unusual in having a child in your 40s. Running through my head are the names of several people I know who did just that. Also, in my own family, I notice the younger generation are not marrying till they are over thirty, well over thirty. Two of my nephews and their wives come to mind. They were all around 33 when they married.

 

Horses for courses, as they say.

[Rosti87]

People all too often enter marriage (and indeed partnerships) with totally unrealistic expectations -- not just of the "other" but sometimes of themselves.

 

No one is the bionic woman or the bionic man, all-seeing, all-patient, all knowing. Nor are they supposed to be.

 

Enmeshment with the "other" is not, repeat not, a marriage, or a partnership, or anything remotely healthy.

 

That really is an excellent and common-sense article:

 

Another excerpt:

 

"First, we can reduce our expectations of our marriages. For example, perhaps we can reconcile ourselves to the idea that friends or colleagues may better meet our needs for support and encouragement at work than our spouses.

Second, we can invest more time and effort into our relationships by spending more quality time together (note the use of the word quality—spacing out in front of bad television may not qualify)."

LOL! No Netflix benders?