4 ms·

Caring about potential loss of material objects over deep human connection sounds like an absolutely miserable way to live your one short life in this universe!

by s5300 3y ago

pengaru 3y ago
> Caring about potential loss of material objects over deep human connection sounds like an absolutely miserable way to live your one short life in this universe! Then fix the outdated laws so people can enjoy those human connections without all the risky loss/gain baggage.
- boring_twenties 3y ago
  You can already do that by simply not getting married? I have friends that have lived together for 10+ years and have multiple children that don't plan to ever marry... seems to be working for them.
  - pengaru 3y ago
    I don't know where you live, but that's a problematic approach in many US states having common-law marriages. Your friends anecdata is entirely irrelevant until they've separated and we hear about how that plays out, before it's even remotely worth hearing as still meaningless anecdata.
    - boring_twenties 3y ago
      Seven[0] out of fifty is not "many" by any stretch of the imagination. Even in those seven, it's not something that happens automatically. For example, in Utah, it only applies to those "who hold themselves out as and have acquired a uniform and general reputation as husband and wife."[1] If my meaningless anecdata isn't remotely worth hearing about, then what's to be said about your intentionally misleading irrelevant statement? *Oops: [0] https://www.ncsl.org/human-services/common-law-marriage-by-state https://www.ncsl.org/human-services/common-law-marriage-by-s... [1] https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title30/Chapter1/30-1-S4.5.html?v=C30-1-S4.5_1800010118000101 https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title30/Chapter1/30-1-S4.5.html?v=...
    - fps 3y ago
      Common law marriages are not as easy to happen by accident as many people assume. Living together doesn't matter. Common law marriage, in every state I've checked, requires that you have a ceremony and present yourself as a "married couple" publicly. You have to go around telling people you're married for it to matter.
      - dragonwriter 3y ago
        > Common law marriage, in every state I've checked, requires that you have a ceremony and present yourself as a "married couple" publicly. You have to go around telling people you're married for it to matter. It generally does not require a ceremony (but it does usually require an explicit mutual agreement), and living together does matter (cohabitation is commonly a requirement or evidence of common law marriage), but other than that you are right that publicly presenting as married is often a requirement (and otherwise is evidence). Here’s info from Texas as an example, which is more required-elements-based and includes cohabitation: https://guides.sll.texas.gov/common-law-marriage#:~:text=Texas%20law%20states%20that%20a,others%20that%20they%20were%20married%E2%80%9D https://guides.sll.texas.gov/common-law-marriage#:~:text=Tex... And here is Colorado, which is more evidence based and does not identify cohabitation as even a form of evidence (though it does have joint ownership of property): https://pitkincounty.com/288/Common-Law-Marriage https://pitkincounty.com/288/Common-Law-Marriage Utah is more specific requirements, and includes both cohabitation and how the couple presents publicly, but no ceremony: https://www.utcourts.gov/en/self-help/case-categories/family/marriage/common-law.html https://www.utcourts.gov/en/self-help/case-categories/family...
- adoxyz 3y ago
  Prenups are a thing you know?
  - pengaru 3y ago
    I'm replying to someone saying don't care about these things and you're saying bring in lawyers to mitigate the awful legal defaults! I'm pretty sure that's also in disagreement with the comment I'm replying to.
- s5300 3y ago
  >> Then fix the outdated laws so people can enjoy those human connections without all the risky loss/gain baggage. In a country that celebrates sociopathy, manipulation of others, & psychopathy to such a high degree, I think the laws are perfectly fine as they protect exceptionally vulnerable people. What sort of resources do you actually think there are for a spouse that is able to escape after having been isolated and abused for years, that oftentimes becomes responsible for not only their own well-being, but also childrens? The answer is practically nothing aside from maybe your very basic necessities to sustain life. I also think you’re really missing a major point but that’s a tangent I’m not going to go on. [edit]: Revised “What sort of resources do you actually think there are for a spouse that’s been isolated and abused for years” to “What sort of resources do you actually think there are for a spouse that is able to escape after having been isolated and abused for years”
  - pengaru 3y ago
    The lack of a social safety net in the US is not something antiquated marriage laws should be misused to insufficiently provide. We need better general solutions in this area, a lot of the separation-related problems would vanish. Job-separation and spouse-separation overlap substantially, and it's rather harmful as-is when spouses are incentivized to stay in abusive relationships if they wouldn't even receive significant support separated from an abusive deadbeat anyways. They become trapped.
sidlls 3y ago
Humans change. A deep human connection at age 30 might not last through age 40.
- SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
  But objects are forever?
  - yamtaddle 3y ago
    Looks around room at 120ish-year-old desk, hundreds of books with an average age of probably 30 years with some as old as 160 years, 50-year-old record player and receiver, 60-year-old lamp, 20+ year old guitars that will likely last decades more with minimal maintenance, wood floors that should last literally a lifetime, and decade-old shoes that I expect to still be wearing in 20 years I mean... kinda? The ones that don't involve microelectronics and aren't mostly fabric, yeah, lots of them may as well last forever, from the perspective of a human lifetime.
    - SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
      Well, I guess if you want to prioritize shoes over a relationship, good on you?
      - yamtaddle 3y ago
        Well, I'm not doing that, though, so... bad on me, I guess? But I have LEGOs that are probably way, way older than the average length of a romantic relationship. Hell, they're probably quite a bit older than the average length of a marriage. That's just true. My kids have some metal trucks made a decade before I was born and with hundreds of hours of kid-play-time on them, that they still play with. And those are just kids' toys, not things made for use by adults who will be careful with them! Lots of stuff does last a really long time. Quite a bit of stuff does indeed get a ton closer to lasting "forever" (say, an entire human lifespan) than most serious relationships do. Normal consumer shit, too, not, like, gothic cathedrals or something. Treating things as less-disposable than a serious partner is probably not a great idea, but, in actual fact, they... kinda are.
outime 3y ago
I'm not aware of the specifics OP talk about (I'm not from the US) but any mature adult should of course care about the unfair loss of wealth. If you look at US marriage/divorce statistics, it'd not be paranoid to think that it could also happen to you. In fact, I bet most of the people who got to lose "material objects" unfairly never thought they'd be in that situation - which then makes them get to experience the miserable way of life you mentioned, at least for a while. So yeah, I'd suggest to be mature and consider that things can go wrong, which shouldn't affect the depthness of the connection while things work (hopefully forever).

Caring about potential loss of material objects over deep human connection sounds like an absolutely miserable way to live your one short life in this universe!

by s5300 3y ago

Caring about potential loss of material objects over deep human connection sounds like an absolutely miserable way to live your one short life in this universe!

pengaru 3y ago

> Caring about potential loss of material objects over deep human connection sounds like an absolutely miserable way to live your one short life in this universe! Then fix the outdated laws so people can enjoy those human connections without all the risky loss/gain baggage.

boring_twenties 3y ago
You can already do that by simply not getting married? I have friends that have lived together for 10+ years and have multiple children that don't plan to ever marry... seems to be working for them.
- pengaru 3y ago
  I don't know where you live, but that's a problematic approach in many US states having common-law marriages. Your friends anecdata is entirely irrelevant until they've separated and we hear about how that plays out, before it's even remotely worth hearing as still meaningless anecdata.
  - boring_twenties 3y ago
    Seven[0] out of fifty is not "many" by any stretch of the imagination. Even in those seven, it's not something that happens automatically. For example, in Utah, it only applies to those "who hold themselves out as and have acquired a uniform and general reputation as husband and wife."[1] If my meaningless anecdata isn't remotely worth hearing about, then what's to be said about your intentionally misleading irrelevant statement? *Oops: [0] https://www.ncsl.org/human-services/common-law-marriage-by-state https://www.ncsl.org/human-services/common-law-marriage-by-s... [1] https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title30/Chapter1/30-1-S4.5.html?v=C30-1-S4.5_1800010118000101 https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title30/Chapter1/30-1-S4.5.html?v=...
  - fps 3y ago
    Common law marriages are not as easy to happen by accident as many people assume. Living together doesn't matter. Common law marriage, in every state I've checked, requires that you have a ceremony and present yourself as a "married couple" publicly. You have to go around telling people you're married for it to matter.
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      > Common law marriage, in every state I've checked, requires that you have a ceremony and present yourself as a "married couple" publicly. You have to go around telling people you're married for it to matter. It generally does not require a ceremony (but it does usually require an explicit mutual agreement), and living together does matter (cohabitation is commonly a requirement or evidence of common law marriage), but other than that you are right that publicly presenting as married is often a requirement (and otherwise is evidence). Here’s info from Texas as an example, which is more required-elements-based and includes cohabitation: https://guides.sll.texas.gov/common-law-marriage#:~:text=Texas%20law%20states%20that%20a,others%20that%20they%20were%20married%E2%80%9D https://guides.sll.texas.gov/common-law-marriage#:~:text=Tex... And here is Colorado, which is more evidence based and does not identify cohabitation as even a form of evidence (though it does have joint ownership of property): https://pitkincounty.com/288/Common-Law-Marriage https://pitkincounty.com/288/Common-Law-Marriage Utah is more specific requirements, and includes both cohabitation and how the couple presents publicly, but no ceremony: https://www.utcourts.gov/en/self-help/case-categories/family/marriage/common-law.html https://www.utcourts.gov/en/self-help/case-categories/family...
adoxyz 3y ago
Prenups are a thing you know?
- pengaru 3y ago
  I'm replying to someone saying don't care about these things and you're saying bring in lawyers to mitigate the awful legal defaults! I'm pretty sure that's also in disagreement with the comment I'm replying to.
s5300 3y ago
>> Then fix the outdated laws so people can enjoy those human connections without all the risky loss/gain baggage. In a country that celebrates sociopathy, manipulation of others, & psychopathy to such a high degree, I think the laws are perfectly fine as they protect exceptionally vulnerable people. What sort of resources do you actually think there are for a spouse that is able to escape after having been isolated and abused for years, that oftentimes becomes responsible for not only their own well-being, but also childrens? The answer is practically nothing aside from maybe your very basic necessities to sustain life. I also think you’re really missing a major point but that’s a tangent I’m not going to go on. [edit]: Revised “What sort of resources do you actually think there are for a spouse that’s been isolated and abused for years” to “What sort of resources do you actually think there are for a spouse that is able to escape after having been isolated and abused for years”
- pengaru 3y ago
  The lack of a social safety net in the US is not something antiquated marriage laws should be misused to insufficiently provide. We need better general solutions in this area, a lot of the separation-related problems would vanish. Job-separation and spouse-separation overlap substantially, and it's rather harmful as-is when spouses are incentivized to stay in abusive relationships if they wouldn't even receive significant support separated from an abusive deadbeat anyways. They become trapped.

sidlls 3y ago

Humans change. A deep human connection at age 30 might not last through age 40.

SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
But objects are forever?
- yamtaddle 3y ago
  Looks around room at 120ish-year-old desk, hundreds of books with an average age of probably 30 years with some as old as 160 years, 50-year-old record player and receiver, 60-year-old lamp, 20+ year old guitars that will likely last decades more with minimal maintenance, wood floors that should last literally a lifetime, and decade-old shoes that I expect to still be wearing in 20 years I mean... kinda? The ones that don't involve microelectronics and aren't mostly fabric, yeah, lots of them may as well last forever, from the perspective of a human lifetime.
  - SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
    Well, I guess if you want to prioritize shoes over a relationship, good on you?
    - yamtaddle 3y ago
      Well, I'm not doing that, though, so... bad on me, I guess? But I have LEGOs that are probably way, way older than the average length of a romantic relationship. Hell, they're probably quite a bit older than the average length of a marriage. That's just true. My kids have some metal trucks made a decade before I was born and with hundreds of hours of kid-play-time on them, that they still play with. And those are just kids' toys, not things made for use by adults who will be careful with them! Lots of stuff does last a really long time. Quite a bit of stuff does indeed get a ton closer to lasting "forever" (say, an entire human lifespan) than most serious relationships do. Normal consumer shit, too, not, like, gothic cathedrals or something. Treating things as less-disposable than a serious partner is probably not a great idea, but, in actual fact, they... kinda are.

outime 3y ago

I'm not aware of the specifics OP talk about (I'm not from the US) but any mature adult should of course care about the unfair loss of wealth. If you look at US marriage/divorce statistics, it'd not be paranoid to think that it could also happen to you. In fact, I bet most of the people who got to lose "material objects" unfairly never thought they'd be in that situation - which then makes them get to experience the miserable way of life you mentioned, at least for a while. So yeah, I'd suggest to be mature and consider that things can go wrong, which shouldn't affect the depthness of the connection while things work (hopefully forever).