No… absolutely not. Depends on the relationship though so this may not apply to everyone because it’s extremely generalized
I am not aware of this nor do i have any clear indicator that it’s the case.
From the grand scheme of things it seems so yes but it depends on the person and what you want in a relationship unless… like you said laws somehow involved… but be careful about anyone using reasons / ‘rumors’ as a form of manipulation
Alimony is a thing.
Yes, maybe not for life, idk, 2 persons told me about such situations; someone told me that a relative from Germany pays his ex wife, apparently for unlimited time, since she is poor; someone else told me how her daughter from Italy can get benefits from her ex husband, again, for many years, if not for life.
Again, I dont know the laws, nor can I know if what they told me is accurate.
@SoulStar33 Ere George, do you know what the most confusing day in the West is?
… Father’s Day
Ouch …
Just for The Western World:
“Blessed are Those Who Know Their Father” 
(no disrespect though)
It’s a Crazy World Nowadays, no Loyalty, No Honor, No Values, Zero Trust in Relationships, Low Self Confidence, Everyone for Himself/Herself, Ego Driven People, General Apathy, etc.
Getting married in a Western country (especially Europe and US) is the biggest financial risk someone can enter in their whole life.
More risky than day trading with a leverage…
With a marriage contract, you are not marrying your partner.
You are marrying the state.
You are involving a third party into your romantic relationship!
The whole idea is sold as “romantic” etc., but the state has only one objective: to outsource its financial obligations onto private people.
I heard California is the worst, because people are put into jail if they cannot pay for their ex-partners. It is state enforced slavery.
Why do people need a third party to oversee their romantic relationship?
I don’t get it.
When you are in an intimate relationship with someone, how creepy is that to have a third anonymous party to be involved in that?
The Western states are so corrupt, even co-habitating with a partner for 2 or more years, without being married or anything and the state will count you equally “as married”, lol, because again, the state seeks to put off financial burdens onto its citizens.
In Sweden you need to sign a legal contract if you want to sleep with someone, every single time, otherwise the other party can later say that it was not consentual and if you cannot prove the opposite with the signed legal contract, you will be put into jail for rape.
These laws have created the MGTOW philosophy in the first place. Society has cut into its own flesh.
In Germany, if you want to be financially safe, you and your romantic partner have to continue to each live in their own apartments and just visit each other. LOL 
Lol, Best Relationship …
Really Corrupt, but I think corruption is Everywhere, no Big Country doesn’t have it, but in the west, I think feminism and corruption have ruined any sane future (at least for now), but I think that people are gonna get smarter than the state, i think …
New solutions will be found, yet the state finds new solutions too lol (no need for marriage, 2 years are enough to put our burdens onto you) …
Wait a sec ---- Declare that you are not in a relationship (advertise that you are single, ALWAYS and that she is just a roommate, lol), Voila, you beat them at their OWN game.
No alimony needed lol.
This won’t work. A few whatsapp messages between you and your romantic partner will be enough to convice the family court that you are real couple.
Yep …
Hmm …
No great thought/solution comes to my mind atm.
Short term relationships it is, then - under 2 years lol.
And thats WHY they pushed for Gay marriage, they want the same “blessings” for everyone lol.
Gays used to be free, free from the burden of Government.
But not anymore lol.
It does not need to be short-term.
You can stay forever together.
Just with separate flats…
PS: This will only work until you decide to have children.
Yeah, it is not about rights for LGBTQ people, but the state knows that 30-50% of marriages will get divorced and then someone has to pay for the other partner.
And when there is a marriage contract, it will not be the state who pays.
A huge financial outsourcing gain for the state!
It is all calculated for financial gains, and then packaged and sold to the masses as “human right” and “romantic events”.
You are a Genius - You Understand THE System lol.
It’s all so crooked.
Most people are not ready to be awaken from the matrix.
They wouldn’t be able to face and handle the lies they’ve lived their whole life.
I was confused about this as well since I really don’t know. I didn’t get legally married. So I got curious and did a little google research to find out:
If one spouse needs financial support and the other can afford to pay it, the judge will order the higher-earning spouse to pay alimony to the lower-earning spouse, regardless of their genders. Since 1979, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled there can be no gender bias when it comes to spousal support.
Men have typically had to have pay alimony because they were traditionally the higher earners in times of divorce. The vast majority of US states changed their divorce laws to be gender neutral and some women find themselves being ordered to pay alimony as well. Now that some women are higher earners, some men are asking for alimony in divorce as well. The thing is, some men don’t because it might feel emasculating to to ask for that. But really it’s case by case kind of thing. Statistically though, women do typically are ruled more favorably in divorces than men are.
Well, as risky as it is (it is also one of the, if not the greatest commitments), it seems to be fair ground - in terms of paying (at least in the U.S., but probably modernized throughout Europe as well) at least, although personally I find the State to be way too involved in peoples afair and it favors women, when it comes to divorces, even if slightly (I guess things can’t be completely balanced).
What I still dislike (as an “outsider”, not being married or in a long term relationship) is the fact that such laws exist in the first place, although I could understand if this would be an exception, like only paying for a few years at most, under certain circumstances.
Yeah living in California makes me not want to get married sometimes. Especially with a lot of the beliefs systems that propagate around the communities here.
