I have an uncle & auntie, one of which never wanted to get married but wanted kids, the other wanted a marriage but never wanted to have kids. They ended up doing neither, I guess both technically "gave in" but in a different respect to what people would imagine. They seem happy enough, but I do think both would have made great parents.

According to Census figures (from Forbes), of the 400,000 people in the US receiving Alimony, 3 percent are male, yet 40 percent of households are headed by female breadwinners. This implies that either divorce courts are sexist towards men, or we see more divorces between poorer females and richer males, or in my example, people with less to lose and something to gain.

I don't like the above statistics, i'm not happy with the above statistics, but it's the world we live in as of today. I agree theres been great strives towards gender equality, but we aren't there yet. Nothing you've said disagrees with the fact that these women have less to lose and something to gain.

In your post you haven't listed a single negative thing this man is doing outside of having a progressive view on weddings. You can ask any number of married men and women whether 10-15 years later butterflies still exist daily. He seems like a relatively nice guy, you seem to be set on a wedding, he seems to be okay with marriage but thinks a wedding is a public display for what he thinks should be private.

Neither of you are in the wrong for having a preference, but I doubt he would break up with you for making an off handed comment, whereas that seems to be your logical go to. Hence the large amount of comments disagreeing with you.

It's not so much doing it for financial gain, but they typically don't have as large a financial risk.

Now this isn't inherently in the wrong, women do give up opportunities typically to become a SAHP. But there are a lot more stories of men going into debt to fund alimony than the other way round.

There's also plenty of high profile stories where it's hard to believe that say MacKenzie Scott would have earnt $38.3billion had she not been in a relationship with Jeff Bezos, yet marrying him and later divorcing him netted her that worth.

Because usually those pushing for it have nothing to lose and something to gain.

As someone who's been to weddings of 200 people and also 8 people, the wedding is typically not for you and your partner. It's usually a large waste of money to spend 3-4 minutes talking with relatives you didn't bother to speak to for the last few years.

The most intimate wedding I went to was the incredibly small event with 8 of us, we all sat and spoke over a meal, we enjoyed the day. There was no white dress, no groomsmen or bridesmaids, a cake made by the bride herself. It was a true "showing of love" between two people.

I would question why you feel a "large display of love" in a public setting is necessary. Fiscally speaking, weddings are disastrous, it usually kills off the more responsible outlooks of home deposits or preparing for a child. It is a lot of faff. It's akin to a very expensive valentines day, if your partner thinks just showing love on significant days is what they should do, this is a red flag, if they're willing to show love and be kind and compassionate without the need for a public event this is a win and something to be thankful for.

It feels as if you've internalised some big day in a white dress to constitute love, it is an old notion which had it's part in society as it gave some legal rights to women who didn't have them in the event of the husband dying. As to why you feel it necessary feels more alien to me than him not wanting one.