Would you ever have a committed relationship with a married gay man who is married in name only?
The gay man who was married to another man. But they are now only married in name only. Been separated for over 5 years, and don't speak to each other at all.
So the gay man is for all intents and purposes single. But married in name only to another guy.
So would you have a committed relationship with this person?
|by Anonymous||reply 34||08/01/2014|
I would ask him why he hasn't properly ended the marriage. It sounds either very lazy or very stupid. Maybe both.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||06/09/2013|
He is a liar. There is a reason he isn't divorced and hasn't closed this chapter in his life and it is more than "just a piece of paper." Anyone who is mentally healthy would have moved on after five years. And you are an idiot to believe anything else.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||06/09/2013|
R1 it is harder to get a gay divorce than it is to get a gay marriage.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||06/09/2013|
Keep telling yourself that honey, @ R3. We all live the lives we want to live and ultimately find a way to do the things we want to do... and five years... five years... this guy apparently wants to be married to someone and have that person's presence in his life in some sick codependent way... sign up for that if you want. if you do, you are as sick as he is.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||06/09/2013|
It is not me, but someone I know
|by Anonymous||reply 5||06/09/2013|
I think the OP means perhaps someone who is married to a woman only for tax purposes or other financial reasons? It would all depend, of course, on the reasons behind the marriage. In today's world, with gay marriage becoming so much more available, it would be harder for me to say "yes to the dress" in terms of being involved with a married man. Seems like such an outdated construct. And a bit creepy and duplicitious.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||06/09/2013|
I guess it would matter if the marriage was in name only.
Is the marriage in name only?
|by Anonymous||reply 7||06/09/2013|
In name "only"?
In name is a HUGE part of marriage.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||06/09/2013|
Nope. I'd tell him to take care of his old business before moving on to something new. And the fact that he hasn't is a huge red flag against getting involved with him.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||06/09/2013|
The married couple are not even Facebook friends. There is NO communication between the two.
They have just not cut the cord, for whatever reason.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||06/09/2013|
Are they legally marriage or "commitment ceremony" married?
|by Anonymous||reply 11||06/09/2013|
Before your friend is "committed" in any way, he needs to insist on a divorce. If that is refused, he needs to break up. There really isn't any grey area here - the "name only" relationship means another person has legal claims on his partner.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||06/09/2013|
[quote]the "name only" relationship means another person has legal claims on his partner.
Which is a huge issue to contend with and not deserving of the "only" modifier.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||06/09/2013|
No, if you build a life with this person and something happens to him, all that you built goes to the spouse, not you.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||06/09/2013|
[quote] the "name only" relationship means another person has legal claims on his partner.
It is not like they have moved in together. They just recently decided to become a couple after one date. As discussed in this DL post linked below
|by Anonymous||reply 16||06/09/2013|
I'd say proceed with caution and if things get serious insist on a divorce. If the divorce doesn't happen, run away. Of course all this assumes that the new relationship is compelling.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||06/09/2013|
This is why they hate us.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||06/09/2013|
R17 again it is not me. It is the couple I discussed in the link at R16
|by Anonymous||reply 19||06/09/2013|
You asked what I would do.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||06/09/2013|
Why would anyone commit to someone who could not commit to them?
Keep him as a fuck buddy or a roommate with benefits but keep the emotions at bay,
|by Anonymous||reply 22||06/09/2013|
In their FB status updates (with both of them being in a relationship)
The married/separated guy writes
" Life is so great!!!!!"
To which the Asian guy responds
"Indeed...it's full of joy and painted with colours from within!"
|by Anonymous||reply 23||06/09/2013|
My former neighbor inherited a not too small fortune when his husband-in-name only was killed in a car wreck. They did not speak and had no contact for at least 2 years before the death. But they never bothered to divorce so the spouse got everything. It probably helped that the dead ex was an alcoholic who never got around to making a will. Former neighbor sold his house and moved into the ex's house in Brentwood (L.A.) a much better neighborhood than his old one.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||06/09/2013|
Depends on several factors, if they were a couple of convenience and they knew about their indiscretions it would be fair game. I wouldn't follow through if there was a lying involved.
It also depends on the guy I was interested in. If I had a really intense connection and really liked him, I couldn't say I'd be certain of not engaging in a relationship.
Why should I follow rules that don't apply to me? I'm a gay man. I don't want to have children, and families aren't really apart of the whole gay community(exceptions do exist, though). So if two men, without kids want to see people on the side, that is their business and not mine.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||06/09/2013|
Why does this couple matter so much to you, OP? Really.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||06/09/2013|
R25 they are a couple that is married in NAME only.
They do not communicate with each other at all. No phone calls, no emails, no texting, no chatting, no face to face talking.
It is like they have broken up, but have yet to make it legal.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||06/09/2013|
[quote]Why would anyone commit to someone who could not commit to them?
That's not the situation. They can be as committed as any gay couple has been before marriage. The just can't get married without legal action.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||06/09/2013|
R27 your point is?
You just answered your own question.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||06/09/2013|
Ah the joys of marriage and its 1,000 entitlements.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||06/09/2013|
So with marriage equality a reality, this might be the new norm in the gay community.
Married gay couples who break-up, but never divorce.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||06/27/2013|
No never but then again I have self respect as a gay man to never go after married men.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||08/01/2014|
It's probably better than marrying a guy who's gay in name only.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||08/01/2014|