What is it with all these reponses that just say “no way”?
Not all of of them, but a good handful.
Why? Elborate.
Put me in the case by case court. If there’s children envolved that would be a factor. If he just moved out and were living in an hotel or something…that would definatly be a factor. If the wounds were still fresh…If he gave you any reason to think that he was still pining for her…
But in my case he was moved out completly for almost a year…but UK law requiers 18 months seperation for a no-fault divorce. And that’s what she wanted. She could have gone for adultery, at least when I showed up but she didn’t want that. And he respected that. And I respect him for that. I think there’s a lot to be said for people who stay in good contact with their ex’s. And I never got a whiff of his wanting to go back to her.
It 's just a legal contract. If it were more than that my aunt is not married. And believe me she’s married.
I’m between ‘no way’ and ‘case by case’, but leaning towards ‘no way’.
I might be acquaintances with a newly-separated woman (possibly with the mutual intent to keep track of each other for later), but anything serious–even a kiss–would have to wait for the divorce to be final.
This is basically what my mother did before she married my stepfather.
I agree with this, too. When my husband and I started dating while he was separated, all either one of us was looking for was a “fling”. (Oh, he didn’t have kids with his first wife, either). It didn’t turn serious for two years.
Funny how those things happen, though. . .we’ll be celebrating 19 years of marriage in a couple of months.
He hasn’t seen his first wife in well over 20 years, and has no desire to. Once, about 20 years ago, he and I were eating in a diner, and he thought he saw her at another table (her tour in England would have been over by then), and he mentioned that he thought it was her. I said “Go on over and say hello if you want”, and he said “Nah, that’s okay”. That’s the last time he ever saw her (if in fact it was her). I, personally, have never met the woman.
Hell, no. Like kittenblue, I don’t date married men. And if the papers haven’t gone through, you’re still married.
When I think “legal contract,” it’s never prefaced by the word “just.”
I’d be especially reluctant to date a separated man with two young children. The possibility for drama and heartbreak is just too high with little ones involved.
My gut feeling is ‘no way,’ but in real life (if I were in the dating pool, I mean) I might consider a case by case evaluation.
In my younger days, I once dated a guy who told me he was divorced but then it turned out that he was still legally married (to his credit, he didn’t just tell me, he identified himself as divorced whenever it came up in conversation with anyone, he used “divorced” as a casual synonym for “breaking up” I guess) and I was mightily pissed off when I learned about it. That made me a little gun shy on the topic. I know that’s not fair in terms of approaching it with other people, but I think the reality of the situation is that a person’s view might be colored by past experience, good or bad.
I’d be wary of a divorced man with young children as well, but hopefully by the time the divorce is final, issues of custody and residence have been worked out to a larger degree. The possibility of reconciliation also seems higher if they’re just separated.
I know for a fact that men have absoultely no problem dating a woman who is separated but not divorced. In fact, the estranged Mrs. Z has to more offers than she knows what to do with them.
I just have a line in my mind. Don’t date married men. Ever. It causes nothing but trouble. You only need to see one friend fall for it and spend years chasing empty promises to realize it’s not for you. I crossed that line off in my mind years ago.
And if you’re only separated, you’re still married. If you can’t be troubled to make the divorce final, there’s other fish in the sea. I’m not old-fashioned, I’m very modern-thinking but I also believe in the sanctity of marriage.
(Of course, the young kids would make me run anyway, but that’s neither here nor there.)
In your particular case, Jackknifed, I would probably say no if only because it sounds as if you’re ambivalent about the separation.
If it were a situation where it was only for financial reasons you weren’t divorced, and there was no possibility of reconciliation, that would be different. In fact, when my (now) husband moved in with me, I was still married to my ex. I was going to get the divorce, but hadn’t yet for financial reasons. Finally, he did it. It was tough on my (now) husband because the woman he was with prior to me had also been married and “going to get a divorce”, but after 9 years with my husband went back to her ex that she was going to divorce. That experience that he had had made it more important to me to make sure I took care of my situation and go through with the divorce so that he would know I was serious.
I would say definitely not. Like I mentioned in a recent thread, I’m the “marrying” type. If a relationship can’t ever deepen beyond a certain point, for whatever reason, it’s not for me. It just…makes my spidey sense tingle. My question would be “Why do you want to date me when the divorce isn’t final?” and any answer I got probably wouldn’t satisfy me that it was worth the emotional investment.
I can’t even think of potential answers to the question that would sound legitimate to my ears. In my book, if you’re ready to date me, you’re ready to dissolve your previous relationship and move on. If you’re not ready to dissolve your previous relationship–for emotional or financial or any other reason–then you’re not ready to date me.
Honestly, I’d have to take even divorced guys on a case by case basis, but my answer is definitely no when the wounds are still fresh.
My rule (back before I got married and had rules about dating that applied to my life) was “No.”
As with most rules, I might have entertained exceptions in extraordinary cases. For example, I had a friend who was dating a gentleman who was still legally married - but was legally married solely that his chronically-ill wife could avail herself of his health insurance coverage. Their marriage had been functionally over for some 5 years, they no longer cohabited, and he had no financial responsibility for her outside the agreement regarding medical insurance (they had a legal agreement in place spelling it all out, actually). She was uninsurable on her own due to her medical condition. However, their separation was an amicable one. I know for a fact my friend insisted on meeting the wife before allowing a serious relationship to develop.*
My reason for the rule were as follows:
If you haven’t signed the papers, you’re still a married man. I do not date married men. This is for purely practical reasons (as ennumerated below) and because I, personally, choose to respect the sanctity of marriage. In my view, you have promised faithfulness for the duration of the marriage, and if the marriage isn’t officially over (via finalized divorce decree) you are not free to date without committing infidelity. YMMV, of course.
It isn’t fair to me to become seriously involved with a man who is still seriously involved with someone else. A married man is, by definition, seriously involved with someone else. Now the involvement isn’t always still emotional (see above example), but I have the right to insist that I be the only person my lover is seriously involved with if he is to pursue a relationship with me. A casual fling, maybe. Some friendly dating, maybe. Serious dating? Emotional involvement? Intimacy? No. It’s a quirk of my particular makeup that to be happy in a serious relationship, I must have monogamy. The chances of someone who is not yet divorced being able to provide monogamy are significantly worse than those of a single man. Hence, separated-but-not-divorced is a major, major red flag for me, even aside from reason (1) above.
My interest in being used as a weapon during the divorce proceedings (or reconciliation, for that matter) is nil. The only sure way not to find yourself involved with the divorce proceedings as a potential companion to one half of a separated but not yet divorced couple is not to date either half of the couple.
I don’t need the drama and baggage of dating someone who’s smack in the middle of their separation. I really don’t need the drama if one party has not reconciled themselves fully to the dissolution of their marriage - or has second thoughts about the divorce sometime before it’s final. (Please note that the person having second thoughts or not fully reconciled need not be the one I was dating - if either party has second thoughts or isn’t fully reconciled, drama will ensue.)
A person looking to start dating before they’ve finished their divorce proceedings strikes me as dishonest on the face of it (there are, as always, possible mitigating and/or extenuating circumstances, but generally they don’t represent sufficient justification to break your promise to your soon-to-be-former-spouse in my view). It is, in my own personal view, a dishonorable behavior. This is particularly true in the case of people who are just waiting out a year separation so they can do the no-fault thing and start dating. Just wait the freaking year! Geez. I try to limit my contact with people who do things I think are dishonest.
What does it say about the man in question that he’s willing to embroil me in the drama that is virtually always attached to an unfinished divorce? How is it even marginally considerate of him to inflict all that crap on an innocent third-party, namely me? (And before I hear protests that not all divorces are messy, let me preemptively rejoin that amicable divorces are a definite minority - and as a girl in the dating world, I’ma be playing the averages, thank you very much!)
There are also some circumstances under which there is not a single chance in hell I’ll date a man whose divorce is not finalized. These include: If there are children of the marriage; if the couple are still cohabiting; if the separation is less than six months old; or if, in my opinion, the man is still emotionally invested in the marriage (in either the positive or negative sense).
*It should be noted that the wife’s medical condition meant that she wasn’t going to be a permanent obstacle to a future remarriage - her life expectancy simply wasn’t that lengthy. I think at the time my friend met the gentleman in question, she had five more years on the optimistic end, and two on the pessimistic end. Ultimately, she passed away some three years after my friend and the gentleman began dating. Also there were no children of the marriage.
I am curious if there are any other men who want to validate that generalization?
Frankly it’s ming-boggling to me why someone would deliberately insert themselves into a situation so rife with potential drama, and where the risk of getting hurt is much higher. Unless they’re just looking for a fling?
As a younger, less wise man I probably would have. And yes, I would have been primarily looking for a fling. Now? No way, unless it was some really extenuating situation.
When I hear that someone doesn’t want to divorce for “financial reasons,” my mind immediately leaps to court-mandated child support.
In any case, no. I wouldn’t date someone who was separated unless the circumstances were extremely unusual. And, frankly, if the circumstances were extremely unusual, I’d probably wonder what sort of people tend to have circumstances that are so unusual and would probably still not date that person.
Well, I think you’re presuming that there will drama. Sometimes there isn’t any. It’s really up to you to evaluate the situation, talk with your potential lover about his or her situation, understand it, read them; sometimes you’ll find that their leaving their lover was the final straw in the relationship.
Hell no, in terms of a generalization. Of course, I dated my share of drama queens who were single, so it really depends on the person and the situation, but I wouldn’t say that “men” have “no problems” with dating women in that situation.
I don’t have to elaborate on my “no way,” because Anaamika did it for me! These are my exact reasons that I wouldn’t do it. The only thing I would say further is that young kids in general don’t scare me off, but young kids whose parents are in the middle of a divorce are going through an extremely difficult time, and I don’t think either parent should be dating until everything is settled and worked through…if the parent is going to date, then they’re going to date, but I wouldn’t want to be a party to potentially making it all more tough on the kids than it already is.
