Melanie Griffith went through a divorce in 2014 with Antonio Banderas, her husband of 18 years, which wasn’t finalized for over a year. It then took an additional four months to work out the financial details. So she was dealing with her divorce for well over a year, and she’s also been married three other times. Griffith was married to Steven Bauer (Avi on Ray Donovan) from 1982 to 1987 and has a 30 year-old son with him. (The last we heard, Bauer, 59, was dating an 18 year-old.) She was also married to Don Johnson both before and after Bauer, and they have daughter Dakota.
Melanie has a lot of experience with marriage, having been married four times to three different guys, and judging by her latest comments she wouldn’t recommend it to anyone. At the premiere of Dakota’s film How to Be Single, which Melanie attended along with her ex, Dakota’s dad Don Johnson, US Weekly asked Melanie for her advice to women about being single.
[Melanie Griffith] was asked for her best piece of advice for women about how to be single. Her answer: “Don’t get married!”
“There’s no need,” explained the actress, who was photographed at the premiere with ex-husband Don Johnson, 66, and their daughter, Dakota, 26.
“You don’t need to get married to have a child anymore,” the Working Girl star explained. “It’s not like there’s a stigma on a child, and getting married, you either go through the whole bulls–t of a prenuptial, or if you want to get divorced and you don’t have a prenuptial, then you wish you had a prenuptial.”
“So why not enjoy the person and have a good time and do whatever — live together, don’t live together — but marriage seems archaic to me,” she added.
US also reports that Melanie vowed never to get married again. I agree with her in theory, but in practice many women need the legal protections that go along with marriage. So many people need to marry their partners for more practical reasons, and that’s why marriage equality is important. In an ideal world, we wouldn’t need to get married to get health insurance or to be able to visit our partners in the hospital, but that’s how it works now unfortunately.
It’s nice that Melanie and her ex partners like Don Johnson and Antonio Banderas still are friendly when it comes to supporting their kids. I don’t think she has that kind of relationship with Bauer, but the guy is a mess.
In the photo below that’s Dakota’s half brother, Jesse Johnson, 33.
photo credit: WENN and Getty
She actually looks better here or maybe it’s that I want her to look better. Bless her heart, she was looking terrible for a while. What’s up with her hair though?
Her and her ex both look good. I’m glad they came out to support their daughter, who looks radiant.
Melanie was a self admitted hot mess for years. She’s had substances abuse problems for years which have been documented. Plus she always has come across as very needy.
She should have taken the Goldie Hawn route,worked on demons and concentrated more on her career away or behind the camera.
If wearing a pretty mask is looking better, um, I guess? Way too much plastic surgery for both of them, they look like their faces are melting. And he won’t make eye contact with her-
Spoken like someone with financial security. Not that I’d marry for the security (I would consider it if there was a kid involved) but damn, the tax breaks alone might be worth it. So yeah, archaic maybe but also not a bad idea until certain laws are changed. Otherwise you’d need a lot of other paperwork to make sure you and your partner can make decision for one another etc.
Yes! I’ve considered marrying a friend just for the tax breaks. This is not financial protection that just women need, btw. Men also get a tax break.
Health insurance. When bf & I finally enter the shackles of legality, it’ll be so he can work freelance with my health benefits.
Not only financial security but social security as well. Even though it’s outdated and silly, society still views unmarried couples as less committed than married couples. I married my husband on nearly our tenth anniversary together, and the way people treat you when you’re married vs. not is quite starting. All of a sudden our relationship was real and meaningful, nobody raised their eyebrows when they learned how long we’d been together, and no questions asked about us or our relationship.
I’m benefiting in many ways, financial and social. No, you don’t “need” to get married to have children or be committed, but hoo boy society sure does reward you when you are.
Wren, you’ve listed all the reasons I still get a little queasy at the thought. 15 years in and I’m starting to believe the mere fact of being married won’t make us bitter and resentful towards each other (unlike multitudes of married people we know) but I worry I’m going to throttle all the smug, I-told–SOS.
Interestingly there have been no “I told you so’s”. Nobody was smug about it. Worst we got was a bunch of “finally!” from elderly family members. For me the biggest thing is how you are treated by acquaintances and strangers when you say “my husband” instead of “my boyfriend”. It’s subtle, but it’s definitely different.
One needs a better term, and ‘boyfriend’, ‘partner’ and ‘POSLQ’ (that’s an old politically incorrect term ‘person of opposite sex sharing living quarters’) just don’t cut it. Can anybody out there come up with something better.
And actually if you’ve been together that long, in some states you’re common-law husband and wife, I think? So didn’t need to put a ring on it to have the titles.
In my country, even if you’re not married, but live together, you end up having the same financial gainings as if you’re maried. You have single people, married and what is called a union-of-fact. Even property (let’s say a house) after 5 years living together, becomes property of both people…
Hmmm yes but the goal is to work to make yourself financially independent. Then I also agree- theres no advantage to marriage. It seems to me like a trap. I am on my own feet and the only way I would marry is if I had generous clauses allowing me to still control every aspect of my own life, money, property, items etc and also to leave without any damages being inflicted upon me or anything I care about. If women can support themselves there is far less sense in marriage. AND if men werent asshats toward their own progeny. But you cant make them be not-asshats by law. Sadly.
That is pretty much where I sit. I personally think all the financial incentives for marriage should just be abolished…. in favor of financial perks for people who are domiciled together. It doesn’t matter if you are boinking or not, but here are perks to reward you for sharing resources with others. This would make it so much easier for everyone to improve their lives. And health insurance: single payer for everyone regardless of marital or employment status. It is ridiculous that anyone should feel like they have to get married to get health coverage.
Universal healthcare cuts out the needing to get married for health benefits thing—seen a lot of couples do so, sad and very true.
More like spoken by someone with four failed marriages. Some people can do it and some people cannot. But don’t slam the institution or idea in it’s entirety just because it didn’t work for you. Just like Cameron Diaz who got cheated on by half a dozen douches and then proclaimed monogamy doesn’t exist. Whatever. Sour grapes.
I have no problem with someone deciding they don’t want to get married, but don’t tell me what to do. There are many legal and emotional (for me) benefits to being married, and many people have spiritual and or religious reasons for it. My marriage is a partnership. It’s not archaic, and I would feel that there was something missing if we weren’t married. Some people don’t feel that way, and that’s fine. I really try not to take advice about marriage from someone married five times.
Excellent point.
Marriage *is* an archaic institution specifically because it’s primary function was and has always been specifically about material concerns, helped along the way by religious concerns. Only recently has it become an emotional concern.
I think it shouldn’t matter if someone married several times or once or not at all. If their emotional wellbeing suits marriage, then so be it. It doesn’t make them better or worse than someone who isn’t in their circumstances.
Instead let’s work towards making it a primarily emotional concern rather than the horror of it’s main concerns ie material and religious because then you are allowing the church and state to dictate your relationships even if you think they are not. All those legal benefits or having to be married by a religious figure in some religious are a very plainly telling everyone that the church and state are dictating your relationship, yet it’s often glossed over. Usually until the divorce.
We will never agree on this and that’s fine. I respect your opinion, but in this case, I think you have a very cold view of marriage and what it really is. And I never said I was better than someone who has been married five times. I merely pointed out that she is obviously either not suited for it, or she’s doing something wrong. I wouldn’t choose to take financial advice from someone who had lost five businesses, either.
First I am for people to do what feels right for themselves, and I really don’t understand why people feel so strongly about others marriages or relationships. My personal relationships and marriage are hard enough for me, much less anyone else getting that invested in why we do something or not. I think Melanie was just asked a question and gave her opinion on marriage, based on her experience. Not surprised since she was married four times.
Now I disagree that when you marry you are letting the state and maybe religious entities dictate your relationship. No some people just get married because they want to and just like some think marriage is archaic a lot of other people believe in it. Keep in mind there are legal ways around most of those health and business related issues if someone wished to not marry but have a significant other, and not sure I understand the dictate part either as no one is forcing anyone. The other thing I find funny about marriage discussions are the amount of people who gloss over a marriage being a business and legal partnership. It is definitely a very big aspect to it, and if you don’t want that people should probably at least think a bit more about it.
LAK, I sign off completely on everything you’ve said. As I said above, health insurance is likely to be what pushes us into a legal arrangement, but there’s nothing spiritual about that. And it makes me truly uncomfortable that a thousand years of outdated ideas about marriage will be wound up in our legal agreement to share health insurance.
GNAT, you should do as in my country, people living together have the same legal rights as those who are married: do the IRS together, healthcare benefits from the partner, can adopt a child, as if you’re married. One just has to ask for a declaration from the city hall, declaring you live together and your own statement…
GNAT: Agree 100. You and I had this conversation before if you recall. It’s not easy but worth it.
Yes, I do, and it is.
@gnat, i don’t she’s speaking to people like you, who’ve made up their mind in terms of what they want. i think she’s referring to younger people who might feel compelled to get married ‘because they have to’. i know tons of people my age who reason like that, they don’t really see the value in marriage but think it’s something you have to do because it’s expected of them and it’s like a milestone. it’s sad that in 2016 people still feel that way, instead of being free to go in whatever direction works better for them, so i get what she’s saying.
Ok, that makes more sense. And no one should get married if they don’t really, really want to.
Yeah, I took her comments the same way as Ell. I’d say 75% of the people in my peer group who are married did so simply because they thought it was the thing they were supposed to do. A solid 50% of those marriages have either already ended or are circling the drain. I know one girl from college who got married a couple years after we graduated, then had kids by 25. I did not think she was the domestic type and she actually said at her second kid’s christening she just “did the family thing” because she thought that’s what she was supposed to do, just because she’s a woman. Btw, her kids are nightmares being raised by a nanny and she and her husband cheat on each other constantly. This is not at all unusual among women my age. A *lot* of young women start families way before they’re ready because of nebulous societal pressure. I took Melanie’s comments as advice to avoid making that life change before you’re really ready.
I agree with you GNAT. It is not archaic and for me, it is a symbol of my husband and me being united with the Holy Spirit and the Church. Marriage is a sacrament for us and not to be taken lightly.
Archaic just means ancient. It does not mean out-of-date, irrelevant or unecessary.
My take on LAK’s post was that marriage is not a bad thing because it’s a very old institution. She’s saying laws that protect couples need to be revised. Because right now being legally married is the only way couples have certain legal protections.
Like my friend’s dad, who is on his fifth wife now last I heard, whenever he started rambling on with relationship advice. My friend was always like, “um, really?” Yeah, I don’t think so, the only thing you can offer is a cautionary tale and examples of what not to do.
I get that Melanie has had bad experiences with marriage, but her advice is a pretty classic example of assuming that everyone else’s is or will be just like hers. People do it all the time.
I’m right there with you. And if you have children together when you’re not married you damn well better have some kind of legal paperwork drawn up.
yes HappyMom it’s called a co-hab agreement, lots of people nowadays have them.
GNAT thank you for this post. I am married to a wonderful partner and I’m very happy about it. I wouldn’t have it any other way. We were together for five years before marriage and when we got married, everything was subtly different in a good way. Marriage means something to me.
Domestic partnership is enough to get you medical coverage and the financial benefits of being married. My husband and I are not legally married because we are disgusted that the state of California has taken the opportunity to financially benefit from what should only be between a man, a woman and God. We are married because we made a promise before God, not because we applied for a permit to be ALLOWED by the state of California to be married. A marriage licence means zip to us.
But back to Melanie: I agree with GNAT. She really isn’t in any position to give advice on marriage.
What exactly has California done to marriage? Do you have to pay for it or something? I don’t get it.
You have to pay for a marriage license, but that’s not exclusive to California. All states have a fee. It covers the legal recording of your marriage, with a small profit, and basically provides you with the legal benefits of marriage. Your marriage license is how you legally prove you’re married. Makes sense to me, if you’re going to have the institution of marriage then you need an official way to record and keep track of it, and nothing, especially administrative stuff, is free.
I can’t think of anything else I paid the government for when I got married. Next to some of the other bills, the $50 fee felt quite reasonable.
California is a community property state as are Arizona, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin. Alaska allows you to opt in or not. I would never get married in a community property state. If you divorce, you can be liable for your partner’s debt, as well as half of your property goes to the partner. You always hear the positive side of this when some famous person has to give half of their money earned during the marriage to the other partner. I have personal knowledge of the negative side.
Domestic partnership is enough to get you medical coverage and the financial benefits of being married
Actually no its not that is dictated by a persons insurance. How your insurance company defines marriage. Yes some insurance companies define marriage as a partnership. Many do not.
“…disgusted that the state of California has taken the opportunity to financially benefit from what should only be between a man, a woman and God. ” That sentence is disgusting. Whether the institution of marriage is archaic or not, anyone who wants to get married should be able to. And believe it or not, men were getting gay-married back in the Ancient Roman Empire.
I agree with you. The fact that the government it so involved (especially regarding how much you pay them to achieve the status of “married”, and using tax breaks as a way to heavily influence people to take the step) is disgusting to me. I’d love to have a ceremony and commit myself to another in front of God and my congregation, but I have zero desire to legally get a marriage license.
Crumpet, If California does not recognize common law marriages, you cannot claim retirement benefits from your partner’s Social Security. A person can obtain SS benefits from their partner/spouse if they never worked or they can increase their own benefit if their spouse earned more benefits than they did.
I was shocked to learn that fact while helping my aunt here in Minnesota sort out her finances whose partner had died. Auntie had 2 kids with him and they had been a cohabitating couple for 12 years. He died and she’s ready to retire but she cannot collect any Social Security from his benefit because Minnesota does not recognize common law marriage. If they had been legally married for 10 or more years in Minnesota, she could have increased her own Social Security benefit because he earned more over his lifetime than she did.
I’m ambivalent about marriage, but it’s funny that she says marriage is archaic, and yet she was happy to accept 65k a month in alimony from her ex-husband. She wouldn’t get any spousal support if they weren’t married and their child is grown, so no child support.
i know right. so hypocritical
Thanks Goldie, I was coming to the comments to say exactly this — it was just last week that I read she’s now getting $65K a month in spousal support from Antonio Banderas.
And I’m old enough to clearly remember when she and Antonio got together and they couldn’t get married fast enough for her. So I understand that her views have changed, but when you’re getting $65K a month from a former husband, it feel a tad disingenuous to say, “don’t get married”.
so you’re saying people should get married for money, right?
I’m old enough too, and if you remember she was the top wage earner when they got married. If they had gotten divorced earlier Antonio would have been entitled to the alimony . There is also palimony for the non married especially in the lovely state of California, not sure this holds too much water. I think she just has a negative view of marriage because four of her marriages failed, and she has a bit of a point that you don’t need to get married now to have a child as it is socially not seen in the same way. She was asked and she gave her opinion, and not really surprising opinion considering her history.
I hope she speaking for herself. As far as i am concern, i will be more than happy to get married once i find the right one
I come here to comment on this subject all the time, because I feel what Melanie feels. I think marriage has long since been more about a business transaction than romance, and the traditions surrounding it are patriarchal and archaic. However, we got married in the end because it was also about family. We wanted ours to be complete, and even though our ideas are pretty progressive (Baby Machine is Closed party celebrating a vasectomy, anyone), we have a lot of traditional people in our family we love and want to keep knowing. The best way to change someone’s mind is just to live your life.
We researched ancient gaelic vows, made a little combination of the ones we thought applied to us, invited only close family and swore to protect each other and grow together for ‘as long as we can’. We’ve been realistic for the last seven years, and major shit has hit major fans, but really, they were trivial things in the long run. I think too many relationships die sad deaths, rather than being sent off because they’ve run their course. The idea of parting ways is still seen as a failure, rather than an evolution. I also think few people are truly honest with their partners when things are awry. Or about their sexual needs and interests. Eventually, you have to trust your partner more, not less, so if that’s happening, you’re not in a marriage anymore.
Mkyarwood, your comment is gorgeous and I’m seriously going to paste it into a Word doc and print it out.
I’ve been with my partner since the day we met, Halloween 2009, and we’ve lived together since spring 2010. I know we’re still young-ish (28 and 31) and can’t predict the future, but we feel the same way you do about the business transaction element (not to mention the actual wedding industry money-suck) and *especially* the patriarchal nature of the whole thing. Not for us.
This article mentioned health insurance & visitation rights, but domestic partners do qualify for both if you go through the necessary details & have the privilege (as we do) of a progressive employer/access to cheap Obamacare/family members who wouldn’t challenge a next-of-kin thing. Still need to do more research on that, though.
But I get why you did what you did, and I do think of my family a lot, and what weddings symbolize for more people than just the couple. Yours sounds like exactly the kind I would want if we ever did it. I just think marriage is such a discriminatory institution (even now with marriage equality) that I can’t bring myself to entertain the idea of participating it and reaping benefits from a system that treats non-traditional relationships as less legitimate. And I resent & protest the fact that couples who have met, married & divorced during our relationship were seen as more valid, solid, committed, etc. — society’s opinions don’t affect us, but I know they affect others in similar roles.
But then again, he and I plan to adopt a sibling pair someday and are already researching how much our marital status would affect our chances in certain states. If it came down to it, the ability to give children a second chance at success and love and happiness would outweigh my grievances with marriage.
In short… I’m much less eloquent than you, just woke up (sorry)… but it’s very refreshing to hear a similar perspective and different experience. Thank you.
My husband and I had a traditional handfasting and after a year and a day, we decided to make it permanent.
Says the women who said I do four times. Marriage has changed but it still works in my opinion. If I had any advice having married at 20 and been married for 18 years is…..wait a little longer to hit the alter. I think I am the exception to the rule, and was lucky. Thirtyish sounds about right to me. Whatever works I guess, but I’d hardly look to her for marital advice.
” I agree with her in theory, but in practice many women need the legal protections that go along with marriage. So many people need to marry their partners for more practical reasons, and that’s why marriage equality is important. In an ideal world, we wouldn’t need to get married to get health insurance or to be able to visit our partners in the hospital, but that’s how it works now unfortunately.”
agreed so much. i also find marriage to be an archaic idea (very romantic, completely unrealistic). i come from divorced parents who have a friendly relationship and i’m close to both of them, so i’m evidence divorce isn’t the end of the world. however i often heard my mum saying how being married made it so difficult to separate as opposed to just living together, and it would have been easier if they never married. it’s unfortunate that still in many countries civil partnership isn’t treated as equally as a marriage and is not available to opposite sex couples.
I know divorce throws some extra hurdles and $$ in the process, but even if people weren’t legally married, they still would have to sort out the childcare arrangements, splitting of assets and income, etc. All that stuff is very complicated and contentious, and the divorce process I think protects people’s interests. I can’t imagine dissolving, say, a 20 year marriage with multiple children would ever be easy.
To each his own is my opinion. I don’t think you should tell people they shouldn’t or should get married. It is a personal choice.
My personal choice is marriage. I’ve read a good bit on the history of marriage (the institution) as part of a patriarchal society. Despite knowing the roots I still wanted to get married. And it has evolved a lot. I don’t see marriage as a grand finale “happy ending” – it’s just the beginning of the real work. Especially if you have children. I think that’s why so many movies end with the couple getting married. They don’t show the part where Ish gets real.
Also, one thing I think has actually gotten worse over time-too much focus on the wedding and not the marriage/commitment.
I agree with you, expecially your last point. Marriage for many has become about the wedding; and as oversimplified as that sounds, it’s completely true for too many people.
Yep-and it’s no surprise considering all the shows dedicated to wedding everything and the booming bridal industry.
That’s one of my least favorite part about romantic movies, because it always ends with them getting together! I’m always like “….okay, now what?”
I think it reinforces the idea that once you’re married everything is great and perfect and amazing forever, and younger people see that and aren’t prepared when their marriage hits snags/rough points that all marriages get through the passage of time.
Perhaps marriage started out as a property transaction, but, for me, marriage is still important. And as someone who has witnessed the joy of a same-sex couple wedding ceremony, I would say marriage will be around for some time to come.
I was against marriage ( for myself) but am now looking to get married just for the kind of divorce settlement this lady managed.
I can’t tell if your comment is tongue in cheek. 😅
Melanie and Antonio get along? Um no, he clearly destroyed her mentally.
If you dont want to get married because its archaic, then don’t. Otherwise, kindly stfu.
She’s promoting her daughter’s movie, “How to Be Single.” If her daughter were in a movie, “How to Be Married,” mightn’t she change her angle?
Maybe marriage isn’t the problem, but the people she is choosing and how they treat each other, and that said…living together can cause just as much heartbreak and financial issues as being married. Look at Kurt Russell and Goldie Hawn. If they decided to split, it would be just as difficult as if they had gone through a ceremony.
Marriage, for those who choose to do it, is more, imo, about a public declaration of vows in front of family and friends, and then a celebration of those vows. It signifies a beginning of something. For some it’s about the ritual, which can be extremely important in many ways …just read some Joseph Campbell. The problem I see today is that too many people are all about the wedding and not about the marriage. I see couples on these shows on TV talking about wanting their guests to experience the “Wow factor” and how they have to impress with this and that …and they spend thousands upon thousands of dollars on an event that seems to forget what it’s about…two people vowing to care for each other and love each other through life’s trials and joys, good times and bad and treat each other with respect and thoughtfulness and care. The latter doesn’t really require the most expensive gown or biggest diamond ring or most elaborate reception…it simply requires people that the couple loves and wants there to witness their commitment and to celebrate with them. In fact, a study just came out recently that found that couples who spent ridiculous amounts on their weddings, often didn’t end up with the happiest or longest marriage… not a big surprise. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-larger-the-rock-the-rockier-the-marriage-2014-10-15
Some people may not care if there are witnesses to their commitment and some may not have any family or many friends to bother with a wedding. Some may not find ritual relevant to their lives, and all of that is okay, as long as it’s truly want the couple wants for themselves and not because of money or family pressure or one part of the couple insisting. Suppressing what you want to please someone else never seems to end well and isn’t a good start for any relationship, married or not.
Yeah, whatever, Mel.
Naw, she’s a poor example to be giving advice.
That’s absolutely horrible advice. Especially coming from a female who is benefiting so much from spousal support. Women absolutely need to get married, as soon as they (suffice they find the right man which is very hard to do so it ends up being a while anyways ), and stay married. It really is their best interest. I hate feminism who says otherwise. The 50s were wonderful in the sense that the nuclear family existed. So important.
it’s hard to take anyone who calls women ‘female’ seriously.
women don’t NEED to do anything. especially no absolutely. it’s a choice and it should always be treated as such.
Pfft.
I defend marriage, but what you’re saying is severely ignorant. My maternal grandmother had it as good as it could get for a married woman who wasn’t rich — she was middle-class and married a man who supported her continuing education. She got her Master’s degree while raising 4 kids. And yet, she said, “any woman who thinks the 50s weren’t terrible didn’t have to live through them.” This woman lived through the Great Depression and WWII, she had financial security and a happy marriage during the 1950s, and yet the 1950s was the worst decade for her to be a woman in.
In the 1950s, my paternal grandmother was married to an alcoholic who beat her regularly. She finally was able to kick him out in the early 60s. My father’s clearest memory as a child was hiding behind the couch with his brother, waiting for the police to come save his mother’s life. Yeah, tell me again how great 1950s marriage was.
i use the word female so what? And I also now people who lived through the 50s and guess what they liked it! To say the 50s was horrible for all women is ignorant. Some women had it tough then like some do today. But they were certain advantages having two parents was one of them. My mother worked her ass off in the late 70s and 80s and for what. To be married to a guy who wanted to exploit her for her money as a doctor. Oh that not mentioning the many women who want to get married but their boyfriends don’t want to be. So many single mothers, many in low wages jobs and hard conditions on top of trying to raise kids. I can tell you their struggles and worries. Their boyfriends leaving them. My generation having sex with multiple guys but never actually being in a relationship. And no they are not happy with it. Yeah tell again how great relationships have been 1960s and forward. And again marriage benefits women so much more than men. And I’m saying marriage if you find the right guy. Finding a good mate takes awhile.
Yeah… Those good old times when a man could kill a supposed cheating woman so he could “defend his honor”… When a single mother was seeing as a freak… When a woman that refused to have a husband and kids was an abomination… Yeah, great times.
I’m all for defending everybody’s right to get married (or not) and dislike the idea some feminists have that getting married makes a woman less progressive or not real liberals, but to say that all women need to get married, that it’s essential to women’s happiness, or that women who have sex without the whole marriage/relationship thing is just too much Evangelical Christian propaganda. Needing a man to marry you in order to be happy, and not being happy with sex without a relationship or marriage may be your truth, but that doesn’t apply to all women. Also, it’s hard to take seriously anyone who makes the false MRA/Bible-Thumper “Women were happier during the 50’s” argument, because 1.) You can’t even always know whether or not an individual is really happy or not, or all the reasons for that happiness or unhappiness, so to try make that generalization about a whole group of people makes it more likely for your conclusion to be inaccurate, 3.) It’s an argument that erases women who weren’t white, had any type of sexuality that wasn’t the approved of status quo for white women of the 50’s, or who dealt with any other issue that nice white ladies who successful men wanted to marry didn’t have to deal with and 4.) It’s usually an ignorant argument people make in order to be apologists for patriarchy and racism. (“Those people were happier back then!”)
Also, a family does not have to consist of a man married to his submissive wife in order to be a good home. (And that’s not a guarantee of happiness or healthiness either. Look at the Duggars).
I totally agree with Melanie. Did it once, and I will NEVER do it again. It is archaic and men don’t believe in marriage or monogamy anymore, if they ever did. It is just a romantic idea that women have that no longer exists. It is just so much easier to just live together, or just each have their own place. The latter being the ideal situation. Women don’t need men to take care of them anymore. My kids are grown and I have done it on my own. My son is more of a man than most young men I see growing up in 2 parent families. At 18, he is working, going to college, paying his own way (he did not qualify for college assistance), paying his own rent, living in his own apartment with a roommate, and making tuition payments. Most kids these days don’t even want to leave home! Me, I am not even 50 yet and I am 100% independent with no one to answer to. I ADORE it.
both my mum and dad currently have partners, but my mum and her boyfriend live separately because they don’t want the pressure, and want to be able to see each other when they really feel like it. i honestly have so much respect for my mum doing what’s right for her, and not caving in to what society expects a woman of her age to do. oh, and it seems like you did really well with your son, you’re right to be proud 🙂
She’s had her heart broken and feels a tremendous loss. I can’t fault her for saying this. Don’t think she truly meant this as advice for all.
I wouldn’t take marriage advice from a woman who’s been married and divorced 4 times anyway.
65K per month seems incentive enough from where I’m looking.
No kidding. Being single was never so easy as Melanie doing it with her alimony check. Her words should be the template we all look to when questioning the modern woman and their relationships. ~eyeroll~ She is being so short sighted, small minded and just downright insipid.
And she’s being irresponsible. I am one of those people who believes because celebrities have influence, they should not be so careless with their words. Not being legally married in a lot of states means a woman cannot collect certain Social Security benefits from her deceased partner.
She’d be better off lecturing us on the pitfalls of being so needy you have to follow your partner everywhere he goes to make sure he doesn’t cheat on you. But that’s marriage-neutral.
Ha-I think LeAnn Rimes passed that course with an A+.
Easy to tell everyone not to do something when you couldn’t take your own advice. Marriage can be very beneficial for both parties as it’s a good way to pool resources, just don’t expect the fairy tale.
Everybody needs to walk their own path. With what SHE has gone through it’s probably solid advice.
I didn’t think she was lecturing. Someone asked her a question, and because of her own experiences this is the conclusion she’s arrived at. I really don’t think she’s saying people can’t do what they want. Now why they were asking for her advice when she’s been married however many times, I don’t know. I’d fault the interviewer more than her — someone asks you a question, you’re going to get an answer of some kind.
Don would still get it.
He is 66!!!!!!
I think she does have some kind of relationship with Steven Bauer still. They posed for photos together at the red carpet premiere of one of her indie movies a few years ago. He also had a cameo role in a film she did with Patrick Swayze and Penelope Ann Miller, Forever Lulu. Their son Alexander went to rehab in his late teens, just like Dakota did.
I doubt she thinks twice about him having a girlfriend that young. This is the same woman who dragged a 12-year-old Tatum O’Neal into an orgy after giving her drugs. Melanie was about 19 at the time and having an affair with Ryan O’Neal, this was right after her quickie marriage to Don Johnson ended.
… and she herself was quite precocious. Blame the men, the culture, etc. She made some really bad decisions with all the freedom she had. Getting married to her maybe was an intent to be some kind of normal.
Read about her and Ryan O’neal. She was under age. He took advantage of a teenage girl. She was used by older men in Hollywood. You don’t know how many times she attempted suicide. Drugs was/ is everywhere in Hollywood. Melanie Griffin is a survivor.
I like being married. Not only is it more convenient and secure in too many ways to go into, but I simply like it for itself. It’s a level of commitment where you stand up in front of all of society and say I will be with this person for life. That matters, a lot.
Of course it doesn’t matter much in Hollywood, but Hollywood is not like the rest of society at all.
o
Well, they asked her for an advice, so she just gave one. I’m waiting for the day when marriage will cease to be an institution to become just a choice.
Honestly, it seems like way more trouble than it’s worth. More often than not, it ends in divorce which seems to be either a life-ruining curse or a blessing, no in between. If it’s a blessing, that doesn’t speak too highly about marriage. I can’t help but think about how some of the great marriages commenters have discussed here will, indeed, end in divorce.
It also seems like a threat to independence, something I value over money.
“I can’t help but think about how some of the great marriages commenters have discussed here will, indeed, end in divorce.”
I can’t help but think about how some of the “marriage ain’t for me” commenters would jump at the chance to get married if a guy actually popped the question.
And end in divorce later.
Actually no darling, marriage is the glue that holds society together, just because it doesn’t work for some doesn’t mean it’s not worthwhile and deeply fulfilling for most people. Speaking as someone who never felt the need to be married I would never tell people they shouldn’t.
Why would you need the whole society to validate you and your partner’s union, romance or however you want to call it? Marriage doesn’t mean commitment by default. Commitment is also not conditioned by marriage or any other unnecessary by default rules & regulations…
The point is I don’t, but if other people make that choice it’s not my place nor my business to tell them they are just being prehistoric which is basically what she said.
To each their own. If you want to get married, great, if you don’t great.
I’m married, have been for a long time, been with the hubby for half my life but if this doesn’t work out in the end or something else happens, I won’t be doing it again. I am far from religious and don’t believe that there is only one person for me, etc etc, I just know, after this long, that I would never get remarried. Have a companion, sure, live in the same place? Hell no. I could write a novel as to why but the short version is, it is my choice that I don’t need to justify to anyone, same as someone who gets married once or someone who gets married 8 times (Ms. Taylor, I’m talking to you).