"I realized my husband was of no added value."
Wow, what a statement, but apparently, this is how some women feel about their husbands according to an article in the Dallas Morning News (thanks to reader who emailed the article). In the article, Christine Wicker, author of the best-selling book Lily Dale : The True Story of the Town that Talks to the Dead,
asks why women are walking away from their marriages:
Everywhere you turn, it seems that some women's magazine, Suze Orman or some other cheerleader for the divorced (including the Atlantic magazine article mentioned in the essay) is telling women to throw in the towel and get rid of that guy. Women are told to be unhappy with everything about men. It's no wonder they are walking away from their marriages. The article says that women claim they don't regret it. Maybe they won't. But given the male shortage, especially for older men, I think the guys will be just fine.
asks why women are walking away from their marriages:A lot of midlife women in my acquaintance are leaving what appear to be perfectly good and loving husbands. Or thinking about it. Or cheating on them. Or wanting to. Or staying married and faithful but buying their own houses, which they either live in or keep as a bolt hole.
This astonishes me. I grew up believing it was men who had midlife crises that threatened marriage.
I decided one recent morning to list women I knew who fit the profile. In 15 minutes, I came up with 30 names. Some families on my list have more than one walk-away wife. ....
University of Virginia research shows that progressive wives are less happy than traditional wives.
"More traditional women may wear rose-colored glasses, but they also benefit from a sense of male and female roles," said sociologist W. Bradford Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project, who conducted the research. "They don't expect their husband to act like a woman."
Everywhere you turn, it seems that some women's magazine, Suze Orman or some other cheerleader for the divorced (including the Atlantic magazine article mentioned in the essay) is telling women to throw in the towel and get rid of that guy. Women are told to be unhappy with everything about men. It's no wonder they are walking away from their marriages. The article says that women claim they don't regret it. Maybe they won't. But given the male shortage, especially for older men, I think the guys will be just fine.
Labels: marriage, men's issues
posted by Helen at 3:05 PM
104 Comments:
And those women, and their apologists, are where there is a crisis of men unwilling to commit.
It's high time to get past the crybabyness about "men being just boys." The only common thread about women who can't find a guy to commit is the women themselves. Time to look inwards, girls, and find out why men just aren't that into you.
More traditional women may wear rose-colored glasses,...
It's the more "progressive" women wearing the rose-colored glasses. They expect some sort of ideal relationship and expect their husbands to act like a woman.
Thus, their expectations are centered around what they want and what they get. Not a good recipe for a successful relationship with anybody.
"But given the male shortage, especially for older men, I think the guys will be just fine."
I have three co-workers who had their wives leave them in as many years. One of those remarried fairly quickly with an old sweetheart (I'm thinking he was the reason for the split), but the other two women, while financially stable and in careers they seem to love, are reportedly not as thrilled with their newfound freedom as they hoped they would be. Evidently the only men looking for women in their 50s are men in their 60s or 70s, so unless they go cougar they are having some lonely nights. (At least that's what I hear through the woman grapvine.)
On the other hand, my three buddies have suddenly discovered just how many single gals out there in the mid-30s to late 40s who are looking for successful guys just their age (early 50s).
As we say in the military, it's a target-rich environment.
"This astonishes me. I grew up believing it was men who had midlife crises that threatened marriage."
You've been brainwashed, honey. By the "man bad, woman good" syndicate. Surely (shirley?) you are familiar with the old joke about female prerogative - "I reserve the right to change my mind!" Turns out it's not a joke, at least not in the topic you're talking about.
Neither gender has a monopoly on bad marital behavior. Men are learning this, which is why more and more are taking steps to not wind up the unwitting victims of your neighborhood klatch.
I have a story from 2 hours ago.
I emailed an acquaintance over the weekend about something trivial I thought would be good for him to know. I did not give him my phone number. 2 hours ago he called me on the phone, I guess he used the directory. I thought he wanted to talk about the email which we did.
Now this is an extremely rich and very powerful man I have known for 30 years. Nice guy. In the middle of the conversation he interrupts me and says,"My wife bought another house and has moved out."
I figured out fast he wanted to talk about this, so I replied, "Are you getting a divorce?"
He said, "No, she doesn't want to live with me any more."
Stupidly I said, "You just were married a few years ago, why did you do that?"
He replied, "I didn't want to be alone"
I let him talk for several minutes about the situation when I could only say, "Bob, I have no clue as to what to do, I live alone, I bother no one, I pay my bills. I don't know what makes other women do what they do."
My mother also has mentioned to me that a large number of her older female coworkers are leaving their husbands. The only thing I can think of is that women, especially white women, have tremendous pressure on them early in life to get married and have kids. Once theses tasks are accomplished they get less excited about being a caregiver and life partner to a man. I'm just guessing on this so don't hang me for it. I'm not the guilty party here.
Cham,
I hear older women talking about not wanting to have to "take care of a man." However, I don't know any men like that. All the men I know (mostly in their thirties and forties) work, take care of the kids, cook and do a good majority of the "caregiving." So I am not sure where these women are finding men who are that needy.
Interesting this came up, as just last night I was reviewing the thread about Jessica Wakeman's regrettable post on The Frisky. It was a hypocrisy-laced tome in which she said she wouldn't consider marrying a teacher or a journalist (her profession) because it wouldn't provide the lifestyle she wants.
http://drhelen.blogspot.com/2010/06/ugh-stop-trying-to-justify-sexist.html
The relation to today's article is that Wakeman wants everything both ways, which is a characteristic "I deserve it!" thought process of walkaway wives. It's OK for her to explore her passion of journalism, but her husband can't do so - HE has to work a soul-crushing job to keep her life plush.
Showing no interest in, you know, supporting his moving up the ladder, or possibly making some good money herself, she says middle-class dudes are disqualified because "our two salaries together just wouldn’t be enough to cut it for what I want out of life."
She was almost uniformly blasted here and at her home site.
She tried to make it all about the children by saying it was critical her kids have material comforts, but that appeared to be a pretty transparent papering over of her own material expectations. It was like a preliminary alimony - my parents got me accustomed to a lifestyle so now hubby has to provide it or he's not good enough. Notice how she comes first:
"logically, I need to marry a guy who makes more money than I do—preferably a lot more money than I do—for us to be able to afford what I want and I hope he will want, too."
Incidentally, Wakeman last month published an apologia trying to back away from what she wrote initially, as if it was some 400-word Freudian slip. Nobody bought it.
Dr. Helen,
My question is this: Since when did it become such an awful thing to take care of your husband?
In cases where both spouses work, the dynamic you describe above is a just and right way to handle things.
But many women, even in 2010, want to stay at home and raise their own children. In that case, the distribution around the house should be unequal.
My husband works. I stay home.
I cook, clean, iron his clothes, run errands, take care of the kids. He helps out on occasion but the roles are pretty clearly defined. I have no problem with that, but I know many SAHM's who do.
It's as if they don't understand that working 8-10 hours a day is part of their man's contribution to the family, making it possible for her to give herself over totally to her maternal yearnings for the benefit of their kids.
I am very, very thankful that I have husband to take care of. And I don't think he's needy. He could say the same thing about me and the kids when almost all of his paycheck goes to pay bills.
I lament the death of common sense.
Helen:
That might be true of men in their 30s and 40s, but all I can say is my mother has waited hand over fist on my father for 60 years. Now that he is sick she has has added the duties of nursemaid, doctor liaison, medical researcher, nutritional overseer and insurance company yeller-ater. It's a lot of work, and I'm not sure he'd be doing the same if the situation was reversed. Some of these older ladies might be jumping ship because they see the writing on the wall, women live longer than men. Again, I can only observe, I'm not in a marriage.
"I hear older women talking about not wanting to have to "take care of a man." However, I don't know any men like that...So I am not sure where these women are finding men who are that needy."
Male "neediness" is sometimes an invention of the mind. I hear from and read of women who are all about being large and in charge, and are very sensitive about any perception they are under a man's thumb. Thus the idea of caring for a man is anathema, they are intrinsically hostile to it. NAWALT but it is a common archetype in middle upper class circles. They are rude and dismissive of any concept of male emotional needs, dismissing them as "the fragile male ego" and "neediness" as if being supportive and protecting their partner's ego made someone a mindless Stepford wife.
My response is, "if you're not ready to suck it up sometimes for the sake of your partner's ego, you're not ready to HAVE a partner."
It should go without saying that this goes for both genders.
Terry@BreathingGrace,
I don't think it's a terrible thing to take care of a husband, I just don't know any wives who spend their time cooking and cleaning for a guy. Your husband sounds like a lucky man.
Just now I saw this story:
"Infidelity Rises When She Makes More Than He Does
MONDAY, Aug. 16 (HealthDay News) -- A new study finds that men are more likely to cheat if their income is much lower than what their wife or female partner makes, while women are more likely to fool around if they make more than their husband or male partner."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20100816/hl_hsn/infidelityriseswhenshemakesmorethanhedoes;_ylt=Ai7Ea4B6ZrDLO1rb7zpKsE2l24cA;_ylu=X3oDMTN2aXVpaWQ0BGFzc2V0A2hzbi8yMDEwMDgxNi9pbmZpZGVsaXR5cmlzZXN3aGVuc2hlbWFrZXNtb3JldGhhbmhlZG9lcwRjY29kZQNtb3N0cG9wdWxhcgRjcG9zAzYEcG9zAzYEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yaWVzBHNsawNzdHVkeWZpbmFuY2k-
OK, sounds like some social science. They've investigated a situation and its effects on both men and women and issued some conclusions.
So what's the "teaser headline," the one they use in the sidebar to get people to click on it?
"Study: Financially dependent men more likely to cheat"
Totally focused on the faults of men. More on that later.
Female infidelity happens - at an alarming clip. That doesn't mean male infidelity isn't a problem. We just need to be intellectually honest. It's not that "the last 80 years were lies and it turns out women are bad and men are good!" It's that we need to acknowledge behaviors and risks for everyone, and not sugar-coat them because we're invested in some false dimorphic view of humanity.
Back to the story: we have the obligatory fragile male ego - "Men who make less than their wives may lean toward infidelity because they feel a "gender identity threat," Munsch speculated.-snip-Helen Fisher, an anthropologist and research professor at Rutgers University, said it makes sense that men with more money would be more likely to fool around. "He probably travels a lot and drives nicer cars, and he's probably in finer restaurants. He's advertising the kind of resources that women are looking for from an evolutionary perspective," she said. "Around the world, women go for men who are on the top of the pile." "
So the male reporter quotes TWO experts to speculate on why men cheat. Zero experts on why women cheat. It's like it's just a statistical blip they want to sweep under the rug.
I think that what is happening is that women are simply getting bored with their marriages.
I don't think this is "new". It's easy to get bored in a relationship over 20-30 years. However, what is "new" is that the relationships are now easily disposable, both legally and socially, on very favorable terms for the wives, and so there is really much less incentive to "stick through" a bored patch in a marriage. Why bother? She can retain most of the economic benefit of the marriage if she divorces anyway, and get the freedom to try something else. Or, using that legal leverage as a sword of damocles over the husband, she can simply move out and not get divorced -- something which is increasingly common among older women because they get to stay on health plans and so on that way, while the husband avoids, at least for a time, getting the divorce court fleece job.
I'm sure people always got bored in their marriages, or went through bored patches -- at least many people. The difference is that under the ancien regime, commitment through bored patches was highly encouraged socially and legally -- something which is no longer the case. The current de facto model of marriage is that it is a tool for personal fulfillment and happiness -- and since that is how it is currently defined, once it stops serving that function, it makes perfect sense to see people ditching it if it is easy to do so on favorable terms (which it is, generally, for women).
Why aren't men doing it in the same numbers? A couple of reasons, I think. The first is that men have a higher tolerance, generally speaking, for routine and boredom than women do -- at least they feel less angst about it. My own experience is that the expectations for the relationship are often less on the male side than on the female side, and therefore women are more prone to experience more angst if going through a grey or bored period. The second, of course, is that men know, if even only in a general sense, that leaving the marriage will hurt them financially, perhaps severely in some cases. For men it would be more common to have an affair without leaving the wife, for example -- whereas for women it would be more common to just end the marriage, since she can do so easily enough and on favorable terms.
I remained single for many years after my divorce, rearing my children and simultaneously focusing on my career. I worked hard, both at work and at home, and mentioned many times that in terms of pragmatics, no, a husband would not add any "value". What's he going to do? Earn more money? I'm still going to work, so he's not really helping me any there. Help rear my kids? Not likely, as a step-interloper into a very tight family framework. Bring companionship, aka sex? Well heck, we all know you don't have to marry to get that.
I eventually did re-marry. Wanna know why? Because I love him. Unconditionally, unearned, un-justified, un-value-added. No "balance sheet" necessary. He doesn't have to earn his way into my paradigm by "bringing added value". In my book, that's not love.
Oh yes, I take care of him. Now, and forever, whatever that looks like. He takes care of me, too. We've never kept score on the paycheck, the checking account, or the house chores, and we never will. We just show up and do whatever must be done. In my book, that's love.
Lily Dale, that's right near where I grew up. I've been there, went to a seance too. Unfortunately the dead weren't talking that night. Nice town though.
This story might relate to the fact that the foreign bride market seems to be very popular. I agree that a single guy in his fifties or sixties, in good shape, is sitting on a gold mine.
But given the male shortage, especially for older men, I think the guys will be just fine.
Given what their wives were like, I think that these guys would be better off even if there weren't a male shortage.
This story might relate to the fact that the foreign bride market seems to be very popular.
It's not exactly the same thing, but I lived in Silicon Valley for more than thirty years, and I became very reluctant even to consider dating a woman whose parents were born in the United States. It's a bit different in the small town in the midwest where I recently moved.
Well, welcome to my little 'speciality'. Thanks for the article Helen.
It's very simple. To make sure the 'sheeple' are good little slaves the there are two critical pillars of society that have to be destroyed in order for the PTB to bring in their 'New World Order' that every G8 leader has now talked about openly. Also, MANY senior political figures have openly talked about the 'New World Order'. Those two pillars of resitance to tyranny are:
1. The systems of law.
2. The family.
The rule of law has been displaced in the west by 'the rule of the legal system'. The 'legal system' is NOT a lawful system. It is anything but. Indeed, the marriage contrace, though 'legally binding' is an unlawful contract under common law and any man can rescind his marriage contract from the beginning in any common law land like the US (ex-LA).
The family must also be destroyed so as to make it easier to control the people as the oppression is wound up.
Since men are magnificient creatures and will, to a vast majority, defend their wife and children up to and including to their own death, the evidence for which is abundant and not refutable, the PTB MUST REMOVE MEN from the family. And they way they are doing this is to offer the women 'babies and money' to kick the man out.
When I first realised this conspiracy was a collaborative effort between the UN, guvments, legal profession, judiciary and the women themselves I was really quite shocked. However, once you realise the agenda is 'Population Control' (as in the PTB think there are too many people on THEIR planet) then the destruction of the family makes all the sense in the world. Fewer children are born in societies where the family is destroyed. One only need to look at the dramatic decline in the Germany birth rates since the 1960s to know that the PTB are hell bent on there being fewer people in the world.
Only women are stupid enough to 'marry the state', the state being the biggest killer of people, rather than marry a man who will love them and 'protect and provide'. Now I tell men 'do not marry, do not have children'. Certainly until we sort this mess out. A lot of young men are listening.
Cham said...
"Again, I can only observe, I'm not in a marriage."
This is no surprise to me. ;-)
Topher said...
"Male "neediness" is sometimes an invention of the mind."
True. My ex used to pronounce loudly at dinner parties how 'completely hopeless GM is without a woman around'. Really? When she would do this? When we got home I would tell her that such statements were completely unacceptable to me. I pointed out that I was travelling nearly 10 months of the year and that I kept myself perfectly well in those 10 months without a woman to 'so called wait on me'. I told her many times over I was perfectly capable of looking after myself, however, when I was home, it was time for me to rest from my labour and I needed her help to give me the rest I needed. I used to work 13 days per fortnight. Usually around 12-14 hours a day, when I was away from home. When I was home? I needed rest. I was usually quite burned out on my trips home. I did not expect to be doing washing, ironing, dishes, lawns, car-washing and all that shit when I was regularly averaging 80 hour weeks for years on end from which every cent generated went to the family. And yes. My ex refused to apply her skills (she was a software developer as well) to the extent she would even refuse to spell check the manuals I would write for my software. To busy sitting on her fat arse with her fat arses friends complaining about how 'their men are so needy'. Where the truth was most of these men were very successful. My circle of friends in Irelend was a 'whos who' of business.
Male neediness is complete cow-shit made up by women. Period. Indeed. Recently, on the Spearhead, a woman asked in a PM why it was that men expected so little from their women. The summary of the answer was because a woman is a liability, not an assets, and we expect so little because we get so little, and often not even the little we wish for.
The fact is that it is the wives who are of 'no added value'. They are a large liability. The fact that the criminal 'just-us' system gave my ex 95% of the family assets despite her refusal to work for 16 years of an 18 year marriage while I renovated two houses and rose to the top of my profession worldwide tells young men just exactly what value women add. A LARGE NEGATIVE. Like I said. Young men are listening.
"She tried to make it all about the children by saying it was critical her kids have material comforts,"
The science shows that a dad in the family is much more important than creature comforts or anything else.
Trey
That's funny - I have found that a woman in the house has no added value, in fact, is a distinct liability. As for a wife - forget about it - no way am I going to allow the state to divide my property in half again. Got screwed last time, never again.
Life is too short to have to deal with an emotionally unstable perpetual adolescent with very real, very large appetites for money and food. Go away - go fatten yourself using some other person's money. Leave me alone. And when your lack of discipline and self control results in illness - well good luck with that.
All the women I meet here are liberals - in government they trust. Hope the death panels are a compassionate lot as they shuffle off this mortal coil, and that their belief in taking from the productive among us is justified.
Sixty Grit...bravo for telling it like it is.
"I'm sure people always got bored in their marriages. Under the ancient regime, commitment through bored patches was encouraged. But the current de facto model of marriage is that it is a tool for personal fulfillment and happiness."
bingo! I think that's exactly the problem.
But the wide-eyed romantic in me wants to believe that the emphasis on commitment also meant that people were less bored. I've discussed this with couples married for more than twenty-five years, and all of them have gone through bored patches.
If your partner is forced to commit to you, they'll try harder to make sure they've got your back; it doesn't make any sense to shoot your partner in the foot if you're running a three-legged race with them. And if you're with someone who's always got your back, I'll bet you're less likely to be bored. I think a virtuous cycle is perfectly possible: if both partners could commit to working at it, I'll bet some couples who would otherwise have closed themselves off to one another could cultivate love and even passion.
But no one seems to believe that anymore. It all has to happen "naturally," by which they mean that it should not require any effort on their part. Because that is so rare and generally short-lived, I think many of us tend to have a cynical, zero-sum view of marriage and relationships.
I have found that a woman in the house has no added value, in fact, is a distinct liability. As for a wife - forget about it - no way am I going to allow the state to divide my property in half again. Got screwed last time, never again.
Same here. Sometimes I think I might want a wife/woman in the house to spend my old age with. But, then I think a little more. Naaaaa.
Bored?
Hell, I was bored before I was married, and I've been bored while married, and I'll be bored again.
And boredom is your mind telling you to GET BUSY and find something interesting to do.
I'm married because I love my wife, not because I expect her to make sure I'm never bored. She can't do that. Expecting her to do that would destroy our marriage.
A good marriage involves many factors, but one of them is this: at the very least it has to start out not with rose-colored glasses, but with realistic expectations of what human beings can do, should do, and will do for each other, and for themselves.
Josh,
"it doesn't make any sense"
Please refer to Chris Rock. ;-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4f_oxZqD6wQ
And here is a little more detail on men vs women. He's 'funny' because he's right!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPesKyIhGZg&NR=1
And gents,
just in case you haven't seen this...it's really funny and it's also very true. 2+ Millions views can't be wrong.
"Dave Chapelle - Men and Women Phsycology - Very True"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZRflz-93JA&feature=related
Perhaps it's worth putting Bills latest contribution in here too.
He's a bit hot headed in this one because he's been talking about women creating their own killers for some time now.
"Fatal Shooting Wife Feared She Would Be Next."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qja5wuvLqTI&playnext=1&videos=8uIn2ebvMhY
I have been pointing out that if women keep abusing men and provoking them? They might just be successful. Provoking men is never a good idea. Some of them are getting fed up.
"I'm married because I love my wife, not because I expect her to make sure I'm never bored. She can't do that. Expecting her to do that would destroy our marriage."
BarryD brings up a salient point. People have a tendency to attribute their own happiness and activity, or lack thereof, with the partner they are with. If only YOU had picked up your socks MY life wouldn't be a misery!
A lot of these people ditch their partner and find, after a brief honeymoon of newness, the same personal angst. Consider the Pooh aphorism - wherever you go, there you are.
You read pieces like Ellen Tien's lamenting how much she hates life with her husband and thinks about getting out on a daily basis and you realize that's going on.
Dr Helen would know the psychological term for this, but it sounds like projection to me.
I think it's also a factor in the widespread anxiety about "settling." As women have become economically self-sufficient, they've laid out a business case that they don't need a man for the banal, day-to-day support a partner gives, they only need one for entertainment and to give them children. Combine this with the standing hypergamy impulse and a guy has to be pretty excellent, to satisfy those unreasonable expectations. When the entertainment flags and the kids are growed up, the business case says hit the exits.
Topher,
correct. My ex was 'very happy' without a single complaint about her life or a about me in marriage. Mainly because I was taking care of everything. I was pointing out to her how unacceptable her behaviour etc was and asked her to seek counselling. She wouldn't. Why would she? She was 'happy'.
I am told that very soon after separation she went into 'counselling' and was in 'counselling' for 18 months. I am told she was very unhappy. Boo-hoo. She also put on more weight that your average baby elephant. Very bad for her.
Marc Rudov smacks this one out of the park when he notes Men are happier because they are divorcing scream shrews like this woman. Notice how these women always have to scream now to cover up for the fact that women have no arguments to make.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7ZtjGJ4LD4&p=B73D373891227BE8&playnext=1&index=1
Marc Rudov Marriage makes people sick
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChICfhHUULA
Marc Rudov Menaissance
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nir-Xjj7PII
"The fact is that it is the wives who are of 'no added value'."
---
That's the big secret that shouldn't be let out of the bag. I think society would collapse if this got out in a big way (I'm not kidding).
I watched how women behave while I lived with them. I was risk-averse, so I didn't marry until (I thought) I could get a handle on what marriage ... is. Then I saw friends and relatives start to get dusted by the family courts. And the WORST situations were the men who didn't divorce (wives calling them scum to their girlfriends behind his back while they take his money. And take and take and take).
I had neighbors a few years ago - the man worked and the (childless) woman sat at home. On her big, fat butt.
In the summer, I'd see the guy come home from work at around 6 or 7 p.m., get yelled at by the wife for God knows what (it was more often than not loud enough to hear over on my property), probably grab a quick bite that he cooked himself, and then do yard work, repairs etc. outside until it got dark.
That was his life. Get up early, work in a soul-destroying corporation, get home and get treated like shit, and then maintain the house. Wake up, do it again. For 40 years.
They invited me over for dinner, and the woman started making "jokes" about how he does nothing around the house. He tried a feeble comeback, but was just shut down by her. Huge triumph. This is a woman who I have seen getting the newspaper with bleary eyes at 10:30 a.m., jetting off to lunch a bit later (she gets the good car, he gets the crap car), and otherwise not doing shit. Every day.
Why do men even want something like that? Are they just deadened into their slave role?
Target,
"Why do men even want something like that?"
They are brainwashed into it. They have to be. It's the only way it works.
Thanks for your post. It would greatly help for more men to put thinsg plainly like this.
"Male Shortage"?
Last I checked there were plenty of men around....
No, I think I would characterize it as a 'real woman shortage', since the real problem is that women, en masse, are failing spectacularly to make good on the rhetoric that allowed them to shove men out of untold millions of positions in education and the workplace.
Women said "Give us equality in the workplace, we'll give equality to the Bank Account".
What they didn't say, was that if a man makes less than them, they're not interested.
The problem that you miss Helen, is that this problem is not only one of 'underemployed men', but also ubiquitous sexism on the part of women, who daily demonstrate that they cannot, and do not WANT to, live up to the demands of true equality of the sexes.
That women cannot bring themselves to give more than they receive is a failing of the female gender as a whole, not a 'man shortage'.
That term, and the idea behind it, are sexist, and offensive in the extreme. I am not less of a man because I don't make a lot of money, and I resent your implication otherwise.
It may seem like nitpicking, but this, to me, is identical to saying False Accusation is bad because it discourages women....while conveniently forgetting about the suffering of untold numbers of men.
It's the exact same damned thing.
Just came across this:
http://dissention.wordpress.com/2010/03/04/things-i-learned-at-starbucks-1/
This one page summary is making waves in the man-o-sphere as well.
http://weddedabyss.wordpress.com/
Seek your wife abroad, where women better order life's priorities. If preparing children for this uncertain world is not the principal reason we exist, I know not what is. As it ever has been, we live to reproduce. Everything else is secondary, however fulfilling.
"University of Virginia research shows that progressive wives are less happy than traditional wives."
Well, they're more likely to marry progressive "men". Those guys all talk a much better game than they play.
I am the only person in my family who has remained married to the same person. My parents, aunts, uncles, cousins and siblings divorced. Most are on their second and in one case - soon to be fourth marriage. But, it is so odd, suddenly, we have become "cute" or 'endearing" or "sweet" to all of these people. They may have had that momentary thrill that comes with a new relationship - but they want to spend Christmas with us, at our intact household with the string of unbroken memories. I know some people need to get out of dangerous, threatening relationships. But, none of my family break ups warranted it, really. You can work through a fling, even an affair. I am so glad I stayed true to my inner moral compass, I am so glad we are intact and through the storms. My 24 year old daughter (whose friends mostly come from broken homes) tells me how much it means to her. She thanks us.She is so glad she does not have to choose at holiday season. She also tells me the parents of her friends aren't really blissful. Some have ended up single and regretful. I have so many thoughts on this. I could go on and on. In the end, everyone has to live their life, but I am glad I decided to stay in the right hand lane, while everyone passed me/us by.
Its easy to beat up on egalitarian feminism, there is no sport in it anymore. But once child-rearing considerations have passed, you would think companionship, or a form of emotional compatibility, the apotheosis of "value-added", would step forefront. In my world for the people I know it doesn't. I think that odd, you would think that after child-rearing, the band would play a new tune, but it doesn't, its still an environment world of bigger incomes, handsome faces, social status.
Gee, I had a progressive wife. Where to start? There is so much here. Schaffly recently made the point that after Blacks, the next largest bloc voting for Obama was single moms. They have driven the fathers off and now want the government to help them out.
Something like 70% of divorces are filed by women. I filed for mine, because my ex was interested in playing the victim after years of signaling that she didn't enjoy the marriage and wanted out.
The flaw of feminism is that men and women are different, and so can not be equal. Each makes sacrifices in different ways. Women give up their bodies for months during pregnancy and recovering afterwards. But men make sacrifices in different ways. in 2009 93% of work place fatalities were men. And don't expect women to do the "Birkenhead Drill". When the HMS Birkenhead ran aground, the Colonel ordered the regiment to attention while the women and children were loaded into the life boats. Only after those boats were away were the men dismissed. Many of them drowned. But survivors said while they were at attention they were like being on a parade ground. Our loves scorning men. The government hand outs starting in the '60s ruined Black families. Before 1964 Blacks had a higher marriage rate, lower divorce rate, and lower unwed mother rate than Whites.
We need each to respect the other, men and women, for what the other brings to the relationship, and what they need in return.
A wise man once said:
"If you ain't no punk, holla "We want pre-nup, we want pre-nup. Ya"
These are words I live by.
More than likely I'll meet the woman that I want to spend my life with after I've built most of the wealth I'm currently building.
If the woman balks at the idea of not being able to lay claim to half of what I've built prior to meeting them, then said woman is not of the moral character that I would want to spend my life with and proposing was a mistake.
I live in Texas, which is a community property state, so the choice boils down to a pre-nup or lose half of what you own.
No doubt the walkaway wives will, in a few months or years, be utterly contemptuous of the women who their ex-husbands meet who "do everything for them" but also wonder why the now ex-husbands aren't always looking back.
Women, in my experience, are somewhat more prone to fear commitment when we're young. Until we start having maternal yearnings, marriage looks like a dramatic slowdown, or even hiatus, to careers that we've been working toward all our lives. When our biological clocks start ticking, we get more excited about the prospect because we want offspring. But I imagine that when you become middle-aged and your kids leave the nest, you might start yearning for freedom again.
I don't think it's any more unnatural than when men do it... it's just something that we all have to struggle with if we want to maintain lifelong partnerships.
That being said, I find it a little troubling when people complain about how women can leave their marriages as easily as men can these days, as if this is some sort of flaw in society. Character and commitment should keep people together, not fear or lack of alternatives.
A while ago there was quite a discussion on misandry. A friend of mine tells me there's no man so low that he can't find a dog and a woman to go with him lower. One commenter said that he has live in girlfriends. After a few years they start talking about marriage. He makes noises about commitment issues, and they move out. Then he gets a new girlfriend. Don't take it too hard guys, there's always some woman who needs a man.
One of the bad raps men get is that they aren't romantic. Whatever the hell that is. I think men are much more likely to "fall in love" and marry their "soul mate" than women are. Women are much more calculating. If a man on an internet dating site can up his net worth, his dating chances will go up. A woman increasing her stated assets won't attract more date offers.
My ex asked why I was joining the Catholic, and wasn't I worried about remarrying? She wasn't planning on giving me an annulment. I was polite and didn't tell her that 1. it wasn't up to her, and 2. all I would need to do is introduce to the people who did make that decision. My petition for invalidation of the marriage was granted. I asked her if she planned on remarrying. "No", she said "I don't mind living in sin. I want to collect on your Social Security." (Had I known she was a dementor, I might not have married her. )
Andrew: Most states don't recognize pre-nups. Unless you say so on the first date, the bride can claim she was forced to sign under duress and have it invalidated. Good luck with that. Maybe putting your money into a trust might be a way to get around that.
I live in Texas, which is a community property state, so the choice boils down to a pre-nup or lose half of what you own.
But at least Texas has quite low caps on alimony.
complain about how women can leave their marriages as easily as men can these days
It's that women can end a marriage more easily than men can -- in the sense that they can do so on more favorable terms.
Two scenarios for you. Scenario One: man has affair, wife divorces him, gets house, half of everything else and hefty child support. Seems fair, I would agree. Scenario Two: woman has affair, divorces husband, gets house, half of everything else, and hefty child support. This happens *all the time* in our courts, because of the rather extreme bias against men in terms of custodial determinations, regardless of the mother (unless, as one female divorce lawyer mentioned to me during my own divorce, the mother either (a) literally abandons the kids, or (b) walks into the court smoking a crack pipe OR (c) for some reason the woman does not want joint custody). This is an inherently unequal situation in every way, and millions of men can testify to that. It's not that men and women are treated equally in divorce and this is pissing men off -- it's that women are preferentially treated in divorce, and THAT pisses men off (rightly).
And that's also why so many women initiate divorce by the way. There was a study done by two University of Michigan economists called "These Boots Were Made For Walking" (alluding to the famous Nancy Sinatra tune) which found that the greatest predictor for who would file for divorce was who thought they would get custody over the kids (largely because this is basically a substantial financial annuity, in addition to being a real social black eye for women in many cases if they for some reason are in the small minority who do not get custody). The proof is in the pudding. Women divorce much more than men do not because they can do it as easily as men can, but because they can to it on much more predictably favorable terms than men can.
Is there any way to more "objectify" a person than to say s/he is of no added value? Aren't these "progressive women" the one who would cry loudest about being objectified back when they were younger and more attractive? My advice to the husband who learns he provides no added value: time for a younger spouse upgrade.
should read "for some reason does not want sole custody", as judges are generally very reluctant to award JC unless both parents agree, which means that the mother as a practical matter has a de facto veto over that.
@JB: what you describe isn't love. Love is selfish. It involves the partner being a very high value TO YOU and, hopefully, that estimation is reciprocated. Your attempt to explain it as a purely selfless thing gave me 'the willies.' It's like you're saying: this man doesn't deserve my high estimation or my concern or my love: I do it, he does the same, and there's no 'score' to keep. Sorry. There's always a score (of sorts). If a person doesn't generate value in return for the value you are ostensibly generating, sooner or later you will question the relationship as one-sided, unfair, or inequitable. That's the bottom line which I think is missing in your analysis.
The science shows that a dad in the family is much more important than creature comforts or anything else.
That's my impression. It's an unusual kid that knows or cares much about outward signs of wealth before the teen years. But uncertain family situations cause lasting problems.
I once had a girlfriend whose defining childhood memory was the her father telling her goodbye as he left the house as the result of a divorce. When we were together, twenty five years later, I couldn't leave the bed without waking her to let her know. She would be overwhelmed with feelings of abandonment if she unexpectedly woke up alone.
Hmmmm.
There really aren't any good solutions. The one decent idea I've seen around lately, namely removing the government completely from the business of marriage, would still suffer from unequal treatment in divorce court.
The courts will always use their power to "look out" for the children and in such circumstances this society is trained to hammer the husband/father.
...
Amusingly enough the only way to win is to steal a page from that hoary old movie "Wargames" and follow the best advice:
"The way to win, is not to play".
The only way to win a divorce is to never get married.
It's a shame too. I like kids. I think I'd like the idea of a few obnoxious irritating whiny brats, as I was, running around annoying me. I think I'd like the idea of someone to live with. To love. To be loved. To beloved.
But I've had so many of my men friends divorced and nearly ruined. Completely false accusations of domestic violence. Arrests in the middle of the night followed by requests by friends for bail money.
What rational person would look at that and decide that this is what they deserve?
Men are the closest thing that exists to responsible adults.
On the 'added value' point, I bet she had no problem taking his money on a 'no fault' basis, even if HE didn't want a divorce.
If men start assessing whether their fat, aging wives are still 'adding value', women have a lot more to lose than men.
Men already give up a lot more in marriage then women do. If Western Civ makes it unattractive for men to marry, Western Civ will deservedly die.
What rational person would look at that and decide that this is what they deserve?
I hope you realize, by that sentence, that women are NOT rational.
In the mind of a woman, becoming insufficiently attractive is grounds for having a man ruined and/or jailed.
Societies end exactly 100 years after women get the right to vote (it takes a 3 generations for good women to devolve sufficiently). For those who doubt this, get back to me in 2019 (the 100th anniv. of women's voting).
Men have to realize the hard truth :
Women view Beta men (i.e. most men) in much the same way that the Japanese view whales : as a resource to be plundered like there is no tomorrow, rather than as intelligent beings that can feel pain.
As far as who is 'adding value' and who isn't....
I remind every man that getting donor eggs + a surrogate costs just $20,000 at top-flight clinics in India, that cater to Westerners and have a good track record.
After that, you can hire a nanny, or get your parents to live with you and help out.
Thus, a wife is cut out completely, for a much lower cost (both financial and psychological) than marriage.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I can name 3 divorced middle-aged and post-middle-aged men who married women from the Philippines. That only exacerbates the male shortage, but they're all *very* happy.
Deal with this, everyone:
In marriage, the other person is a free-willed human being.
They can do whatever they want.
You can do everything right; and they will still do whatever they want.
You can do everything wrong; and they will still do whatever they want.
So it's a matter of game theory: In a matchup where each side can, on each turn, be generous and reward the other, or be selfish and steal from the other, there are several possible outcomes:
If A always gives and B always takes, A wins and B is miserable.
If both sides always take, then both lose at all times and neither is happy.
If A always gives and B always gives, A and B win nearly as much as in the previous scenario, and neither is miserable.
If each side gives up until the other takes, and then "punishes" the other for taking but quickly "forgives" and begins to give again, you get decent results.
What, then, to do?
1. Try to find someone who'll always give, and always give to them. Significant pre-marriage due diligence is in order. Ideally, the person comes from a culture and a family that inculcated and modeled generous mutual giving in marriage. The previous commenter's reference to Filipino women is related to this. And, Even More Ideally, the parents aren't divorced and are happy together in their old age.
2. If, in the course of the marriage, they switch from giving to taking at some point, briefly punish them for it as a corrective. (Don't, in other words, be a doormat.) But quickly forgive and get back into the mutual giving business if it looks like the other side is doing so.
3. Items 1 and 2 are not guaranteed. There are no guarantees.
4. The essential insight is still that the other person is a free-willed human being. They can, at any point, do what they want to do.
observation: Rupert Murdoch, in his 70's, dumped his wife of 30+ years, married a woman in her 30's, and started a third family.
Imagine a 70 years old woman married a 30 something husband.
Woman, get over whatever you need to get over and be real. Once you passed your 40's into 50's, you are lucky that the man stays with you.
"All the best and let the attacks fly."
Why in the world are you equating "Women who leave their marriages at a drop of a hat" to your "I was in an abusive marriage"?
You're so vain, you probably think this song is about you.
Prime Designer: +5 Insightful, Funny.
"Honestly, I can relate to some of the stuff you guys are saying about your lazy brat ex-wives."
-----
Men and women can obviously both be lazy.
The problem is how society views them: An unemployed parasitical man is just that, and women will be prompted to leave him (and they will show their utter disrespect until they leave). An unemployed parasitical woman is a wonderful, wonderful homemaker, and men will feel a duty to stay - and not even notice it - no matter how bad she is. Even mentioning that he needs some help from her makes him a whiny, little-boy, controlling bastard.
Dody Jane,
thank you for your comment. Women do not seem to realise the value of an intact family over a long period. My parents recently celebrated 50 years together and that is a magnificent achievment for which they are held in great regard by all.
The rate at which women are leaving husbands because 'I am bored' or 'I have found a new man who is more exciting' is a disgrace. I too hoped to have 50 years with my wife when I married. For a gift to myself for the event of my marriage I bought a rocking chair. This was the chair my wife used to nurse and breast feed our babies. This was the chair I hoped to put on our porch and rock in when old and having a glass of wine with my beloved wife.
Only problem is, marriage is a scam and it's about time men were told this.
I sure do hear a lot of pain and anger in these posts.
I used to feel a lot of that pain and frustration myself. It appeared to me that too often, really nice guys somehow ended up with bitchy women; while really nice women ended up with abusive jerks, or, alone. And the truth is -- as someone else already pointed out -- there are plenty of both kinds of people of both genders.
Now to address what is "love"... what I see in this discussion is no distinction being made between "adding value" and "being valued". In my mind, the former is a left-brain activity, complete with balance sheets, ledgers, score-cards. And suitable for a business relationship, or any mere partnership. In "love", it's more about "being valued" -- an emotional activity that doesn't necessarily add up, balance out, or make rational sense.
I value my husband (cherish him, actually) -- I would value him if he didn't earn a dime. I would value him if he sat home all day and did nothing. I know for a fact that he would value me, no matter what, too. Being valued is related to "Being" in general. Not "Doing". I don't love my husband for what he Does. I love him for who he Is.
My point regarding marriage is simply this: unless one feels those strong feelings of unconditional love, then any marriage really is nothing more than a partnership. If that's all you've got, then yeah, I guess check your ledger for "value added", and divorce accordingly.
Milwaukee,
thank you for your post and pointing out men and women are not equal.
"We need each to respect the other, men and women, for what the other brings to the relationship, and what they need in return."
I disagree. Respect is EARNED not GIVEN. Women can earn respect by what they DO not by their accident of birth. Today women demand respect for the mere accident of birth of having a womb. But you and I both know men earn respect like the men on the Birkhead. We often lose our lives earning respect or living up to our word. I offered women respect merely because they were women and they spat on me. No more. The women claimed they wanted 'equality' and I am giving it to them. I judge them on the same basis I judge men. And when judge on that basis western women are cowards, liars and hypocrites in the main and I will insist on treating them like that. Further, I insist that any man who refuses to treat them as they have demanded to be treated, as equals, is a man-hating, white knighing, mangina apologist who has EARN my dis-respect. I recommend OTHER MEN follow my footsteps on this because if they follow my footsteps and withdraw respect and agreement from those men you will soon see those men take a different approach. I have seen men swing in 5 minutes flat on this issue. The respect of a man is FAR more imoprtant to a real man than the lies of a woman.
andrew,
prenups are not worth the paper they are written on. I have no idea why men are so stupid as to believe in prenups.
memomachine
"There really aren't any good solutions."
Actually. The solution already exists. I am writing it up in my book. I hope to have it out by christmas. Bascially it is to rescind ones consent to be governed and manage live via contracts. The book will contain (among many things) templates for a woman to claim lawful equality to a man, be chattel property to a man, it will contain a marriage contract with penalty clauses for non-performance which can be enforced by forfeit of a bond to the wronged party. In short, my book eliminates the guvment from a mans life and will allow the woman a chioce of being lawfully equal to a man or be lawful chattel property to a man. HER choice. But the man will have the surity that in dealing with a woman he can claim her bonded amount on contract default. We will soon see how 'equal' women want to be. I think a lot will take the 'chattel property' option. And I think many men will like that option too.
kmg
"Women view Beta men (i.e. most men) in much the same way that the Japanese view whales : as a resource to be plundered like there is no tomorrow, rather than as intelligent beings that can feel pain."
Quoted for truth. If only more young men would realise this they would not end up going through the kind of divorce I did.
mdchaney,
yep. And I only date eastern european women. I am VERY happy. I was just back in Germany for a short holiday and spent time with my favs #1 and #4 and unearthed another little gem who might go forward. Being married sucks because wifey won't. It's that simple.
R.C.
"In marriage,....They can do whatever they want."
You must be a woman or a mangina. No. You can't do 'whatever you want'. By marrying you AGREE to 'love and honour' the other person. So you don't get to abuse them endlessly because that's not 'love and honour'. You don't get to beat the children because you are tired or aggravated. You don't get to spend money you don't have. You don't get to screw around because you made a vow to 'forsake all others'. How stupid can you be? I am constantly amazed how people are so totally divroced from reality they might say 'they can do whatever they want' when by making vows they have undertaken obligations and responsibilities which LIMIT what they can do.
speedwell,
YOU married him. And he was an 'artist' when you did. How stupid can you be to think an 'artist' will do anything but exactly what he did or will ever have any money? Pretty much ALL artists die poor. That makes you stupid for picking him and hoping he might some day become 'industrious'. It rarely happens. So many women pick lazy men and then complain they are lazy and try to make them industrious. Women constant nag, whine, winge and criticise their husbands. We are sick of it.
On the flip side. Women like my wife PRETEND to be industrious, often for years. I put my ex through university as a software developer. I got her jobs. I helped her every step of the way into a great job at one of the worlds largest firms on a good salary with excellent career prospects. We bought the upgrade house to get a spot that would be the best we could afford to raise our kids next to great schools. Only THEN did she quit leaving me with a family of 6 to support on one salary with a large mortgage as well. By comparison. You had it GOOD and you were well informed right up front that your man would never work hard and never have any money. My ex, and TENS OF MILLIONS like her lie blatantly about that. And if you doubt me please note that 60% of all female med student graduates leave the medical profession in the first 10 years in the UK. The result is dead people in africa for pandering to these selfish bitches.
From the Daily Mail,
"Half a million elderly men lead lonely lives with no friends and no contact from their families, a report warned yesterday.
It found that one person in five with an elderly father is no longer in touch with him. One in four claims to be too busy to maintain contact.
Divorce and family break-up has left millions of men without ties to their children and with few or no family links, said the charity Help the Aged."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1025312/How-half-million-lonely-old-men-paying-price-divorce-boom.html
This brings up another issue that Richard Devlin has touched upon...the typical pattern of marriage is for a man to be slowly extracted from his friends and personal passions all in the pursuit of material provision and time with family. Thus when the walkaway wife syndrome hits, these men are extremely lonely as they sacrificed their social lives. Now after 10-20 years of living on their family social schedule, they are out the friends AND the social skills they'd need to get back on the horse. The shock of the split and the suddenness of the loneliness is probably enough to drive some men out of trying entirely.
"It appeared to me that too often, really nice guys somehow ended up with bitchy women; while really nice women ended up with abusive jerks, or, alone."
This seems to be a process of learned helplessness - whenever I hear some overly-nice sap complaining about their partner, it's clear they are pathologically scared they'll never get another partner. They think their abusive standby is the only romantic possibility for their entire life.
Geeky beta guys who didn't get a lot of attention from girls when young are easy marks for this disorder. Ditto for girls who weren't hot or popular in high school.
This is unsurprising given their psychologies. The curse of the "nice guy" is the naked supplication, the deep neediness for social acceptance and lack of self-respect. This is why women despise the "nice guy." Sometimes he is a one-upper and the guys can't stand that either. It works the same way for the "nice girl" who makes a scene of being nice to people.
Incidentally, this is part of the reason that game practitioners teach men the idea that women are overrated and roughly replaceable. It's a caricature, but most of their customers are very beta, and need an overly-bold shock to the system to avoid these "one-itis" cases.
Feminists have tried to teach young women that men are overrated, but that experiment has been taken down the wrong path into misandry and has gotten way out of hand.
Topher
you make a good point. One thing that I was AMAZED by was how so many of my 'friends' were really 'family friends' and when I separated I was the 'outcast'. Many men who had sat at my table and accepted by hospitality were suddenly not very talkative on the phone or email. Their wives had their balls in their handbags. I was very surprised how these women who presented themselves as 'friends' attacked me as a 'scumbag' despite the fact it was clear to all the issues were with my wife. I talked to my two closest friends about this....I also talked to their wives about assisting me. I pissed the hell out of my closest male friends by telling them I found their wives refusal to rebuke my wife in committing crimes as disgraceful and that I had lost all respect for their wives and would never talk to their wives ever again. I told them that I expected better of their wives. I also told them that their wives support of my wife in committed crimes bode poorly for them and they knew it.
Women are such controlling bitches in general that they make every effort to isolate the man to dominate and control him. My example is that my ex actually admitted in writing as to poisoning my childrens minds to me. She did a real good job of that in divorce as well. So women have blatantly revealed 'in the bests interests of the children' is a blatant lie and ALL men should call that the lie it is.
As you point out. Divorce in these circumstances and the loss of the children is so devastating to many men they kill themselves. I was one who spent a month suicidal. I have spoken to MANY men who have been suicidal for years. I have talked to no less than three men who have told me they have put the gun in their mouth and simply been unable to pull the trigger. It is for these men I labour. It is for their children I labour. And women HATE me for my labours and bringing the rule of law to Australia and Ireland. They HATE me for exposing the truth. Well? Tough shit. Maybe if they were not such controlling bitches and so horrible to live with I would not have taken on ending 'marriage' as we know it.
You people need to get out of the city.
Buy a Harley and take your spouse for a ride. Have an adventure.
Really, after the kids are gone, it's all about the fun and adventure. Committment to promises made, and romantic notions about rocking chairs, only get you so far.
Things have changed. When we made those promises and had those notions, we thought we'd be old and weary by now. We aren't. We're still young and ready for whatever new experience we can squeeze from life. Join us or get the hell out of the way.
Topher
"It appeared to me that too often, really nice guys somehow ended up with bitchy women; while really nice women ended up with abusive jerks, or, alone."
"This seems to be a process of learned helplessness"
No. It isn't. I was one of those 'really nice guys'. What happened to me was when my ex lied to me and I caught her on the lie. I called her a liar and demanded that she apologise, beg forgiveness, make a vow to never do it again, as my then religion demanded I do. For doing this she called the cops. I was kidnapped, badly injured, spent a night in jail. I hired a liar/lawyer to find out exactly what this was all about. I was told that on a mere phone call from my wife I would ALWAYS be kidnapped, very likely badly injured, and put in jail for the night.
I was told by the lawyer and the local STATION CAMMANDER that the police officers were under orders to MANDATORILY use MASSIVE AND EXCESSIVE FORCE to arrest the man REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEY FOUND when they arrived at the house. You read that correctly. The cops were under orders to use MASSIVE AND EXCESSIVE FORCE such that the man would have zero chance of causing any injury to the cops. Um...what about the man? At that time I was 100kgs and I was lifted from the floor by my arms twisted behind my back and physically carried to the paddy wagaon and thrown very harshly into it. My feet did not touch the ground the whole time...I am 187cm tall. My shoulder muscles were badly torn from the entire episode. Remember. There was NOTHING I could do about this. They were going to do this to me when the call was made. And my wife even admitted in the court that she lied that she was afraid as she wanted the cops to 'scare my husband'. Her words under oath.
So, my 'learned helplessness' was that cops who were 190-195CM tall and were 100+ kgs, carrying guns, would come into my house against my will, beat me, kidnap me, injure men, throw me into the paddy wagon, and lock my is a 3x6 cell for the night with NO EVIDENCE and NO PENALTY for my ex if she did so on a lie. I was shocked to say the least. So my ultimatum, believing this situation to be lawful, was to my wife "If you EVER call the police again you will be IMMEDIATELY divorced no matter what the cost."
ALl those 'good guys'. They know that one phone call from wifey will result in the same. THAT is why they are so 'helpless'. It is because their only 'recourse' is to shoot the cops coming in the front door. And we all know how THAT would go down with their cop buddies don't we?
It never ceases to amaze me that men, even men so obviously as intelligent as you Topher, put down the 'nice-guys' as having 'learned helplessness'. The truth is there is nothing a man can do any more to discipline a wayward wife. So he MUST NOT allow a woman in his house. PERIOD. Women are NOT ACCOUNTABLE for their actions before the legislation. Women know this. Women are nothing but one giant liability now. Up to and including the liability of unlawful incarceration with not one scrap of evidence presented. The balance of power is to stupidly and ridiculously in favour of the women they are nothing short of 'hand-grenades'.
"Join us or get the hell out of the way."
That's a pretty bizarre comment. Nobody's standing in your way--and there's no reason why we must "join you" in your Harley lifestyle. It sounds like you have some issues you need to work on.
"...there's no reason why we must "join you" in your Harley lifestyle. It sounds like you have some issues you need to work on."
Issues? Have you been reading this comment board? And you select little ol' me as having issues? lmao
I didn't know that suggesting a ride on a Harley qualified me as having some 'lifestyle'. Sounds to me like you are the one with issues.
As to the Harley comment, it was merely an example of any type adventure that can enrich an otherwise boring life. As such, it was directly on point with the article that started this conversation. If somebody has issues with motorcyles, maybe dance lessons or a poetry club would be more suitable.
I can't help it if other commentors have used this thread as a jumping off point to bash women in general. But don't blame me for remembering what started the conversation. Middle aged women are bored, and ready for the next phase in their lives.
Their spouses can join them, maybe even help them, or not.
...oh, and "get the hell out of the way" was perfectly apt within the cotext of this thread - where men are trying to define the roll of middle aged women and tell them what they should be grateful for.
Andi,
"where men are trying to define the roll of middle aged women and tell them what they should be grateful for."
I do not see any men here trying to define the 'role' of bored middle aged women. Do you? Men like me are simply saying middle aged women have no role in our lives. We are leaving them to their vibrators and cats. Indeed, I say no western woman has any role in my life. I want nothing to do with them. Take a fat middle aged women for a ride on a harley? Give me a break. They don't make harleys strong enough for their fat arses. ;-)
Women in the 30-35 bracket from eastern europe, who are hot, attentive, pleasant, feminine, intelligent, friendly and interesting have a role in my life. To be my playmates and companions. Once children are off the agenda women have very little to offer apart from being something of a 'playmate'. And one is definitely not enough. As someone pointed out. There are always plenty of women looking for a man.
globalman,
"Once children are off the agenda women have very little to offer apart from being something of a 'playmate'. And one is definitely not enough.".
I had to laugh, since I feel the same way about men. The only difference we may have is that my playmate is also my best friend, who is incredibly fun to be around, and who I've become quite attached to - I have no use for another.
Really, there are plenty of us couples out in the real world who are enjoying each other and finding new ways to love. The middle aged couples who try to exist as if nothing changes when the kids are gone - they are the ones struggling (male and female).
[i'm choosing to mostly ignore the bait about fat arses, cats, and Europeans. My post should not, however, be seen as an endorsement or acceptance of your post in its entirety, or in its parts, unless explicitely stated. ;) ]
Andi,
"I'm choosing to mostly ignore the bait about fat arses, cats, and Europeans."
Who says that is 'bait'? They are merely statements of facts. Middle aged women are fat. Almost universally. And certainly in the US. The ones without men have a very high predilection to buy cats and vibrators. And western women are very horrible people in the main that I want nothing to do with. Eastern European women occur to me like my grandmothers and they occur to me like they come from a different planet. I don't take any notice of what 99.99% of western women say because it is all lies. Your sistas have done a really good job on making me completely indifferent to women like you. Women like you have nothing to offer men like me. Period. Only a brain dead retard mangina would deal with a middle aged woman that he did not HAVE to. There are simply too many lovely women to deal with.
Andi said...
"I had to laugh, since I feel the same way about men."
PS. You may claim to feel about men that way. But I bet you plan to use 'Health Services'. These are prodominantly paid for by men and used by women. I bet you plan to avail of the safety of your police force. These are predominantly paid for by men and used by women. Indeed, all across the board, taxes are predominantly paid by men and the benefits of which are used by women. Nice of you to SAY you feel the same way about men while you will most certainly benefit from the theft of money from men by guvment to pay for you. Women like you disgust me with your smug 'I am so equal' attitude while sucking on the teet of the guvment predominantly paid for by men. When you women are truely lawfully equal you are not going to be such a bunch of liars.
@Andi -- I like your style! I'm not necessarily on-board with the Harley part, per se; but the overall idea is spot on. As a couple matures, they can
either find ways to continue to enjoy one another (be best friends, etc.), or they end up deeming the relationship "unvalued", and away they walk.
The end of child-rearing does not have to be the end of the adventure.
Duh.
mdchaney said...
I can name 3 divorced middle-aged and post-middle-aged men who married women from the Philippines. That only exacerbates the male shortage, but they're all *very* happy.
My wife is a Filipina and we've been happily married for 27 years. Just be advised that not all Finapinas are created equal. My wife and I met in college where she was on a student visa. We met, dated, fell in love and got married in less than a year. One of the things that attracted me to her was the fact that she didn't pay any of the bullshit games so many American women love to play to manipulate men.
Over the years, we'd attend social functions with other Filipinos and I'd often be asked, "Where did you meet your wife?" They were especially likely to ask the question when they knew I was in the military. It wasn't an innocent question. They were asking if my wife was a whore that I met at some bar near Subic Bay or Clark Air Force Base. Those are the Filipinas you want to avoid for multiple reasons. Even if they don't give you some STD, they're likely to divorce you once they've moved their family to the States.
We were still in college when we married (both of us were older "non-traditional" students) and money was very tight. My wife grew up poor in the Philippines and is very frugal. Those tight times could've broken us but it make our marriage stronger. She helped put me through college and then I helped put her through nursing school. Over the years, there have been times when she made more than I did. We didn't complain about it, we enjoyed it. We still enjoy each other's company - we wake up at 5 AM every morning and go for an hour walk together, both for the exercise and to have time to talk without distraction.
Now that we're getting older and health issues are arising, we're discussing her taking early retirement next year. She's worked hard every year of our marriage and I'd rather have her home and healthy than working and getting sicker.
Lest someone think my wife is some pushover, she can be quite fiesty. Sometimes, she's more jalapeno than Filipino. After she got her US citizenship, she used to joke, "I used to do that for you, but now that I'm an American woman..."
mdchaney said...
I can name 3 divorced middle-aged and post-middle-aged men who married women from the Philippines. That only exacerbates the male shortage, but they're all *very* happy.
My wife is a Filipina and we've been happily married for 27 years. Just be advised that not all Finapinas are created equal. My wife and I met in college where she was on a student visa. We met, dated, fell in love and got married in less than a year. One of the things that attracted me to her was the fact that she didn't pay any of the bullshit games so many American women love to play to manipulate men.
Over the years, we'd attend social functions with other Filipinos and I'd often be asked, "Where did you meet your wife?" They were especially likely to ask the question when they knew I was in the military. It wasn't an innocent question. They were asking if my wife was a whore that I met at some bar near Subic Bay or Clark Air Force Base. Those are the Filipinas you want to avoid for multiple reasons. Even if they don't give you some STD, they're likely to divorce you once they've moved their family to the States.
We were still in college when we married (both of us were older "non-traditional" students) and money was very tight. My wife grew up poor in the Philippines and is very frugal. Those tight times could've broken us but it make our marriage stronger. She helped put me through college and then I helped put her through nursing school. Over the years, there have been times when she made more than I did. We didn't complain about it, we enjoyed it. We still enjoy each other's company - we wake up at 5 AM every morning and go for an hour walk together, both for the exercise and to have time to talk without distraction.
Now that we're getting older and health issues are arising, we're discussing her taking early retirement next year. She's worked hard every year of our marriage and I'd rather have her home and healthy than working and getting sicker.
Lest someone think my wife is some pushover, she can be quite fiesty. Sometimes, she's more jalapeno than Filipino. After she got her US citizenship, she used to joke, "I used to do that for you, but now that I'm an American woman..."
globalman, dude.
"Middle aged women are fat. Almost universally."
They usually reflect the size and appetite of the men they cook for.
"The ones without men have a very high predilection to buy cats and vibrators."
Show how much you know. Vibrators are so yesterday.
"Your sistas have done a really good job on making me completely indifferent to women like you. Women like you have nothing to offer men like me. Period.."
And I thank God for that.
"...all across the board, taxes are predominantly paid by men and the benefits of which are used by women. "
A bit off topic, aren't you? We were talking about aging within a long term marriage, not about the U.S. tax base and civil order. I have a completely different view of men when it comes to society as a whole - then I do of men thriving within a middle aged marriage. But, hey, if you want to rant about something having absolutely nothing to do with what I said... go right ahead.
"Women like you disgust me with your smug 'I am so equal' attitude while sucking on the teet of the guvment predominantly paid for by men."
Man, you've got a serious case of projection or something. Seek help.
Cripes. I'm just about as anti government, pro militia, testosterone appreciating, cat hating, male role model respecting, as it gets.
I do, however, think that middle aged women are looking for new adventures. If their men want to join them - great. If not, the marriage will suffer. How we got from that to the tax code and social equality is beyond me.
Good day.
Andi,
"How we got from that to the tax code and social equality is beyond me."
This is because you are a woman. ;-)
JB, thanks for the comments.
"I'm not necessarily on-board with the Harley part"
Hey, give it a try! It's like when we were young and hubby wanted me to start watching Nascar with him, it grows on you. Now, twenty some years later, we're planning a biking trip to a Nascar race.
And to think, I wanted to take up gardening. :)
Here is Bill warning people on how people create their own killers again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VCOkfFVGSs&playnext=1&videos=-9M4efOXfD4
Andi sounds like the very worst caricature of a woman who screams independence even though she is heavily, heavily dependent on taxes paid by men.
Moocher central, is what these women are. Thank god that they will be at the mercy of Muslims in their old age.
Some more rubbish that us men have to put up with from the media.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1303917/SANDRA-PARSONS-Why-men-colluding-humiliation.html
"And it is partly the result of all those centuries of male hegemony, which has left them complacent and ill-equipped to deal with competition from women."
Really? And when a man like me judges women on the same basis as men and finds that they are cowards, liars and hypocrites. And finds that their work output is about 30% of the men he has worked with? And is prepared to say so? What do the wimminz do? Go completely nuts. That's what they do. Not a scrap of logic or reason to be seen. Just tears and and tantrums like 5 year olds. Never, in my life, has a woman competed with me at anything and come out on top. Not ever. But somehow us men are "ill-equipped to deal with competition from women". Women are a joke when measured by the standards of men.
The usual conclusion from the bulk of the posters is to avoid women and avoid getting married.
This is the common theme of most solutions of challenges outlined by the illustrious blog owner. Avoiding women and avoiding marriage would provide a 100% foolproof answer to the potential of being left late in life by a wife. But is there any other solution? If one avoids women and avoids marriage then they also limit their potential to have a partner in life that has positive overall benefits assuming the marriage lasts and the spouses get along.
Again, before you jump down my throat on this let me remind you I'm not married and never have been so I'm not a woman that feels that men are on this earth to support their wives.
I can think of a few ways men could veer from what our culture shoves down their throat that don't involve joining the priesthood to protect themselves from a lonely future.
Here are my gender-neutral thoughts:
1. When you get married don't dump your friends. Better yet, expand your circle and make new ones. These are the people that will be there for you if your marriage starts to go south.
2. Raise your kids, stay close to your kids and when your kids are grown make sure you stay in their lives. Don't let your spouse control your relationship with your kids. I speak from experience on this, my mother goes bananas every time I talk to my father.
3. Make sure you have a hobby that you don't share with your spouse. Keep developing your own interests. You might be married but you aren't conjoined twins.
4. Earn your share, do your share around the house. This way one never gets completely dependent on the other for anything.
5. Don't grow sour and complain. Just because your spouse always has a smile on his/her face doesn't mean they aren't miserable. If people are repelled by you then conclude your spouse isn't thrilled either.
I am sure other people have some other good ideas that don't involved a lifetime of celibacy and ironclad legal agreements. All thoughts appreciated.
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/08/18/patty-murray-facing-serious-challenge/#comment-37966
Its laws like this that allow women to do this and get incentives and a huge pay off.
marriage is retirement for women, divorce is the pay off.
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/08/18/patty-murray-facing-serious-challenge/#comment-37966
Its laws like this that allow women to do this and get incentives and a huge pay off.
marriage is retirement for women, divorce is the pay off.
Speedwell,
"Who would want you?"
Sweetie, no woman wants ANY particular man. What they want is what the man provides. As soon as he is unable to provide she will dump him faster than a hot potato and jump to the next provider. I always find it funny how women try the shaming language of 'who would want you' when the truth is who the man is has always been irrelevant. It has been that way since Ogg was out hunting wooly mammoth for oggette. I have a little story I wrote for men about Ogg dying to bring home the bacon for Oggette. Oggette obviously transfers her 'affections' immediately she knows Ogg is dead.
Tough luck sweetie. You can't 'shame' men like me with your 'shaming language'. And when you try it, men like me will point it out to the other men so they can see just how it is you women so often go for 'shaming language' rather than go for, you know, evidence, logic and reason.
Charm/All,
"The usual conclusion from the bulk of the posters is to avoid women and avoid getting married."
The ONLY viable solution at the moment is for men to disengage with women. The simple reason for this is that women are liars in the main and they will lie in court and the courts will do things like give 95% of a mans possessions to his wife in an act of outright criminal theft while stating for the record "talk of inalienable rights (eg right to property) is an inanity".
The key issue is that women will commit crimes and OTHER WOMEN will not hold them accountable. When men like ME say this and men like ME organise things to PROVE the hypocrisy of women the women go nuts. Tough.
One part of THE solution, which will be in my book, is to give women a choice:
1. Be equal before the law to men as signed under oath, penalty of perjury, full commercial liability with a bonded amount to define what the womans word is WORTH. If she posts a small bond her word is worth little. If she posts a large bond she has valued her word highly. We will soon see how highly women value their own word.
2. Be chattel property of a man. That is, from father to husband, or brother or son. In this case the man would be responsible for the womans actions and HE would be held accountable for her actions.
The underlying issue today is that the entire political, legal, monetary systems are created to enslave men, the women know it and like it. I have already published everything a man needs to do to be free but men won't use it so those that do not deserve their slavery. I am now ordering all and adding portions to make it easier to go through the process of divorcing their criminal guvments.
The rest of your post is rubbish as none of it deals with the criminal political, legal, monetary systems. Just like a woman, you have no idea what is really going on.
feminism by man and womym myth.
A very good set of videos for anyone who might want to watch or pass around.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkVWz0uXiEA Part 1 of 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F36gT5EpDLI Part 2 of 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4rj6JjnIdU Part 3 of 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNfr5UE195g Part 4 of 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9BB30J5Eao Part 5 of 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLbuWiUABVA Part 6 of 6.
I am a 44 year old male who is going through this right now. The wife has decided that she wants to move to a city, be a rock star, and have a lot of boyfriends. We've been married for 15 years, and just renewed our vows in June. Needless to say, I am STUNNED. I'm seeking counseling for us, but she promises me that it won't help. This normally smart, thoughtful person has become an illogical being whom I can no longer recognise.
snimick,
I'm sorry to hear this. This is exactly the problem we're talking about. I have a few suggestions.
-First, move past the shock phase as soon as you can and accept the water under the bridge. The faster you get over being "STUNNED" and start playing like the other side is - which is to say, a blood sport - the better you will come out.
-Get an attorney. A good one. Not a dude from TV; ask around for a competent family law attorney. Make sure they've brokered favorably on behalf of males before. Sock away money for him/her in your own account before it gets drained by your wife's party lifestyle. Do it TODAY.
-Be prepared for a bogus DV allegation. Start logging your whereabouts at all times. Get your lawyer on the same page; these things often have secret filings or affidavits you aren't told about, and if you don't show up to the hearing you aren't told of, the restraining order can roll over into a lifetime restriction.
-Abandon the pretense of chivalry or playing soft. Remember that in family law for men, no good deed goes unpunished as it will be used against you. Be proactive in the process. If she really wants to split, you have to be forward about what you'll take in the deal. The family law court doesn't care about your chivalric rights, only your responsibilities.
-In all of this, DON'T be the guy who in 20 years will say his wife flip-flopped, he was STUNNED and before he knew it she had absconded with not just his money but his dignity. You can get through this! We're behind you!
Topher,
this is bad advice. Did you know that when you hire an attorney you declare yourself mentally incompetent and a ward of the state. By hiring an attorney you waive your property rights and hand everything you 'own' over to the state. The judge and the attorney meet in secret and plan out their little charade. They they do that in front of the clients. The attorney is the enemy spy in your camp. They are ALL criminal scumbags and they know it.
I have had a few claim they don't know this. Had one on the phone the other day. I pointed him to reference materials. One he said "the presented was borning and did not have enough charisma to really get his message across". I shit you not. I told the liar/lawyer that the man was a carpenter and charisma is not necessary to listen to what a man says. So a liar/lawyer refused to listen to material on the basis that a carpenter did not have enough 'charisma' for him to be bothered really listening to him. Really. That's how big a bunch of liars these lawyers are.
The best advice for snimick is this. Learn what I did. (http://freemanireland.ning.com/forum/topics/globalmans-documents-to) Keep extremely good notes of everything because before long we will have courts for him to access justice.
One thing that he should NOT DO is to get a lawyer. THAT is the WORST possible step.
globalman,
I marked your link a long time ago to read but haven't gotten around to yet. But I don't feel the need to read it - you've blared all over the Internet that 95% of your worth was taken from you by the law. So why should we listen to your plan?
"One thing that he should NOT DO is to get a lawyer."
------
That is awful advice. Whether they are scumbags or not, they know how to play the corners and how the judge does things.
You will probably fare worse if you don't get a (fairly competent) lawyer. Just watch out for the scumbags, and immediately jump ship if you detect one.
Get a good lawyer. In the county of my divorce, petitioners are allowed to refuse a judge, once. So if the judge involved was overtly biased, a petitioner could ask for a different judge. The first judge is selected randomly. Then the petitioner or respondent could ask for a different judge. Then the other could ask for a different judge. A lawyer would have some idea of when to take the judge you have or ask for another. This is all a complicated board game, and a lawyer will help you protect your assets and salvage as much as you can. The adage is: "A man who defends himself has a fool for a client." Human nature is that a lawyer will see things you don't. Get a lawyer.
Gents,
One of the things that is drummed into EVERYONE is that 'you have to get a lawyer' for a FC case. Well? Why do you think that is? Why is it that judges virtually ALWAYS penalise a man who does not 'get a lawyer'?
Have all you men forgotten that the lawyers and the judges are all members of the same CLOSED SOCIETY called the LAW Society and in becoming members they have sworn to work to the benefit of the LAW SOCIETY?
Gents. I just posted another mans 300+ page book that the legal fraternity is nothing but the extortion system of the controlling elite. It's not my work. I didn't write it. But he's correct.
Why do you 'all stand' in a court when the judge comes in? Where else do you 'all stand' when someone comes in? You 'all stand' when a priest comes to the pulpit, you 'all stand' when royalty enters the room, you 'all stand' when a judge enters the court. The connection? They are all members of the 'ruling elite' and they demand their subject 'all stand'. Why would you 'beg the court' or 'pray to the court'? Because it's actually a place of satanic worship which is why you pay bail (baal) for your freedom. All this is public knowledge if you bother to look.
Any man who engages a lawyer is waiving all rights. Period. Does that sound like a good thing? Not to me it doesn't.
"Any man who engages a lawyer is waiving all rights."
-----
Most people won't even engage with you - I suspect - because you are just throwing out absolute nonsense.
Lawyers are supposed to zestfully represent you. I fully agree that a lot are idiots. All too many.
But if you can do the sifting work - and are willing to immediately give up on a lawyer if he starts appearing to be a scumbag - then you may find someone to help you in ways that you don't realize.
The problem is that you think you know it all. You don't.
I remember an interview with Mia Farrow when she was still married to Woody Allen and long before the scandals came to light. They had separate homes (next door I think, but don't quote me). She lived in one with the children, and he came over basically to visit. She said she really liked the arrangement.
JG,
"Most people won't even engage with you - I suspect - because you are just throwing out absolute nonsense."
You can call facts 'nonsense' all you like. That does not change the fact they ARE facts. Most people are simply too dumbed down to consider the fact that they are enslaved in a control grid that they can not see. A prison without bars. It's very interesting to see who people who are completely ignorant of the facts denounce facts as 'rubbish'. I've been seeing this for 2 years now. You are just one more of thousands.
Post a Comment
<< Home