Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Feminist or not, do you think men have it better? Worldwide, just about anyone with intelligence would agree they have more rights, but does that mean they're HAPPIER?
I guess the counterbalance is the man's way is generally more respected, by most men AND many women, but I guess women get more joy out of smaller things, have a closer connection to their children, and get to live a little longer, not to mention get to have things come to them more easily, while men have to work harder for money and a partner (i.e. having to propose).
It seems people are less forgiving of women's mistakes too, like they do one thing wrong and they're a *****, or dress sloppy and they're trashy, while if a man did that people would see them as speaking their mind or being comfortable.
Women get depressed more, and attempt suicide more, but then again far more men complete suicide, so you get the idea when women "try" it's more a statement of despair than an actual attempt to die. I'd think women probably also have high levels of happiness more often, men are just more apathetic generally.
Both sexes really have their pros and cons I guess.
ROFL calmdude. I guess I sort of have pus sy envy because I'm not a very typical masculine, sex-crazed football-loving macho type, women seem more free to be mushy and all that, so in a way I do feel oppressed as a man.
Men and women have different ways of going about achieving happiness. Some get there and some don't. A woman's happines derives interlally, from the fulfillment of womanhood. This largely consists of being protected and experiencing maternity, and is very centrally focuses. Men, on the other hand, derive happiness much more externally, by wandering away from their internalization, and seeking alternatives in the options that lie in their wider world, which they are fairly free to speculatively explore.
Perhaps the happiest union is one in which the husband gives the wife motherhood and a secure hearth, and the wife gives the husband latitude to explore life options. I know that sounds horribly calvinist, but it really is the fact of the matter, whether I approve of it or not. The sexes, I think, are prewired that way.
I don't get it... how does a man get more rights? Like when a woman cheats, has someone else's baby, and they divorce and he HAS to pay for child support? You mean those rights? That's one right, I rather not have...
I don't get it... how does a man get more rights? Like when a woman cheats, has someone else's baby, and they divorce and he HAS to pay for child support? You mean those rights? That's one right, I rather not have...
Couldn't one do a paternity test or something in such cases?
Divorce laws are skewed. The man normally makes the most money and that is the catalyst that drives the courts and leech Attorneys. Guys take it in the behind most cases.
Like when a woman cheats, has someone else's baby, and they divorce and he HAS to pay for child support? You mean those rights? That's one right, I rather not have...
That's a myth. The presumption of legitimacy is a rebuttable one, and is absolutely overcome with a simple DNA test. The rationale behind the presumption is to prevent divorcing men from claiming out of hand that the children are not theirs. Once it is proven that the child is someone else's, that father is responsible for his share of child support. Of course, you -- the husband -- lose custody and visitation, but if you don't want to pay for child support on someone else's kid, you wouldn't care anyway, would you?
Divorce laws are skewed. The man normally makes the most money and that is the catalyst that drives the courts and leech Attorneys. Guys take it in the behind most cases.
Money isn't the only investment made in a marital relationship. In most cases, women are expected to give up or significantly degrade their careers in order to enable the man to make more money. Their diminished earning capacity is an upfront investment in the marriage. Punishing them for it is unfair.
Besides, men who make way more money than their wives consequently have means to out-litigate her ten times over -- since good divorce attorneys are paid upfront, and contingency fees are illegal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer
PRENUP
Whatever. Like that's going to prevent litigation. As long as the one who insist on a prenup doesn't act all insulted when his intended hires her own attorney and presents a list of changes to protect herself. If you treat marriage as an adversarial relationship from the get-to, don't be surprised if the other side does so too.
But really, it's all lawyers' fault. As always.
Last edited by Redisca; 09-10-2008 at 11:03 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
- it is a mixed bag.
