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.
Sing it! Many, MANY women do the same. But that is another point lost on the "woe be unto men" crowd.
I think that's why a lot of states have community property: this stuff can just be endlessly scrutinized, and I think the lawyers just eat up more money fighting about it. It's not like I'm the one doing all the supporting, because he does plenty for me, too. And I think a good marriage should be like that, where you can't easily tell who does all the work. I honestly couldn't say. It's not all about the money. It's about time and effort and sacrifice, too.
Is there any wonder why marriage is such a debatable topic? Why there are so many challenges? Why it often doesn't work?
Consider this...our plates are often full with just the differences between the genders (Martian vs. Venusian). That would be sufficient for most relationships to remain a challenge. But do we stop there? No. Add age, maturity, race, culture, religion, superstition, finance, children, extended family to name some others and holy sh*t!...you have the potential for all out chaos.
Why do marriages fail at a 50% rate? Because of some or all of the above. Because it can be hard work to balance all these elements. To remain true to the self yet to be able to give to others.
If being married sucks, get out. Being in a sucky marraige sucks even more. You can't stay together for the kids...that has the potential to mess them up even more, if nothing else, by showing them dysfunction is the norm.
I understand what the OP is saying. I used to think that marriage sucked too but now I think that it doesn't necessarily suck, it is just different from being single. I will say though that marriage is a risk however. There's at least a 50% chance that people won't survive through the marriage. That is a very high percentage right there. If you are not prepared to take that risk don't do it. And also, marriage is expensive. An average wedding in the US costs something like $34,000! That is the yearly salary of several people spent on one event. That's a lot of money to spend. The thing is that some people feel they gotta have like a thousand guests or something and do something extravagant just to please everyone. Kind of silly. But as I was saying, marriage is different and risky. That's the thing.
I understand what you mean -- my concern though, and as I think the earlier poster touched on well, is that the modern marriage laws are fundamentally stacked against men. We live in a society where (rightly or wrongly), a woman can divorce a man, and also financially destroy him if she elects to, by literally taking him to the cleaners financially. Never mind that the odds are that she's also working herself. So we still apply pre-equality era, 1950s-ish laws to men (men are liable for paying alimony, entitlement to an ex-husband's retirement account, etc. to a divorced spouse), whereas women who *are* fully equal now are getting the benefit of pre-equality era laws, and even if they are also working.
I have no reason to believe that's the case. Do you really believe my lower earning husband would get financially screwed if we parted? I can't imagine how. He'd get half the house and property even tho I pay 75% of our life style. It's possible that I would have to pay alimony. To claim that he would is nonsense.
I haven't read the rest of the thread, so maybe i'll come across some evidence.
I have no reason to believe that's the case. Do you really believe my lower earning husband would get financially screwed if we parted? I can't imagine how. He'd get half the house and property even tho I pay 75% of our life style. It's possible that I would have to pay alimony. To claim that he would is nonsense.
I haven't read the rest of the thread, so maybe i'll come across some evidence.
Exactly. Depending on how long you were married. You could possibly get out of paying those things, but you;d need to make a "case" to the judge depending on your state. With legal fees at around two hundred dollars per hour...even if he gets nothing, you could still spend quite a bit.
22% of couples have a higher earner spouse be the woman. So the argument that women are do-it-all pillars of the American household is factually incorrect. Men are still the preponderance of breadwinners. Which makes them, because of that fact [higher earning], losers in the gauntlet of marital dissolution. Women can get taken to the cleaners too, provided they are the higher earning/saver spouse. Which statistically speaking they are still NOT, by a large margin. Ergo, men stand much more to lose in marriage, for a benefit they can attain [companionship] without having to sign that certificate in the first place. It's not about woman hating. As I've said before, sign that prenup sweetie, and I'll quit my banter. Equal is equal.
Yea, sign that prenup on what? The little most couples have when they enter marriage?
A job that women make it sound as if it is a complete hell, when it is not. Yet, the law and society rewards women greatly as if the man, the one who brought the food/kept a roof/transportation/education/etc., is seen as if he did nothing. So the women is protected/favored by law for what she contributed to marriage while the man is not?
So what did he do to keep a roof over your head, food on the table, clothes for you and the baby, transportation, etc.? Did he just walk somewhere to get it for free or did he have to work for it?
I find it interesting how women talk about how men should do half of this half of that, contribute, etc. But when it comes to dating it is women who support the idea that men should be the ones who take care of the initiative, romancing, expenses, chivalry, etc. So I guess the whole teamwork thing should be applied in marriage only, right?
This will be my last post on this topic - because honestly I just feel like debating this with you or any of the guys that think like you is really just a waste of my time.
Like another poster said, a marriage is a partnership. I think you lack the basic understanding of love and relationships - so I'm not quite sure how to explain this to you. When you only see things in terms of dollars and cents - it's hard to describe things like love, marriage, dating, relationships, feelings, etc. My husband makes most of the money. My life is not a living hell. I enjoy doing things for him. I enjoy doing all of the cooking. I hate cleaning but I do almost all of it. My husband loves the fact that I take care of him. I suppose if we weren't married - he could hire a maid to clean, a cook to cook, etc. - but he wouldn't be nearly as happy. Because we both also have someone to talk with, to laugh with, to love - and you can't put a price on that. I also take care of things like planning all of our trips, taking care of all of our finances, sorting out our insurance issues, etc. Did he pay for most of the roof over our heads - yes, along with his parents, my mom, my aunt, etc. But he wouldn't have a roof over his head if it wasn't for me - because I spent hours upon hours of time researching, looking at houses, narrowing them down, talking with the brokers, etc. I can't tell you how much time I spent doing all the leg work - so he only had to look at about 6 or 7 houses - while I looked at closer to 50 or 60. So basically, I was like his very own real estate broker - but he didn't have to pay me. So - should I charge him for all the things that I do for him that he would have to pay for if I wasn't married to him? Should I open my own checking account and use all the money that he pays me to pay for my own food, rent, etc. Would that make the relationship more equal? Then - if we got divorced, I would just take the money he paid me and then somehow that would be more even? That isn't what marriage is about. It's not about dollars and cents. It's not about who makes more, who does more, who is worth more. Human beings do not have price tags on them.
Until you understand what goes into a relationship, not to mention a marriage, you will never understand what I am saying. The thing is - I'm okay with that. You can go on thinking that wives are the same as hookers. It really makes no difference to me. My husband and I understand what love is all about. He knows that my value to him has nothing to do with how much money I make - just as his value to me has nothing to do with how much money he makes. I didn't marry a wallet - and he didn't marry a hooker.
This is my conclusion, I am 34, single, no kids, never been married, probably never will, I don't even understand why people in the USA are so obsessed with this very antiquated concept.
Some of the brightest people I know around my age are not married either and truly enjoying life, I have a friend who is extremely smart and educated and she has no desire to get married or have kids.
I am far from being wealthy but just because I am not married or have kids, I have enough money to do most of the things I love like traveling.
I don't even understand why most people get married anyways, it seems like most people do it because they have been pressured to do it by someone else or because society "expects" them do it, I could care less about what people or society "expect" from me.
Anyways, I would love to know some of the "rational" reasons why people get married.
There are no rational reasons for people to get married, except to pro-create. That's the only rationality. It's what is inbred in us, we can't help it. It happened to me. If you have enough money to do what you want without the hampering of a family then good for you, that's great. At some point though, the biological clock will be ticking, whether you're male or female. I've seen the best of the diehard bachelors or bachelorettes come crashing to their knees, it ain't rocket science. It's just life.
I have no reason to believe that's the case. Do you really believe my lower earning husband would get financially screwed if we parted? I can't imagine how. He'd get half the house and property even tho I pay 75% of our life style. It's possible that I would have to pay alimony. To claim that he would is nonsense.
I haven't read the rest of the thread, so maybe i'll come across some evidence.
For the most part, whoever historically has made more during the marriage regardless of gender, stands to lose the most.
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.
Inter "species" arrangements?
