Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-09-2013, 03:27 PM
 
12,535 posts, read 15,164,162 times
Reputation: 29087

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rego00123 View Post
only get involved (and ask yourself if you are) a individual who has the best interest for everyone involved and don't "settle" or ignore real issues because its the easiest option to take when getting to know someone the way you should be to consider a serious relationship with them. taking out all the blame on the other person in a conflict situation and not taking any of your own personal accountability into consideration is probably one of the reasons that would lead you to bitter split in the first place.

every serious relationship i have been in has ended amicably. although there may have been bitter feelings everyone knew the reasons as to why it ended and accepted their parts in it, learned from it and moved on.

i have a very hard time believing all these people that get "screwed over" do so out of thin air. you're not doing any favors to anyone by staying in a situation that will just become more and more toxic until one person finally snaps or does as they please regardless of your feelings
Yep. You can either learn and grow from it or you can play the blame game and waste your life. Getting to call yourself a martyr is small compensation for a life of misery, in my opinion.

Someone had a poll on here not long ago asking whether people who were divorced thought their marriages were worth it. By and large, those who were willing to admit that they had a role in the demise of their marriages said it was worth it, and they are the folks on here known to be in happy relationships or marriages now. Perhaps this is because they somehow managed to be objective, confront and work through their pain, and forgive both the other person and themselves. That was my route at least.

 
Old 05-09-2013, 03:51 PM
 
Location: Elsewhere
88,224 posts, read 84,127,726 times
Reputation: 114530
I always said the rocks in my head must have matched the holes in his. If I had been emotionally healthier when I was younger, I would not have ended up in my marriage.

But we are on friendly terms now. We have a daughter, and years have passed. I still have moments when I am SOOOO glad I'm not married to him anymore, but there's no hatred.

Also, re some comments, no, he was not a lazy drunk when we married. He did drink more than he should have, and I had no experience with alcoholics or I might have seen it coming, but he had had a good job then left and started his own business. It went well for a while, but then it didn't, and he just kind of let himself sink. He got worse and really went down the tubes when I was pregnant. It took 8 more years before I gave up.

But--it was the right thing for him and for our daughter. He picked himself up after a couple of years and got a job. He went to our kid's school events and sports activities, which he had never done before. He didn't drink around her again till she was about 16, and he became a respectable dad rather than an embarrassing one. Just that made me know the divorce decision was the correct one.

Last edited by Mightyqueen801; 05-09-2013 at 04:21 PM..
 
Old 05-10-2013, 09:10 AM
 
Location: moved
13,587 posts, read 9,618,420 times
Reputation: 23343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilac110 View Post
Is that what you lived through? I noticed you didn't answer my question about whether you've ever been married.

Regardless, it appears that marriage stunted the wife's potential. It seems that because marriage offered a safety net, she rested on her laurels. But he enabled her. In the end, it was probably best for her to divorce. Some people need to be pushed off a cliff to get their act together. She just chose to jump without being pushed.

...

The bottom line is that marriage should be beneficial for both partners. If it's not, and they can't make it that way, the one it is not benefiting owes it to himself or herself to leave. Life is short.

Yes, marriage should be mutually beneficial and shouldn't be a luxury-prison for the wife and petting-zoo for the husband.

The scenario that I outlined is a stylized rendition of my own history, with some embellishment. I’ll respond by PM with more details.

But now for a philosophical question, about life being short (or not), an unfulfilling marriage getting terminated (or not), and the whole paradigm of taking the devil that one knows. I fail to understand this meretricious urge towards the “pursuit of happiness” in American society. Everyone believes that if only they work hard enough, they can achieve anything; that if they’re unhappy, they have the power the change the situation, and are shiftless degenerates if they don’t. This applies not only to marriage, but to choosing one’s college major, to keeping or changing jobs, to choosing where to live, what car to drive, what toothpaste to use… everything from the quotidian trivialities of life, to the most profound aspects… everything, one asserts, can and should be improved, and therefore nothing in principle is merely good enough, merely acceptable enough to be continued, while the hope exists for upgrade.

I am not a conservative in the social-religious sense, but I am more of a fatalist, a believer that while personal stupidity can be costly, activism and striving are also unlikely to pay off. I’m baffled by the “pursuit of happiness”, craving instead an avoidance of pain. My point is not to disparage the American ethos as something disingenuous or jejune, though personally I can’t help thinking that, at least in part. Rather, my point is to suggest, politely and gently, that we expect too much from life, and in particular too much from marriage. Expecting too much, we’re more likely to see our marriages fail – and thus attain even less. It is precisely by expecting less that we’re more likely not to be disappointed.
 
Old 05-10-2013, 11:20 AM
 
8,076 posts, read 10,017,178 times
Reputation: 22648
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
[in reference to the above post] So the entire marriage was a stratagem on the part of the ex-wife?
Yes.

I never would have believed that, and i still didn't believe it even after she filed. I just could not get it into my head and my heart that anyone could be that cunning and despicable. Especially someone to whom i was married.

Apparently it is well known in female circles that women go out of their way to plan such eventualities. And if the man doesn't go along with their scheme of life, they slam the trap shut--and the pieces are already in place: Babies, money, jewelery, and sadly, the view of the courts that the 'woe is me' defense is acceptable.
 
Old 05-10-2013, 12:49 PM
 
12,535 posts, read 15,164,162 times
Reputation: 29087
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
Yes, marriage should be mutually beneficial and shouldn't be a luxury-prison for the wife and petting-zoo for the husband.

The scenario that I outlined is a stylized rendition of my own history, with some embellishment. I’ll respond by PM with more details.

But now for a philosophical question, about life being short (or not), an unfulfilling marriage getting terminated (or not), and the whole paradigm of taking the devil that one knows. I fail to understand this meretricious urge towards the “pursuit of happiness” in American society. Everyone believes that if only they work hard enough, they can achieve anything; that if they’re unhappy, they have the power the change the situation, and are shiftless degenerates if they don’t. This applies not only to marriage, but to choosing one’s college major, to keeping or changing jobs, to choosing where to live, what car to drive, what toothpaste to use… everything from the quotidian trivialities of life, to the most profound aspects… everything, one asserts, can and should be improved, and therefore nothing in principle is merely good enough, merely acceptable enough to be continued, while the hope exists for upgrade.

I am not a conservative in the social-religious sense, but I am more of a fatalist, a believer that while personal stupidity can be costly, activism and striving are also unlikely to pay off. I’m baffled by the “pursuit of happiness”, craving instead an avoidance of pain. My point is not to disparage the American ethos as something disingenuous or jejune, though personally I can’t help thinking that, at least in part. Rather, my point is to suggest, politely and gently, that we expect too much from life, and in particular too much from marriage. Expecting too much, we’re more likely to see our marriages fail – and thus attain even less. It is precisely by expecting less that we’re more likely not to be disappointed.
American society still has a lot of the Protestant work ethic woven into the culture. That is reflected in interpersonal relationships. And not for nothing, but the pursuit of happiness is considered an inalienable right around here. You claim fatalism, and that's fine, but your fatalism sounds a lot like cynicism to me.

And I don't think expecting not to be miserable is expecting too much. I'm a realist. I know what is reasonable to expect out of a marriage or relationship, and what is unreasonable to expect. Marriages are made of humans, and humans are fallible. Your spouse can and will hurt your feelings, let you down, and make you angry, and vice versa, and everyone has tough times simply because other family members die, illness and accidents happen, and companies downsize. Those things are to be expected, and smart people go into marriage realizing that. It's when one expects perfection in another, cannot forgive minor offenses, cannot admit when he or she is wrong, takes the other person for granted, is abusive, lies, cheats, steals, develops an addiction, or expects life and relationships to be smooth sailing, with no sacrifice or compromise entailed, that one has unrealistic expectations.

FWIW, I don't consider my divorce a sign of failure as much as the end of a chapter of my life, not a whole lot more significant than a break-up after a long-term relationship, of which I have had 5 in this lifetime including my current of 6 years. Maybe it's because my ex and I were friends before and after, we weren't married all that long (3.5 years), and there were no kids, or maybe it's because neither of us were raised to be blamers, or maybe it's just that my mama didn't raise a bitter idiot, but I grew from the experience and it made me a better person overall. And I'd bet the rent that my ex would say the same. It's funny, but this thread prompted me to go back through my old journals. There is an entry in which I noted something he said: "You signed up to be a wife, not a babysitter."

Last edited by Lilac110; 05-10-2013 at 12:59 PM..
 
Old 05-10-2013, 01:08 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
1,791 posts, read 3,173,532 times
Reputation: 1363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathagos View Post
Women get the kids, the house, the car, alimony (sometimes), and child support (if the dad's not a deadbeat). What's so hard to get over for women?
LOL, exactly what i was thinking. Of course women get over divorce easier. That's a no-brainer.
 
Old 05-10-2013, 01:28 PM
 
Location: In an indoor space
7,685 posts, read 6,166,718 times
Reputation: 5154
Quote:
Originally Posted by lpfan921 View Post
LOL, exactly what i was thinking. Of course women get over divorce easier. That's a no-brainer.
Like I said, "what is love?"
 
Old 05-10-2013, 01:36 PM
 
36,100 posts, read 30,588,867 times
Reputation: 32351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon View Post
You don't get it, do you? If you are going to understand how difficult it is, you should look at the few cases when the women loses her children, and only gets visitation. Those women go into depression even if they aren't paying child support. Those women actually handle the situation a lot worse than the majority of men who experience the same.

For men you first get punished and won't be able to see your kids. Then you have to provide extra money for the children you are not able to see. Many of these men would pay extra to see their kids. But in court of law it is the other way. If you loses, then you have to pay more if you are not able to see your kids. Its like a double punishment. And to top it off you are forced to pay your wife alimony so she can keep up her standard of living. If she cheated on you and got a children with another man, you still have to pay child support and alimony.

Its absolutely horrible, and I am really happy I am not getting married in America. I am from Norway, and in Norway 50/50 is quite normal. If you don't get that, then you will get 40/60. Also, alimony only exists in a few cases, and only for a few years.


So she was nice. But she had the power to screw him over. And many women do.

Other reasons it is harder for men is because their support network is weaker, and more women initiate divorce. A lot of men wouldn't dare to initiate a divorce, because the courts will screw them over.
If your through with the drama......
If you dont get to see your kids 1. you didnt seek custody/wasnt proactive in your divorce and had a crappy attorney 2. the courts found you unfit or 3. your ex is a selfish, coniving law breaking ____(insert experlative). Courts lean heavily towards shared custody 50/50. Yes, the mother is usually the primary custodian because its usually the mother who has been the caretaker of the children.

Yes, both parents are responsible for financially supporting their children. Is there no child support in Norway?

Similar to Norway, most states have equitable distribution beginning with 50/50. It is rare any alimony is awarded in an average divorce in most states. When it is, it is due to particular circumstances and usually temporary.

Most divorces never go to court. The parties negotiate via. mediation, etc. based on the divorce laws of each state which are NOT gender specific. So if you get screwed, again, not proactive and bad attorney.

I think we have established that women file more often because men wont take the initiative to do so.

Financially, both parties suffer in a divorce.
As far as children are concerned, although raising kids basically on your own is tough, being the non custodial parent has to be the hardest part emotionally for parents that were active participants in their childrens lives.
 
Old 05-10-2013, 01:49 PM
 
246 posts, read 387,131 times
Reputation: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
Yes, marriage should be mutually beneficial and shouldn't be a luxury-prison for the wife and petting-zoo for the husband.

The scenario that I outlined is a stylized rendition of my own history, with some embellishment. I’ll respond by PM with more details.

But now for a philosophical question, about life being short (or not), an unfulfilling marriage getting terminated (or not), and the whole paradigm of taking the devil that one knows. I fail to understand this meretricious urge towards the “pursuit of happiness” in American society. Everyone believes that if only they work hard enough, they can achieve anything; that if they’re unhappy, they have the power the change the situation, and are shiftless degenerates if they don’t. This applies not only to marriage, but to choosing one’s college major, to keeping or changing jobs, to choosing where to live, what car to drive, what toothpaste to use… everything from the quotidian trivialities of life, to the most profound aspects… everything, one asserts, can and should be improved, and therefore nothing in principle is merely good enough, merely acceptable enough to be continued, while the hope exists for upgrade.

I am not a conservative in the social-religious sense, but I am more of a fatalist, a believer that while personal stupidity can be costly, activism and striving are also unlikely to pay off. I’m baffled by the “pursuit of happiness”, craving instead an avoidance of pain. My point is not to disparage the American ethos as something disingenuous or jejune, though personally I can’t help thinking that, at least in part. Rather, my point is to suggest, politely and gently, that we expect too much from life, and in particular too much from marriage. Expecting too much, we’re more likely to see our marriages fail – and thus attain even less. It is precisely by expecting less that we’re more likely not to be disappointed.
At first I thought my views diverged considerably from the posters but having read the last paragraph I'm thinking not so much. I like that we should pursue maximum happiness in life and in marriage. However, I believe that you should do your utmost to work it out with your partner (after all you chose one another for a reason) before bailing out. If all else fails then move on.

Regarding whether women get over a divorce easier I tend to believe this is the case. It seems women are better at compartmentalizing their emotions than men. Men, certainly true for me, have it all mashed together so it's hard to separate our relationship life with other aspects of life. We men also seem to reflect more as to what went wrong. Once the woman makes up her mind that's usually it. So the often heard on/off switch ... where she says I love you one day and the next day not. I've had experience with that directly and female friends confirm it's a defensive mechanism. Men are left pondering what went wrong and women are looking forward.
 
Old 05-10-2013, 04:45 PM
 
Location: moved
13,587 posts, read 9,618,420 times
Reputation: 23343
Relationships are hard work, not merely to maintain but also to initiate and to engender. It’s exasperatingly difficult to find a potential partner. Then, once found, to convince her that she too ought to be interested; to polish the rough edges, to merge two lives logistically, financially, emotionally. This is all tremendously hard work. It’s emotionally taxing, it requires substantial investment of time, moderation of one’s character, honing of one’s virtues, suppression of nasty habits, accommodation (to a point) of one’s partner’s habits and particularities. Over time, the two partners develop a common lexicon, joint habits that ease their path and facilitate domesticity. In short, it’s an investment: in oneself, in one’s partner and in the relationship.

Every breakup means losing one’s investment. It is a disavowal of one’s hard work, crushing of one’s mental constructs erected as foundation for the relationship. It means returning to zero, beginning again from nothing, as with a careless stock-speculator after a precipitous market collapse. Why risk it? Why do this to oneself? After all those years of interlocking the pieces of life’s domestic puzzle into proper fit, they are disturbed again, pried out and thrown with desultory rejection back into their box, in careless pile.

In contemplation of potential new relationship, one asks oneself: “Why ought I to again accede to such prodigious risk? Why work so hard, why make revisions and undergo self-abnegations for another’s sake, when said other may not reciprocate, or disregard the bargain at some future time when the marriage no longer suits her? I mean not necessarily the mechanics of divorce, which are irritating enough; or once again having one’s heart broken, which is painful enough. These are both very trying and very obvious. But I mean more basically: why bother again, if the bothering carries no guarantee? One has better things to do that to endeavor to please another, if the pleasing shall always be contingent.

Now about the whole idea of taking things (or people) for granted. This merits concerted retort. “Taking for granted” is not a moral weakness. Quite the contrary, the reverse is morally reprehensible and leads to discord and collapse.

Simply put, the whole point of officially codified relationships is to take each other for granted. I work as a permanent employee and not as a contractor so that I could take for granted having a job and a paycheck, and my employer could take for granted my showing up daily and exchanging my labor for a paycheck. I am a citizen of my country so that my country could take my patriotism for granted, while I could take for granted my basic rights. If this taking for granted were unreasonable, then no man would be a citizen, and no nation would govern itself by a constitution promising rights. If I could NOT take my job for granted, then paychecks would come sporadically and only in exchange for exceptionally pleasing performance at work, while if my employer didn't take me for granted, I would only bother showing up to work on days that suited my fancy. Instead I work every day, whether it’s raining or I’m bored or I have a headache. And I receive a paycheck every two weeks, whether my employer fares well or ill, or thinks highly of me or not. I retain allegiance to my country whether or not I care for its politics, and it respects my rights as a citizen whether I speak crudely or fawningly of it. Civilized life is all about the taking for granted of daily affairs and lifelong contracts.

Dancing-partners at a party might only remain in each other’s embrace so long as their steps are agile and music builds mutual concord; but when the tune changes, or some enticing stranger smiles from across the room, the partners split, with the infatuation of the moment gone. But marriages should be different! The marriage should endure regardless of the tune or if the steps are awkward. The partner can – nay, must! – take each other for granted, that they’ll remain together without having to dexterously hold each other or lock eyes in fond smiles. Their union is a fact of being, not of behaving. A wife is a wife because of the definition of the term, and not whether (or not) she loves her husband, or stays up waiting for him to return from a lengthy business trip.


Most profoundly, a child takes his/her parents for granted, and they him/her. A mother does not renounce her son because he commits a crime or behaves boorishly. A son does not renounce his mother if she nags or disregards his ambitions. The relationship is unconditional. It is a fact of being, not of behaving. Marriage, one hopes, would likewise be unconditional. I would love my wife not merely while she’s pretty or willing to prepare my breakfasts or to launder my socks, but because she is who she is, and that is enough. To require otherwise it to cheapen the essence of human relationships, where every man is for himself, and only happenstance of temporary satisfaction prevents contractual agreement from being abrogated or a life’s work destroyed.

Last edited by ohio_peasant; 05-10-2013 at 05:03 PM..
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.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:42 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top