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.
2mares is arguing that stay at home parents are at "risk" of being "in the poorhouse" after a divorce or spousal death because "they have no skills."
I've named countless examples of why that isn't true. If a burger flipper marries a billionaire, it's not the burger flipper who is taking a risk.
I couldn't care less who gets what in a divorce, I'm pointing out that stay at home parents are far from being at risk of being in the poor house, so long as they didn't marry someone who was broke.
This is the part of the post I responded to. You are clearly talking about divorce, not death. You even highlighted it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocko20
One reason folks get married, is the legal financial protections that come with a divorce via a judge. I don't see the ex-wife of Jeff Bezos or Bill Gates in the poor house. What are their marketable skills again? Did they go back to working full time after their divorce? No. All they did was marry someone with money, then divorce them.
Not sure why this is on the Political and other Controversies rather than Relationships.
This is a controversial topic that would probably have been locked there. The normal people including the elites are trying to cancel and censor Incel groups. Maybe they should maybe they shouldn't...its a toxic movement that fuels hatred and resentment but so are a big chunk of the other groups the left promote as victims...why not let the Incels have their victim status also?
Many of these men feel powerless to change themselves. They need guidance not redicule or censorship. The red pill movement is designed to be a non toxic alternative to PUA to encourage men to develop the skills to turn a woman on and keep her around. Its designed to promote positivity and empower a man to be his best rather than hold a angry bitterness over female nature like so many of these men do. It doesn't always work at some of the toxic men have infiltrated that group also.
A lot of men haven't accepted the fact of the dating Market is the harshest free-market that exists that in order to acquire Goods they have to provide enough value to acquire said Goods. A man has to bring something to the table every person has to bring something to the table. Men have to be extra careful carefup because the courts are against them but those are the rules right now and you got to play the game with the cards you're dealt. Accept the risks or fold? The choice is yours.
Why would you expect a woman who is young enough to be your daughter would want to date you? A 20-something who wanted to date you would be someone with daddy issues.
And this is why some men are perpetually lonely and sexless.
2mares is arguing that stay at home parents are at "risk" of being "in the poorhouse" after a divorce or spousal death because "they have no skills."
I've named countless examples of why that isn't true. If a burger flipper marries a billionaire, it's not the burger flipper who is taking a risk.
I couldn't care less who gets what in a divorce, I'm pointing out that stay at home parents are far from being at risk of being in the poor house, so long as they didn't marry someone who was broke.
And many are. Your naming millionaires. I'm talking about average people. Of course if your married to someone worth 100 million dollars your not going to be at risk. There is a lot of area between broke and a billionaire.
Wow you just solved poverty, women should never get married or have kids unless they have PhD in rocket science. There's no such thing as a rich divorced woman in your world.
If you say so, whatever. What I said was dont be dependent on another person for your wellbeing, survival and future
Breaking news, a single parent family will generally always make less than a married family. It doesn't matter what job she or he has.
Yes this is true. It will matter though that he/she had a job, work experience and raises. Finding yourself 35 years old with no work background you are not going to be able to secure anything more than entry level minimum wage.
Not every person is going to be a doctor, lawyer, and CEO. The notion that stay at home parents are too "stupid" to get child support, alimony, life insurance, or a division of assets, in the case of a divorce or death of a spouse, is an insult to all of them. Ofcourse a single parent won't be able to afford the mortgage on a family home after a divorce to their CEO spouse, that's where the judge comes in to decide who gets what.
Again, I never insinuated everyone is going to be a doctor, lawyer or CEO, nor did I insinuate SAH parent don’t get CS, spousal support. Just FYI, many states don’t allow spousal if your married less than so many years and in most states it is temporary. Again the average CS is 400/month if you can actually get it.
Now this is where it is difficult on the working non custodial spouse as well. You will be having around 50% of your net income garnished.
Dr Dres ex wife was still awarded $100 million after the divorce, yet she was a lawyer, and their kids are fully grown. Please enlighten us again on how stay at home parents are "lazy and stupid."
Quote:
Under the terms of the settlement, Young will get $50 million immediately and the other $50 million in one year, the sources said https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...ement-n1286739
One reason folks get married, is the legal financial protections that come with a divorce via a judge. I don't see the ex-wife of Jeff Bezos or Bill Gates in the poor house. What are their marketable skills again? Did they go back to working full time after their divorce? No. All they did was marry someone with money, then divorce them.
Your talking about millionaires.
So before you paint every stay at home parent as stupid and lazy or "one divorce away from the poor house." Please educate yourself on the reality of the situation: whether that be the division of assets, alimony, child support, spousal support, life insurance, property, investments, etc. that are more than enough to ensure a stay at home parent is protected. Not everyone marries broke people.
I never painted every SAHM parent as stupid. Not even one. That is all you saying that. What I said was dont be dependent on another person for your wellbeing, survival and future.
I think perhaps you need to educate your self on the reality of how divorce, the courts and actually receiving spousal support and child support works. How many divorces have you had? How many child support court hearings?
Most people are not Dr. Dre or Jeff Bezo or Bill Gates. The real median personal income in the US less than 50K/year. Not sure what life insurance has to do with anything. About 40% of couples in the US own their home outright and of course most of those are boomers. Only ~15% of millennials are mortgage free. So splitting the equity isn’t all that much generally. As well the property needs to sell first unless one party has cash on hand to buy the other out.
I can go to Eastern Europe and get me a mail order bride who doesn't even know English, marry her, then divorce her the next day and I will still be obligated to provide her spousal support for a decade via
Depends on the state. Actually after a day it would be a annulment and spousal support is not typically granted for annulments. Many state base spousal support on the length of the marriage.
It's unfortunate that good men get their hearts broke, and it's unfortunate when good women get their hearts broke, by selfish and narcissistic partners.
I have more sympathy than I did in the past for people who jump into things in the "heat of the moment" when they don't really know much about each other, and then grow apart over time. It's why marrying when one is older and more mature makes more sense. Most people are not that mature in their 20's of either gender. Getting together with one's high school sweetheart and staying together for life might seem romantic, but it's not very practical in most cases and is only going to work if both partners have very similar value systems from a very young age, and even then the desire to "sow one's oats" often gets in the way. It's just the way we are wired through evolution and the way culture pushes us to "experience everything."
Some men are bitter about this claiming women "give away their best years to alpha males" ... hey hormones do crazy things to people when they are young... lay off the bitterness it's not good for you. The 20's are the identity forming years. Often both genders want to have fun and engage in their thrill-seeking activities. The 30's are applying what one has learned in the 20's and making responsible choices. The 40's are for excelling on what one made in the 30's, by in large. Some people are late bloomers. Growth and maturation are a process, and should ideally continue throughout adult life.
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.
