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.
May have been 1972. Crone is not a spring chicken. Although women had varying degrees of property rights and financial freedoms throughout history, it was technically legal for banks to refuse loans and credit to unmarried women (or require a husband’s permission for married applicants) until the Equal Credit Opportunity Act was passed in 1974.
I was responding to another post regarding women not being able to get credit.
It was shortly before the equal credit law was passed. Just 48 short years ago.
I'm 83, and have a long memory.
48 short years ago. lol You people talk about the conservatives living in the past. You can't move past the way women experienced life in 1972 or how blacks experienced life in the 1800's. The hyped up gender, race and class wars sure help one party gin up the base, don't they?
Yes. The house is marital property, no matter who's name is on the mortgage. As long as one spouse's income is enough to qualify for the loan, one spouse can sign, and they will still be going after both in a default because, as I said, the home is marital property. In the case of a divorce, all assets and debts are split, including the mortgage debt. But if they need both incomes to qualify, of course, both spouses need to sign.
My husband and I bought our first house together. My name was on the deed but not the loan because I knew I was going to be a SAHM and I wasn't going to have any income.
The reason why is because it is just about the only hope many men have of getting a woman. Men really have nothing else to offer. Traditionally, men could offer status, resources, or protection to a woman. All that stuff is redundant for women in the modern age, so men are reduced to essentially grovelling at the feet of women. Yes, it's pathetic, humiliating, and undignified, but the urge to mate is one of the strongest.
Expect increasingly bizarre social pathologies as male desperation reaches higher and higher levels.
This is true, but you have to ask why?
Traditionally, men could offer status, resources, or protection to a woman. All that stuff is redundant for women in the modern age, so men are reduced to essentially grovelling at the feet of women. Yes, it's pathetic, humiliating, and undignified, but the urge to mate is one of the strongest.
This actually made me laugh out loud!!! It's true that modern women don't generally NEED a man's status, resources, or protection anymore. Don't you see what this means? Men don't have to second guess if they are only being used for their wealth. Modern men and women are free to simply enjoy each other's company, explore interests, passion, and love, but for this to happen, men have to have a pleasing personality, interests, and more manners than can be found in Mom's basement. So many here see relationships as transactions, but that is old fashioned thinking.
This actually made me laugh out loud!!! It's true that modern women don't generally NEED a man's status, resources, or protection anymore. Don't you see what this means? Men don't have to second guess if they are only being used for their wealth. Modern men and women are free to simply enjoy each other's company, explore interests, passion, and love, but for this to happen, men have to have a pleasing personality, interests, and more manners than can be found in Mom's basement. So many here see relationships as transactions, but that is old fashioned thinking.
Keep pushing this strawman that men who are struggling with women are all basement dwelling, Cheeto eating, Mountain Dew drinking, video game/porn addicts, but it is just that, a strawman. We don't live in a world where all men are lame and all women are great, there are just as many low-tier women are there are low-tier men
48 short years ago. lol You people talk about the conservatives living in the past. You can't move past the way women experienced life in 1972 or how blacks experienced life in the 1800's. The hyped up gender, race and class wars sure help one party gin up the base, don't they?
I'm not living in the past. But the behavior of some people taught me just how mean humans can be. That's a lesson I will never forget. And shouldn't.
I come every day to politics and other controversies as a reminder. Some among us here would go back to Jim Crow in NY minute.
Being in the middle of a miscarriage and needing treatment before you lose too much blood and having to wait for another physician to say, I concur might mark one forever. Going back in time? We are there in my state.
Do women really want "well off, successful men?" That is not what I'm seeing. It seems to me that women do not want rich, successful, etc men. Women do not want a man's money and status, they want their own money and status. Women do not want "alphas," they want to be the alphas. I've heard many accounts of men saying that they're doing better financially and career wise than ever before, but are also getting less female attention than they did when they were young and broke. How many high-earning professional guys are struggling just to get a date?
Money and status mean nothing to women anymore because
-being a woman is the ultimate status now
-women under the age of 35 currently out-earn their male counterparts
-women gain very little from having a man in their lives. Men on the other hand, can gain a massive status boost from being seen with a woman, as well as social and emotional support that they could never get as a single guy
-women get free money thrown at them constantly.
apparently I can't rep you again, but all very good points. Then I kept reading down the page and found another good post after another good post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taggerung
Keep pushing this strawman that men who are struggling with women are all basement dwelling, Cheeto eating, Mountain Dew drinking, video game/porn addicts, but it is just that, a strawman. We don't live in a world where all men are lame and all women are great, there are just as many low-tier women are there are low-tier men
All it really takes is to be passive. For all the progress we've made as a species most women still expect the man to lead and even liberal women are attracted to men more dominant than they are. Regardless of all their feminist talk you can't undo a million years of evolution. The other major point is lack of social skills, being able to build chemistry by being playful is perhaps the skill some men lack the most. They are too serious, because they did not have a group of friends who talked bleep to one another and things of that sort when they were kids. Think the movie "Stand by me" ... just having coming of age adventures of that sort goes a long way towards making a man a man, as opposed to a sheltered helicopter upbringing where the kid is in front of a screen.
Most men think it comes down to looks and money. Looks can get her in the bedroom, but your personality is what gets her to stay, bottom line. If it was an RPG game with stats it would look something like this... money 10 point scale, looks 10 point scale, Personality 25 point scale, so personality is double weighted, if not triple weighted. Looks and money account for very little in the end, unless you get her from a less developed nation where they are still living in survival mode. You can buy her loyalty and companionship, but cannot buy genuine affection and chemistry, which comes from being interesting, playful, and confident.
Do women really want "well off, successful men?" That is not what I'm seeing. It seems to me that women do not want rich, successful, etc men. Women do not want a man's money and status, they want their own money and status. Women do not want "alphas," they want to be the alphas. I've heard many accounts of men saying that they're doing better financially and career wise than ever before, but are also getting less female attention than they did when they were young and broke. How many high-earning professional guys are struggling just to get a date?
Money and status mean nothing to women anymore because
-being a woman is the ultimate status now
-women under the age of 35 currently out-earn their male counterparts
-women gain very little from having a man in their lives. Men on the other hand, can gain a massive status boost from being seen with a woman, as well as social and emotional support that they could never get as a single guy
-women get free money thrown at them constantly.
I don't know what it is that you are seeing, but I am seeing successful men and women marrying each other constantly. I'm mostly around successful people so that is who I see every day. I cant speak for what is going on in other socioeconomic communities, but you are delving into my world now. Let's pretend there aren't a lot of other things besides success and money for a minute, $2M a year together, still goes a lot farther the $1M a year each, separately. That still makes pairing up a lot more attractive than going it alone. Just from a financial standpoint.
I really don't know a whole lot of high earning professional guys that are struggling to get a date. And as I said in another post, older, heavier, married me gets a lot more female attention than younger, good looking, trim me got. Your theory is the exact opposite of what I am seeing in real 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.
