Unmarried Americans are at all time high (kid, divorced, couple)
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.
[Snip.]...just be plain about it. probably left the relationship materially better than she came into it and left you dumped on your head with a huge financial mess to clean up and recover from. Just tell me you learned your lesson at least.
Good grief. Love how you immediately leapt to such a conclusion that the poster made no mention of.
Finally a woman comes in here and gives it straight (I should take a picture so
I can remember this rare moment.)
Its nothing new on these threads for women to argue that often women are the ones to choose not to marry because they simply do not need marriage as they once did.
Quote:
Men are mostly the same idiots they've always been. It's really women
who's tastes and habits have changed and account for most of the dropping
marriage rates. They simply feel less pressure to do so because society
tolerates them living like male bachelors until all their eggs dry up, if that's
what they wanna do. They figure "someday", until someday leaves them 35+ and too
set in their ways by then to ever make it work with anybody. That ship sailed.
I agree, but statistically after 40 it is generally equal percent of men and women who have married for the first time (CDC).
Quote:
The other (much smaller) piece of the equation is men. Some of the smarter ones
have started to realize what a bad deal it is for men and have actively chosen
to avoid it. And in fact the more of an "eligible" bachelor you are, the more
sense it makes to avoid it. These guys are still in the vast minority of men
though.
This is where you have to elaborate. So far no one has spelled out just how marriage is a bad deal for men as opposed to women.
You stated that women have changed and do not feel the need for marriage because women are able to secure their own substantial income. So why would it be a bad deal for men to marry (double income) and why would there not be as many eligible bachelorettes who actively chose to avoid marriage. Your points seem a bit contradictory.
Fair enough, but choosing to marry someone might be one of the most important life choices you may ever make. I see nothing wrong with looking at all angles of such a choice. There is a difference between being ruled by fear, and being prudent and really thinking things over.
My first marriage, I was young, went into it with the seashells and balloons, "love will conquer all", fearless, idealistic mind set; maybe that's how you should go into marriage, IDK, but we ended up divorcing, and all I worked for in those 10 years was pretty much gone. I know it's not always good to let money rule you, and be your only love, but there's nothing wrong with covering your ass-ets either.
I agree, but out of curiosity in those 10 years were you the only one working and financially or otherwise supporting your family to gain those things lost? Did your wife not work, did she not make it so that you could advance in your job, was she not a partner in building a home, life and assets?
And wouldn't it stand to reason that a person in your financial situation be attracted to and choose a similar person. A person that has the same level of education, similar goals, similar discipline, similar income level and assets/debt. And I do think that is the norm. That is why it is frustrating to listen to the continual complaining of men who believe and perpetuate the fears that only men lose and suffer financially in divorce. If your mate is in the same boat as you are then their risk is equal in a divorce.
That sounds fine in theory but reality shows otherwise most of the time. Due to our nature that dictates who and what is attractive to us, men usually end up marrying below their socioeconomic class while women overwhelmingly choose to marry up. It's inherently a savvy career move to jump into cahoots with someone of higher means and greater resources than yourself, and that's generally what female nature dictates women are attracted to in opposite sex mates. Almost totally win-win all the way around. For men it's inherently more of a calculated risk/sacrifice than a savvy business move to decide to contractually make equal with somebody who makes half of what you do and probably spends twice as much...no CPA would put their blessing on that deal. The calculated risk and roll of the dice is that she will be a loyal companion who will be there for you and will bare you healthy children who might go on to do big things someday. Dicey at best.
I see the same thing. Though, I do at times see situations where like I could be in (I'm not now) where I got through undergrad with little debt (now paid off) and grad school without any debt (in state student at a flagship U), but often date women that while they earn more, they have large amounts of student loan debt from going to rather expensive private schools. The woman I'm seeing now has just into six figures of student loan debt. I could see that giving people pause.
Definitely something to consider and discuss. My ex had some student debt, no where near 6 figures, when we married and I had none. You will in one way or another absorb your partners debt, so that would give me pause. Marriage is give and take and sharing so one has to be able to accept that.
That sounds fine in theory but reality shows otherwise most of the time. Due to our nature that dictates who and what is attractive to us, men usually end up marrying below their socioeconomic class while women overwhelmingly choose to marry up. It's inherently a savvy career move to jump into cahoots with someone of higher means and greater resources than yourself, and that's generally what female nature dictates women are attracted to in opposite sex mates. Almost totally win-win all the way around. For men it's inherently more of a calculated sacrifice than a savvy business move to decide to contractually make equal with somebody who makes half of what you do and probably spends twice as much...no CPA would put their blessing on that deal. The calculated risk and roll of the dice is that she will be a loyal companion who will be there for you and will bare you healthy children who might go on to do big things someday. Dicey at best.
No it is not inherent. It is an excuse same as dismissing personal responsibility by saying "boys will be boys".
What I see, and Im pretty sure stats back it up, is that people generally marry within the same socioeconomic level. Most people make a conscious decision not to engage in such a lopsided deal, others are thinking with another part of their anatomy.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,981,862 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
No it is not inherent. It is an excuse same as dismissing personal responsibility by saying "boys will be boys".
What I see, and Im pretty sure stats back it up, is that people generally marry within the same socioeconomic level. Most people make a conscious decision not to engage in such a lopsided deal, others are thinking with another part of their anatomy.
You are correct. This is overwhelmingly the case. It is, by the account of many studies, one of the primary reasons for growing socioeconomic disparity in society (aka rich getting richer).
You stated that women have changed and do not feel the need for marriage because women are able to secure their own substantial income. So why would it be a bad deal for men to marry (double income) and why would there not be as many eligible bachelorettes who actively chose to avoid marriage. Your points seem a bit contradictory.
Yes it seems the thought process here is, women don't get married today because they are financially independent and "don't need no man." (which is bad) Men don't marry because all that is available are deadbeat women who will be dependent and demand alimony after a divorce. (which is bad)
It's bull**** and just more gender bashing.
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.
Good grief. Love how you immediately leapt to such a conclusion that the poster made no mention of.
, when we married and I had none. You will in one way or another absorb your partners debt, so that would give me pause. Marriage is give and take and sharing so one has to be able to accept that.