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.
A relationship can't last when only one party is getting their needs met and the other party is not. A woman might stay in this unbalanced relationship for a long time, even years, but eventually she is going to move on, or at least she should.
In my opinion, a smart woman won't involve herself with a man who is unable or unwilling to meet her long-term needs in the first place. Too bad that it usually takes women too long to figure it out. Women eventually learn to not be so quick to give their hearts away to undeserving men.
Men also select. Don't you? You choose which women to approach. Then they have a turn, and decide if they're interested. It's a mutual selection process. That's the big challenge--finding mutual interest. It's a 2-way street. The women who may be crushing on you don't stand a chance if you don't choose them. Everyone gets a shot at choosing.
Whoever makes more money may have problems in the divorce process. Not all divorces are contentious (as some of our own posters have told us in the past--they just wanted out, they didn't want to fight over assets). If the woman brought more assets into the bargain during the marriage, she risks getting ripped off. In a lot of cases these days, both earn close to equally, so the divorce is straightforward. Marriage is only a potentially dangerous proposition for the person who has the most earning power. So dudes, if you don't want to have to worry about it, go for a woman who earns the same as you, or more. Or go for a woman who's paying off a mortgage during the marriage. Then you get part of her house if you divorce.
Its already hard enough just finding women who will do what I want them to do in bed and who don't have baby fever and who are in my league that im at least marginally attracted too. After those 3 things that leaves like 20% of women left if that. I could not imagine having tedious income requirements on top of that. I just tell them it will be a very very long time before I get remarried.
Even if a woman earns almost the same its no guarantee.
It was a womans world when the courts had just started shifting and guys were getting caught with their pants down. But now the word is out and its not working out for a lot of women like they would have hoped. Guys are more afraid of commitment then ever.
The custodial parent has the most to lose financially after divorce. That's usually the mother. Custodial parents shoulder a larger percentage of child-rearing costs and their responsibilities prevent them from maximizing their earning power or advancing their careers.
Custodial parents take a hard hit financially after divorce. The noncustodial parent's earning power is uninterrupted.
Why do you think men so rarely seek custody of their children? Because they dont want to, that's why. If there are children, it's the mothers who are the primary child care providers. Divorce court merely recognizes the same patriarchy that is the reality in most marriages with children.
Its already hard enough just finding women who will do what I want them to do in bed and who don't have baby fever and who are in my league that im at least marginally attracted too. After those 3 things that leaves like 20% of women left if that. I could not imagine having tedious income requirements on top of that. I just tell them it will be a very very long time before I get remarried.
Even if a woman earns almost the same its no guarantee.
It was a womans world when the courts had just started shifting and guys were getting caught with their pants down. But now the word is out and its not working out for a lot of women like they would have hoped. Guys are more afraid of commitment then ever.
Funny. I still see people marrying and cohabitating and breeding left and right.
When a woman wants more, more, more from a man, she's a "high maintenance heffa" and a "gold digger" So if a man is this way with a woman, (her best is never enough), what is the charming colloquialism used to describe him?
The custodial parent has the most to lose financially after divorce. That's usually the mother. Custodial parents shoulder a larger percentage of child-rearing costs and their responsibilities prevent them from maximizing their earning power or advancing their careers.
Custodial parents take a hard hit financially after divorce. The noncustodial parent's earning power is uninterrupted.
Why do you think men so rarely seek custody of their children? Because they dont want to, that's why. If there are children, it's the mothers who are the primary child care providers. Divorce court merely recognizes the same patriarchy that is the reality in most marriages with children.
But how much more careful would a woman be if there was no such thing as child support or alimony. How much more would she temper her baby fever and remember her birth control. How much more careful would she be about maybe not choosing the biker bad boy.
The current paradigm allows women to be careless and wreckless and if they are hot having a child in tow does not slow them down like it does for a guy.
But how much more careful would a woman be if there was no such thing as child support or alimony. How much more would she temper her baby fever and remember her birth control. How much more careful would she be about maybe not choosing the biker bad boy.
The current paradigm allows women to be careless and wreckless and if they are hot having a child in tow does not slow them down like it does for a guy.
There's good and bad that comes with this. The good is that it encourages men to be more responsible.
At least for me, with my knowledge of the rape culture and child support, I've been VERY careful over the years in who I sleep with and get involved with.
Also, avoiding women as you describe is pretty easy. It's one of the reasons that I don't date single moms: I don't see why I should have to help raise the offspring of the bad boy she decided to shack up with in her prime reproductive years.
But how much more careful would a woman be if there was no such thing as child support or alimony. How much more would she temper her baby fever and remember her birth control. How much more careful would she be about maybe not choosing the biker bad boy.
The current paradigm allows women to be careless and wreckless and if they are hot having a child in tow does not slow them down like it does for a guy.
I am not really on board with alimony in most situations (only maybe something like a long term marriage when the husband and wife agreed the wife won't work and then later the husband walks out on her). Things are changing towards that in most places... and fading away... although there are states that are behind. Mine isn't, so if there are problems in your state, go get involved and change your laws like people did where I live.
But as for child support, you won't see that go away and I don't think it should. You can't take away responsibility from one parent and not the other. Both made a kid together and both can deal with the consequences. It's not like a men don't know that having sex could lead to a baby. They know it's a possible outcome.
I say this because what happens if parents don't need to pay for the children they bring into the world? The rest of us pay for the child through taxes and social programs. Why should tax payers pay the burden? Because you know that's what would happen. I say let BOTH parents pay for their choice to have a child and leave me and my tax dollars out of it. If you don't want to father a child or pay child support, use birth control or don't sleep around with random women. Same thing goes for women if they don't want a child. And if you do want to be a parent and something goes wrong, be an adult about it and be responsible--make sure you take care of your child.
I am not really on board with alimony in most situations (only maybe something like a long term marriage when the husband and wife agreed the wife won't work and then later the husband walks out on her). Things are changing towards that in most places... and fading away... although there are states that are behind. Mine isn't, so if there are problems in your state, go get involved and change your laws like people did where I live.
But as for child support, you won't see that go away and I don't think it should. You can't take away responsibility from one parent and not the other. Both made a kid together and both can deal with the consequences. It's not like a men don't know that having sex could lead to a baby. They know it's a possible outcome.
I say this because what happens if parents don't need to pay for the children they bring into the world? The rest of us pay for the child through taxes and social programs. Why should tax payers pay the burden? Because you know that's what would happen. I say let BOTH parents pay for their choice to have a child and leave me and my tax dollars out of it. If you don't want to father a child or pay child support, use birth control or don't sleep around with random women. Same thing goes for women if they don't want a child. And if you do want to be a parent and something goes wrong, be an adult about it and be responsible--make sure you take care of your child.
I agree with you in theory, but we all know in practice there are some gross over simplifications here. Women have access to far more forms of birth control then men do and women are FAR more likely to have baby fever. Since they are the ones geneticly hard wired for kids and have more birth control options they should shoulder more of the responsibility. Also I think child support should be fault based, if the woman had majority fault the guy should get a free pass to walk away. Women should not be allowed to be bratty and prudes or cheaters and make the guy pay out while she is off banging some other guy.
If the guy leaves or otherwise engages in some highly undesirable behavoir then child support is justified.
We as a socity should not be supporting poor decisions on the part of men or women, but in this day and time women end up initiating 3/4 of divorces because they dont have as much to loose. The innocient party to a divorce or break up should not have any ties to that relationship if they dont want them.
I agree with you in theory, but we all know in practice there are some gross over simplifications here. Women have access to far more forms of birth control then men do and women are FAR more likely to have baby fever. Since they are the ones geneticly hard wired for kids and have more birth control options they should shoulder more of the responsibility. Also I think child support should be fault based, if the woman had majority fault the guy should get a free pass to walk away. Women should not be allowed to be bratty and prudes or cheaters and make the guy pay out while she is off banging some other guy.
If the guy leaves or otherwise engages in some highly undesirable behavoir then child support is justified.
We as a socity should not be supporting poor decisions on the part of men or women, but in this day and time women end up initiating 3/4 of divorces because they dont have as much to loose. The innocient party to a divorce or break up should not have any ties to that relationship if they dont want them.
It takes two to have sex, how could one be more at fault???
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.
