Is Divorce Too easy? (long-term, man, single, cheating)
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.
Nope, someone that would go without a safety boat has not planned properly.
I safety kayak for distance swimmer every summer, there is nothing else to call it but bad planning. That's not a sign of commitment. It's a sign of being reckless.
Jesus dude. you are taking this way too literally!
I don't think marriage is that hard either. I don't think my wife finds our marriage "work" either. There are levels on which I agree with you to be honest, however, what you appear to be advocating for is a system where lazy or dysfunctional marriage partners have their marriages, marriages that they are not capable of sustaining themselves, maintained through coercion by The State. Doesn't The State do enough damage already?
I think the present Divorce Statutes incentivise women to seek out high or moderate net worth men, stay with them for a time, and then divorce them for 50% of assets that they did not have anything to do with acquiring. They are not the majority. The majority are women who are at least capable of surviving on their own assets,but don't turn down the additional wealth from a successful divorce outcome.
But... guy... don't you have a sense of irony? I mean... three strikes... you do realize that the odds are pretty good that you have some... deficits as a marriage partner. Your experience is not the best test case for a need for more restrictive divorce statutes. Maybe the opposite? You aren't planning on getting hitched again by any chance, are you? I would counsel against it.
You're right. It's no one's business but the parties involved. In fact all these topics should never be discussed in a forum.
Most folks on here seem to be missing my point. It's about commitment. You took a vow. You made a promise. You said you were going to do something. You made a promise to stay together until death do you part. Now you want to go back on your word because you are not happy (again, see my exceptions).
My point is, don't get married if you aren't willing to stick it out through the tough times. If you can bail any time you want then what does marriage mean? Just live together and become domestic partners or something.
This applies to both men and women.
I do get your point; not agreeing is different from not getting.
How can an outside party get high and mighty about someone else's divorce? If you are not in the marriage yourself, then you do not know what has gone on in the marriage.
I totally agree with you here. It's not that divorce is too easy, it's marriage that's too easy. I think in order to get a marriage license a couple must go though classes and pass a test just like any other license. The class would be something like relationship dynamics, budgeting and finance, family planning, and analysis of lifelong goals. That's the real issue with the type of divorce the OP is talking about.
The way to cut those kinds of divorces is to prevent ill fitting marriages in the first place. Kind of like the best way the best cure to any disease is prevention... you know what they say an ounce of that stuff can do.
And I would have to agree here too. I do a lot of water sports and rule #1 is plan and stuck to the plan. Just jumping in with no support network or no buddy is just plain stupid. The second person is more likely to drown and die (or more likely lie about swimming the channel since there are no witnesses).
I get what they poster is trying to say with the analogy, but it's not the best analogy.
Maybe I'm thinking this wrong. I agree, it is marriage that is too easy. Excellent idea!
Okay, maybe the swimming analogy wasn't the best but I think most people get my point.
How can an outside party get high and mighty about someone else's divorce? If you are not in the marriage yourself, then you do not know what has gone on in the marriage.
Right. So many internet dudes talk about marriage and divorce as if it's something that you have no control over. If you take marriage seriously and don't want to get divorced, make good choices, starting with whom you marry. Other people's bad decisions are none of your business and don't need to be regulated.
I don't think marriage is that hard either. I don't think my wife finds our marriage "work" either. There are levels on which I agree with you to be honest, however, what you appear to be advocating for is a system where lazy or dysfunctional marriage partners have their marriages, marriages that they are not capable of sustaining themselves, maintained through coercion by The State. Doesn't The State do enough damage already?
Again, congratulations. You are one of the lucky ones that founs agreat partner (and you are one as well).
The state sanctioned the marriage to begin with so yes, they can dictate how it ends.
I think the present Divorce Statutes incentivise women to seek out high or moderate net worth men, stay with them for a time, and then divorce them for 50% of assets that they did not have anything to do with acquiring. They are not the majority. The majority are women who are at least capable of surviving on their own assets,but don't turn down the additional wealth from a successful divorce outcome.
True.
But... guy... don't you have a sense of irony? I mean... three strikes... you do realize that the odds are pretty good that you have some... deficits as a marriage partner. Your experience is not the best test case for a need for more restrictive divorce statutes. Maybe the opposite? You aren't planning on getting hitched again by any chance, are you? I would counsel against it.
I'm 60 year old and have no plans of getting married again. Not even dating. Yes, I admitted I am not the easiest guy to live with however I'm pretty good at learning from my mistakes and try to change accordingly. But it does reinforce my point, if divorce was not an option then I would have had no choice but to swallow my pride (as a younger man) and do some self analysis as to what my problems were and then try to fix them. I'm sure it would have made me a better person. Instead, divorce allowed me to continue to be a d!ck without be forced to confront my evil ways!
But as BellaLind said, if I had made better choices prior to getting married I probably wouldn't be a 3 time loser.
Why should any person have to justify their desire to be divorced? If they can't do that, then they should be forced to stay married? How does that benefit anyone? Strange way of thinking, in my view.
Really?
Why does a person have to justify why they are going to take 50% of the man's possessions or more, including son's, daughter's, etc???
Why does a person have to justify why they are going to take 50% of the man's possessions or more, including son's, daughter's, etc???
Why do you assume that is what happens? BTW, sons and daughters are not possessions.
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.
