Today’s post is a Trifecta of Doom.
I. Marriage continues its steep decline.
Today’s Economix blog at the New York Times covers the latest study on marriage from the Pew Research center in Older to Wed, If They Marry at All. Using the 2010 census, researchers found that the average age at marriage has risen again, to 26.5 years for women and 28.7 years for men. This is not unique to the U.S. In the last thirty years, the average female age at first marriage has increased in 75 of 77 countries that were studied.
The number of marriages is also down significantly, down 10% in the last two years:
It’s not just a matter of delay either. Check this out:
Some have claimed the economy is the culprit but Wharton economist Justin Wolfers had this to say in 2010:
You’ve probably heard the latest marriage narrative: With the recession upon us, young lovers can’t afford to marry. As appealing as this story is, it has one problem: It’s not true. In fact, the marriage rate appears amazingly insensitive to the business cycle.
There is a rise in cohabitation that could well be related to the Great Recession, because couples are trying to save money by living together. Many of them eventually will marry.
The biggest drop has been in the 18-24 age group, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. The mid-20s is the sweet spot for the lowest odds of divorce, according to some researchers.
Late professor Norval Glenn of UT Austin, in his published study drawing from five different American data sets,
explained:
The greatest…likelihood of being in an intact marriage of the highest quality is among those who married at age 22-25. The findings of this study do indicate that for most persons, little or nothing in the way of marital success is likely to be gained by deliberately delaying marriage beyond the midtwenties.
Paul Amato of Penn State explains further:
Once people enter their early to mid-twenties, the risk of divorce is reduced. Indeed, people who postpone marriage until their thirties face a dwindling supply of potential partners – a situation that may increase the likelihood of forming unions with partners who are not good marriage material. In other words, marrying “too late” may increase the risk of having a troubled relationship.
W. Bradford Wilcox at UVA agrees:
Couples who marry in their mid-twenties tend to do best, when you combine a consideration of quality and stability.
II. The college sex ratio predicts a dramatic erosion in marriage rates over the next generation among the educated.
At first glance, the news is less alarming for the college educated, if not for society as a whole. The share of college educated individuals currently married is 64%, down 16% from 1960. In contrast, only 47% of those with a high school education are currently married, down 35% since 1960. Marriage has been a more stable institution among the college educated population.
That cannot last. The current sex ratio nationwide in American colleges and universities is 57% female, 43% male, and the gap is widening. This means that among today’s college graduates, 25% of women will not marry college educated men. Let me say that again.
Among today’s college graduates, 25% of women will not marry college educated men.
That estimate is actually rosy because it assumes that men will want to marry in equal numbers to women. The data was not analyzed by sex, but in an era of misandrist family law that’s a dubious claim.
Of course, women may choose to marry men with less education than themselves, but this seems unlikely to happen in large numbers for several reasons:
- Women generally prefer men with equal or higher status.
- Men generally prefer women with equal or lower status.
- Society is stratified by socioeconomic status.
III. Tick Tock Biological Clock
Despite progressive sex ed curricula in most areas of the country, adult women today are seriously misinformed about the state of their ovaries.
During a recent story that aired on NPR one infertile woman in her early 40s couldn’t understand it. She insisted that she works out regularly, does yoga, even has a personal trainer. She eats well and is healthy. She never knew that her ovaries were becoming less productive in spite of those measures.
A recent survey found that women dramatically underestimate how much fertility declines with age. They estimated that a 30 year-old had an 80% chance of getting pregnant in one try. The real likelihood is 30%. They also thought a 40 year-old woman would have a 40% success rate, while those odds are less than 10%.
Women are surprised to learn this information and they’re angry about it. One woman had this to say about her 10 year struggle to conceive:
I just feel like it’s something else that they lump onto women that we have no control over. You tell us, “Oh, your fertile years rapidly decline in your mid-20s.” Well, if I’m not dating anyone, and I want to have a family, what is that information going to do for me?
Barbara Collura heads the National Infertility Association. She says the first thing women say is “Why didn’t anybody tell me this?”
Let’s be honest, women don’t want to hear that they can’t have it all. We can have a great job, we can have a master’s degree, we don’t need to worry about child-bearing because that’s something that will come. And when it doesn’t happen, women are really angry.
So why aren’t women getting the message? How can women with master’s degrees have such a poor understanding of their own bodies? Three guesses, the first two don’t count.
“A decade ago, a campaign by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine sparked a vicious backlash. Ads on public buses in several big cities featured a baby bottle shaped like an hourglass, to warn women their time was running out. But women’s rights groups called it a scare tactic that left women feeling pressured and guilty.”
So now they’re feeling barren and depressed instead.
The prognosis for marriage is grim. We need to take our heads out of the sand and speak the truth about this issue. It’s too late for the generation of women in their 30s and 40s today. Those of you in your 20s can have marriage and a family if you want it, but you can’t have it all. My generation of feminists lied to you about that.
You have some tough choices to make. What’s more important, career or family? When you think about graduate school, are you considering the full range of costs and benefits, including potentially delaying marriage into your 30s? Are you open to meeting your life partner in your early 20s, and filtering out men you know aren’t husband material?
There are no easy answers. The climate for marriage is hostile. If you know you want to marry and have a family, you must plan for it. Husbands and babies don’t fall from trees.
No related posts.
{ 1181 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 8 »
@ Höllenhund
I don’t Miranda is that similar to Gisele. They are both very slim, but I believe Gisele is more naturally straight up and down whereas Miranda keeps her weight down by exercising and eating very healthy (not saying that Gisele doesn’t, I just think she has a body which is very boyish by nature). Miranda is a health freak and eats organic only. I also think she has slightly more of a small waist and defined butt, she just keeps her weight very low. I think Miranda have the tendencies to develop more of a pear shape if she gained weight. She also looks a bit “softer” than Gisele, whose body seems to be very hard.
By the way, I have earned the respect of girls in the past by bad-mouthing and making fun of other girls. It’s just the way girl-world works, for some reason. People loved me when I was a gossip.
Olive´s last [type] ..Christmas Trees
Emily,
I’m curious, have you ever talked about a girl behind her back?
I find it very hard to believe that a girl isn’t “into intra-sexual competition.” In my experience, it hasn’t been an easy choice. Like I said to Malia, I can play the game and people will love me, or I can sit out and have no friends. I waffle back and forth, because I actually hate who I am when I become a gossip, but I also hate who I am when I don’t have friends. The solution, I think, will be being choosy about who my friends are.
Olive´s last [type] ..Christmas Trees
Most people don’t understand the difference between joint custody and custodial time. Parents can have joint custody but not equal custodial time. In the case of Kobe, he will likely have joint custody but would not really be able to make a solid argument for 50/50 custodial time because of his travel schedule. He would have to keep the children in the care of a paid caregiver and courts usually will not favor a paid caregiver over a present parent.
To bring another celebrity case to light, Russell Simmons shares custody of his children with his ex-wife, however the children live with her. He provides generous child support, despite the fact that Kimora has a substantial income of her own.
http://allhiphop.com/2008/06/28/russell-simmons-defends-child-support-ruling/
I bring this forth as an example of a decent man, an alpha both socially and economically (an important distinction I must say), who “bangs hot chicks” that most of the alphas here would drool over. Is probably a perfect example of the older guy hot young girlfriend (as he is fond of dating models), but still is an all around good guy without the bitterness, antagonism and axe to grind against women.
>> I’m curious, have you ever talked about a girl behind her back?
I find it very hard to believe that a girl isn’t “into intra-sexual competition.”
Haha sorry, I meant for that comment to be tongue-in-cheek. I thought the winky smiley made that clear, but Internet sarcasm has a way of failing.
Crap, yeah I can’t even pick up on sarcasm in real life lol. Ignore what I said!
Olive´s last [type] ..Christmas Trees
Vanessa’s getting the mansion Kobe bought in 2001 and he’s been kicked out.
http://www.tmz.com/2011/12/17/kobe-bryant-vanessa-mansion-home-newport-beach/#.Tu0q4Fb2K8A
American divorce is just outrageously unfair to men.
I do generally get along with my female friends though. I tend to have a bunch of random individual friends and groups that I sort of loosely hang out with rather than an actual “clique” though. I have a few close friends, but overall I’m kind of a “floater”. I think that maybe prevents the more brutal aspects of female social interaction. Like if I complain about one close friend to another one of my close friends, they don’t know each other anyways so it’s not really doing any harm. My very closest friends also tend to be other geeks, which I think also helps to prevent the stereotypical High School Cheerleader behaviour. I have guy friends as well, but my closest friends are definitely female.
Anne–
I just did a google images of Miranda Kerr. She’s got a very very pretty delightfully pretty face. Fairly nice butt too.
@ Doug
I know, she is my favourite model, I think she is one of the most beautiful and feminine women around today. She’s got a great sense of style too. No wonder she got Orlando Bloom.
Personally, I find her body perfect. To some she may be too skinny, but I think her face and long legs make up for it anyway.
“16 is plenty old enough for sex to not be statutory rape, and almost all of the world outside of the feminist taken over US thinks so.”
Doug1…
To you and all those who co-signed this statement, I want to see a show of hands (figuratively of course)…
How many of you would consider your 16 year old daughter having sex okay…
Would you consider her dating someone your current age appropreate.
What would be the oldest man you would permit your 16 year old daughter to date.
I look forward to reading the responses… because I really want to know ~JS
Jhane Sez–
The age of consent is 16 in the largest number of states. It’s only 18 in 11 states but one of them is California, the seat of our TV and movie industries. Connecticut and New Jersey, two liberal states, set it at 16, NY sets it at 17, as does similarly large population Texas.
I would prefer my 16 yo daughter not have sex with anyone yet, for non slutification purposes mostly, but I wouldn’t more mind her having sex with a 22 yo than a 16 or 17 yo. In all cases it would depend on what the guy was like.
“Women want high status jobs, and they want men who have even higher (or equal) status jobs.”
Not arguing with that point, but most people have low status jobs. I mean, there are more waitresses than there are say, transplant surgeons or bank VPs’. So I wonder how much does it really matter that women want high status jobs? The vast majority of them won’t have them.
Jhane Sez–
No, way too big a gap. But she wouldn’t to anyway, nor would I. I’d also no take a girl’s virginity if I didn’t have very serious intentions with her and at our age gap that would be even more ridiculous. 21 is way too young for me as well.
@Malia # 604
I was drawing the distinction between joint custody and (my term) actual custody. I did just enough domestic law to know I never want to do anymore. Far too many people willing to destroy their children to gain a pyhrric victory not just hollow, but filled with pain.
As for divorce law being unfair to men, well I guess that’s why there’s horse races. A couple enjoys a standard of living; they divorce. To say the spouse is entitled to only what each earned-I guess makes sense in some universes. I am reminded of a quote by a Canadian lawyer-no woman ever wins a divorce. To a man, it’s simply a matter of mathematics. To her, it is and always remains a matter of the heart. Not trying to persuade or convince anyone; this matter is beyond settled as far as the law is concerned, our chatter is idle.
The age of consent in Europe runs from 14 to 16 (well it’s 13 in Spain). It’s about equally distributed between the three ages in that range. It’s 14 in Italy, German, and Austria, some other countries. 16 in Britain. It’s 15 in France and a bunch of other countries.
“Because Mrs. Kobe Bryant didn’t remotely do anything to deserve 100 million. Kobe did, she didn’t. She’ll be doing nothing for him post divorce. Why the hell should he have to transfer half his loot to her so she can live without him in the style to which she was accustomed when living with him, and then more than some.”
Kobe didn’t amass 200 million by just playing basketball… most of his money comes from product endorsements based upon his “nice guy” image… which has its foundation in the fact that he broke the mold of the typical young NBA player.
His ability to command those fees correlates directly to the fact that he was married with children and a devoted husband and father… that is the image he sold to make money.
So his wife becomes an integral part of his PR team…
She is his brand ambassador when he isn’t available especially when it comes to things like charity events and other non profit work… which helps with tax deductions.
She is ‘required’ to show up for games with or without the kids to show that he has family support in the stands… this was especially key when he was facing rape charges to help maintain his Mr. Nice Guy Family Man image…. which brings in the money
She manages and maintains many of his personal assets including his home and personal social calendar.
She is also ‘required’ to give interviews and manage the press… no you don’t see her on ESPN but you do see her on the local new market networks, once again as an extension of his brand.
Being married to a man of means is a daunting job in itself and then you add celebrity to it… they should really offer a class.
Now imagine doing all of this for someone who constantly cheats on you and does so publicly while you are being asked to help project a different view to the world at large… so that he can continue to make money.
Dude I am far from a Vanessa fan… but real talk she earned that money ~JS
Jhane Sez:
Oh what rubbish. Just about any wife would do. His image was crafted by him and only matter because he was a massive NBA star. That was the sina qua non. As well I think actually most of his money was earned as NBA fees. He’s supposed to be worth about 150 million by the way, not 200 or higher amounts thrown around.
Besides she was being massively compensated by enjoying his lifestyle with him in the mansion she’s now kicked him out of, and so on, while she was still with him. That’s plenty. She’s not going to be doing anything for him going forward, yet she’s filed divorce papers asking for half his dough, massive child support=also stealth alimony, plus alimony for life on top of that!!!!! The incredibly greedy bitch.
Horseshiite she did. She didn’t remotely earn a small fraction of it. I find your views on this disgusting frankly and increadably Team Woman American feminist greedy.
No wonder men are warning each other off marriage today with these American divorce laws, the worst in the world for men.
Charlie Sheen was much smarter, and had a prenup both with Denise Richards and with his current wife who’s on and off about divorcing him:
http://www.tmz.com/2010/06/15/charlie-sheen-brooke-mueller-divorce-documents-denise-richards-custody-settlement-support/#.Tu09G1b2K8A
No wonder American marriage is in steep decline, with these misandrous divorce laws and women like Jhane Sex more than willing to take absolutely to the limit full advantage of them.
Kobe’s getting divorce theft big time. And divorce theft is just how increasing many American men see it too. The word is getting out including to young men.
Jhane Sez–
That’s so much feminist playbook god damn rubbish. She was amply compensated by him when living with him. Most any wife could do those roles, which I’m sure your greatly exaggerating. It was no super achievement on her part, unlike what he did and does.
This is truly ridiculous. We don’t know that he constantly cheats. We know he did once, and he may well have done so that she found out about recently, breaking a “never again” promise to her perhaps.
Cheating revenge on this massive a scale should be taken out of the hands of men period.
He was an idiot for not getting a prenup of the kind I recommend though.
She still most likely would have been eager to marry him, though she’s likely have done all she could to emotionally talk him out of requiring it, the golddigger.
My whole take on this marriage/divorce/alimony discussion is as follows:
If you feel so inclined, male or female, to protect your assets in the case of a future potential divorce, get a prenup. It’s that simple. Marry someone who is okay with signing a prenup, and you are good to go.
These celebrity men who failed to have their wives sign prenups, then caused their divorces by infidelity, shouldn’t be pitied. They had every opportunity to draft up and get a prenup signed, but they didn’t for whatever reason.
Madonna failed to make Guy Ritchie sign a prenup, and he walked away with 100 million dollars, an estate property, and a pub. A freaking pub! I found that awesome and hilarious at the same time.
Miranda Kerr 1000x better than Gisele… not even close
sassy–
Yes they should be. The default without a prenup shouldn’t be so horrifically unfair to very high earning men. It’s simply taking advantage of men.
There’s a tremendous amount of propaganda against prenups in the media including esp. the entertainment media by women. Though that’s gotten less bad. It was esp. bad at the end of the 90′s when Kobe got married.
As well he probably wasn’t immersed in knowledge about how unfair divorce is to men esp. in California nor in knowing lots about prenups. I’m constantly educating men about them on the net and most have a very dim idea of whether they work, and what they can prevent, and so on. Kobe had just started his Laker career when he met her.
This kind of stupid meme is what I’m talking about.
Note that she waited just a few months after passing the 10 year mark to fine for divorce the conniving greedy bitch. California gives automatic lifetime alimony (!!!!) to wives in ten years and longer marriages.
Sassy—
The vast majority of Hollywood actresses who make considerably more than their fiancés make them sign prenups. There isn’t remotely the social pressure on wealth women to not demand prenups as there is for men. Madonna is a very surprising to me rare exception.
@Anna #599
A division of the community estate is not alimony under our laws. In fact, in Idaho we do not have alimony as such. We have spousal maintenance. This can be affected by, but is not strictly part of, the division of property. If the couple had accumulated assets during the marriage, then here (in the community property states) she’d get 1/2. Are you saying in Norway she gets nothing, or perhaps the had nothing (spendthrift situation)? You said she was left with nothing and implied it was because she had a means to support herself. What about the wealth they had created together? Either they had nothing, or Norway has some seriously tough laws respecting the weatlth accumulated in marriage.
Tvmunson—
Men are shattered and blind sided by divorce far more than women are. Usually the woman you files for divorce has slowly been making up her mind to do it for some time with much consultation with her girl friends. Maybe because she cheated and thus dissolved her feels of bondedness when married women have good emotional sex with another man, but not when men do.
She has in mind the much rarer kind of divorce where the husband divorces his wife for a younger, hotter model.
tvmunsion–
They changed the name of alimony in most states as a euphemism, because alimony is so unpopular with men. Same difference.
@ Doug1
I understand all that. Regardless, a few things still stand.
1. He didn’t make her sign a prenup, even though he should have. Nobody forced him to not draft up a prenup. He went into that marriage of his own volition. He chose not to get a prenup. The consequences are on him.
2. He shouldn’t have cheated. Whether men like it or not, women see their husband’s infidelity as grounds for divorce. If he hadn’t cheated, perhaps they would remain married.
3. He could have done the research about prenups by himself. We can’t blame his lack of knowledge for his demise. It’s the same way women shouldn’t and cannot be allowed to claim that they didn’t know the truth about their fertility odds upon aging. The information has always been out there. The only people to blame for not seeking out that information are themselves.
4. Despite the social pressure for men to not make their future wives sign prenups, they should still make them sign prenups. Social pressure can only affect a person to an extent of which that person allows. Feminazis could bust in my house right now, screaming and chanting that I should be promiscuous like them. That doesn’t mean I would become promiscuous because of their pressure. At some point, people have got to start using their brains instead of mindlessly following herds. Kobe could have been an individual, said f*ck it, and made her sign a prenup. That little action would have saved him all this trouble.
@ tvmunson
She get out what she directly brought in to the marriage. I am guessing he has bought the house. I don’t know how they spent their incomes, but most likely he has paid for most, as is income was about 100x hers. Perhaps she has spent her income on food, stuff for the children etc., items which are not investment and do not show for anything in retrospective. Bottom line you do not gain from marrying someone wealthy unless you have a specific contract which entitles you to half of everything, but honestly I don’t know anyone back home who has that.
I have however heard of some being generous (no contract involved), a friend of my mum got divorced (he left her) and as their financial situations were very different, he gave her the house.
Tvmunson–
Division of property accumulated during the marriage only came into American law during the 70′s. Well in 1969 feminists got it passed in California. Before that she got to keep any property she brought into the marriage but wouldn’t get his, although she might get the equity in the house if she hadn’t been caught cheating but he had, particularly if there were young kids. She wouldn’t if she just wanted out of the marriage and he didn’t agree.
So this new law is a new oppression of men, particularly very high earning ones. This law is an ass.
There’s no guarantee Kobe Bryant can read. He’s a basketball player, not an academic.
In others words it used to be like Norway’s system before the 70′s, although wives who hadn’t worked from kids onward did get alimony until and unless they remarried.
Ann are you sure that there’s no equal property division of what’s accumated during the marriage in Norway these days. I mean back in your grandfather’s day we were similar here.
“Oh what rubbish. Just about any wife would do. His image was crafted by him and only matter because he was a massive NBA star. That was the sina qua non. As well I think actually most of his money was earned as NBA fees. He’s supposed to be worth about 150 million by the way, not 200 or higher amounts thrown around.”
No… the average NBA player makes aprox 5 million per year and doesn’t get the opportunity for big money endorsements.
The majority of Kobe’s money comes from endorsement deals I think his NBA contract is for 25M… Addias alone was a 6 year contract at 48M, not to mention Coke/Sprite, McDonald’s, Nutella, Vitamin Water, Nike and Nintendo… just to name a few.
Kobe was slated to be the heir apparent to Micheal Jordon… a superior athlete with commercial appeal, the good looking devoted family man.
During that time the NBA was going through a huge image problem and he was the polar opposite of the bad boy thugs in the headlines at that time.
His image was manufactured and polished by his parents and professional media handlers… he was drafted right out of high school so he didn’t have time to make any real decisions about how he was going to present himself.
Kobe engaged in under age drinking, hanging with rappers, getting into fights, hanging at strip clubs, sleeping with groupies, living the playboy lifestyle would have resulted in him making FAR less money… because the majority of the brands he endorses are FAMILY friendly brands.
Now Kobe the young guy in love, getting engaged and married to his young sweetheart, champion for family values regularly photographed attending church… an image like that, in the NBA is a license to print money.
I agree that almost any woman married to Kobe would be able to fill the role… but Vanessa was his choice.
Now because he was young he most likely didn’t understand the position he was asking her to play, nor do I think he understood the responsibility than was associated with being the wife and mother of his children… with hindsight I am sure he would have chosen differently.
But he didn’t and now she wants out and he has to pay… it is what it is ~JS
Jhane Sez–
I think it’s impossible for American (and since 2000) British women to justify these enormous payouts just for being spouses, or that and helping their husbands in various not so terrifically skilled ways that lots of women could do — all while not having to work for outside pay but instead be massively compensated by living such as Kobe Bryants lifestyle.
I think it was deeply wrong of Guy Ritchy to get $100 million from Madonna too.
It’s just that it occurs like 99% of the time with the wife getting big time divorce theft if she married a high earner, not to mention mega earner.
@Susan
You read Tom Wolfe. In both “Bonfire” and “Man in Full” he describes divorced women of a certain age; in “Bonfire” they are replaced by “lemon tarts”. whilst first wives become “xrays” in their attempt to stay attractive through dieting. In “Man”, the exes are immediately forgotten, but in Ms. Croker’s case he discusses the “liberation” of divorce as part of the new lexicon (Wolfe is a lot more candid of feminism than race, which he chickens out of IMO). As you reside in the Boston area and have doubtless seen this play out, what can you describe? Boise is too small and provincial, but we’ve had some women divorce for reasons of personal liberation. As the women I’m thinking of were near 50, I think (we don’t see them anymore; another phenom (?), once divorced they disappear) they were surprised to find that “dating” was not the experience they were expecting. Then we have the ones who’s husbands went “lemon tart”-they also disappear but then we’re not very social anymore (you guessed from my blogs) so can’t gauge. Our governor got a Catholic divorce ( 3 children, near adult) so he could marry his wife (27 or so years his jr.) in a Catholic Church, so we aren’t entirely immune.
So how’s it work out? Does first wife more or less get to face plant herself figuratively like the one at the start of the movie of the same name?
BTW as a long time married, you must feel like Susan and I do, like the last soldiers in Lt. Col. Custer’s command, watching other couples fall apart. Or have you been spared that lovely facet of 21st century life?
@ Doug1
Why is it deeply wrong for Guy Ritchie to get 100 million from Madonna? She didn’t have him sign a prenup, then cheated on him with Derek Jeter. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If women can get court settlements after divorce, guys should have every right to the same settlements.
@ Doug
Naturally if a couple bought a house together, paying 50/50, they would entitled to 50% each when they divorce, the price increase is split between them as well. But if one of the parties bought the house entirely, the other party would naturally not get any of the price increase either. They did not take part in the investment. That’s just the natural way in my mind, is this different in the US?
Jhane Sez–
Yes but it shouldn’t be and wasn’t what the divorce law was a mere 30-40 years ago depending on your state, before feminists began the depredations with divorce laws.
They originally said make marriage an equal partnership including economically, and we’ll phase out alimony as women are able to work more and more. Then they renigged on the phasing out alimony part and instead began pushing to very much bring it back bigger and better for women than ever in the 90′s.
Doug1
Where did you go to law school? Community property law did not come into existence in the 70s; it was adopted from Mexican law, which is turn was inherited from Mexico. There has never been any other system of allocation in the nine states that inherited community property law (most of the remaining systems are called common law).
Sassy–
I half agree with this. That is if women married to rich men get that kind of payout on the regular than men in the symmetrical situation shouldn’t feel guilty about getting it either.
As well Madonna is Madonna and amazing for her age (though I’m sure she wears tons of stage makeup when in public), and celebrity status in a wife of the type she has (sex goddess) does matter more to men that e.g. Roissy would admit, but she is 10 years older than also moderately famous Guy Ritchie, film director, and men esp. those with options VERY rarely marry significantly older women. He might not have agreed with a prenup. She might have asked and he might have said no.
Anne–
Very different.
If the man bought the house entirely with his own money during the marriage which is the usual case, that is put down the down payment, signed the mortgage in his name alone, had title to it in his name alone, and paid all the mortgage payments, she still get’s half of the equity (increase in value) along with half of all other stuff he earned and invest alone (including half of his company pension and other retirement accounts, non tax favored investments, and investment property, any increase in the value of small business he may own, and so on.
She doesn’t get half of a house he bought before marrying her, or in most states half of what he brought into the marriage, so long as he can prove that and he hasn’t co-mingled property (e.g. stock investment accounts) with within marital investments so that can’t be readily proven.
As I said this only became true sometime in the 70′s depending on the state in a big feminist push under the slogan of “marriage as an equal partnership”.
Anne–
America has the most unfair to men divorce laws in the world as far as I’m aware, and I’ve done a lot of looking into this. It rather surprises me that Norway is as fair to men on this as it is.
Anne–
Oh and I meant to say that Miranda is not only beautiful/gorgeous, but is so in a very feminine, engaging, delightful looking way. I mean she just makes me smile. As well many of her pics have this coy feminine quality to them, but also a fun vibe. Delightful!
Anne–
I’d say a whole lot softer.
Anne–
That’s the natural way in my mind too, but American feminists are greedy little bitches, that don’t want true gender equality of opportunity but rather female advantages at every turn. Tis true.
Anna #628
All I can say is in a community property state, whatever is accumulated during the marriage belongs to each 1/2, undifferentiated. I can parse this more, but that’s the basics. You don’t gain anything necessarily by marrying a wealthy person under community law either; his separate property remains his, and even his income stream allocation will be affected by length of marriage, kids, whether wife worked.
Doug
Men are blindsided “far more often” than women-dude, we’ve had VERY different experiences personally and, in my case, professionally. I know of 2 instances where a guy after 20 + years of marriage walked in and pulled the M.Streep scene out of “Kramer”, only not to find himself, but to flat walk out. In one case it was all the wife could do to get him to stay a day or 2 so they could break it to their 10 year old daughter. I do not liek apocryphal arguments, so let’s just disagree and admit our life experiences are radically different. And and show of hands hookers as to how many have had Doug’s experience as opposed to mine.
I do not know where you get this idea it was different 30-40 years ago; I was practicing law 30 years ago, in law school 3 years before that, and aware of the community property laws in the Western states (where it is primarily used) before then and can assure you it WAS NOT different as can any other Western attorney with similar experience. I will string cite 400 cases you can look up if you care too.
Anna 636
Yes it is different in community states (minority-where are you common law lawyers-I need help). As I explained, the increase in value is considered earned. Same with a stock, jewelry etc. A “basis” must be determined so the increase can be tracked. If there is a decrease, that would offset any other assets in the community. The way we do it here is we add up everything, assets-debts=community estate. Divide by 2. the parties are free to allocarte, but if they can’t agree, a judge does. Pensions, 410 (k) etc. also go this way and there is a specific tax provision for it. I’m sure Doug would want the spouse with the military pension to keep it all, but it is divided too.
BTW meant to say that the Mexican law was inherited from Spain.
allocate-we need edit feature!
tvmunson–
A top five law school. Then to one of NYC’s leading BigLaw firms. Left the law after several years for greener pastures in a couple of ways. Related area esp. to the type of law I was doing.
I don’t think I took a domestic relations course in law school, it’s been awhile. I have read up on it on the net since law school though.
Are you saying there was a 50-50 property split in California before 1969?
There sure wasn’t in most states. Also the community property vs. equitable distribution and maybe some others distinctions have grown to mostly just be terminology. There’s some tendency in some equitable distribution states to divide all wealth, or all the husband’s wealth whenever earned equally, though usually not inherited wealth. The equitable distribution part is mostly in practice used to not give a lower earning man half if he wasn’t a model husband doing well over half the housework, etc.
Doug
With all due respect, if you done “a lot of looking into this” you would know that community property law was not adopted in the Western states of the United States in the 70s.
Your opinion of the “fairness” of this is of course something you are entitled to. You have an opinion, just as you have an asshole, and the extent to which I care to devote myself to a consideration of either is entirely something within my discretion. But when you make misstatements expect to be corrected. I hope you are not offended by my amendatory remarks.
“I find your views on this disgusting frankly and increadably Team Woman American feminist greedy.”
Doug1…
I am only going to address this one time and one time only with you and this is also for the benefit of others who use this type of language or share in your opinions.
You boys use the word feminist like the word bitch…
You write it like you would spit it in my face if you could
You take an intellectual exchange of ideas and resort to personal attacks like a petulant child
Stop it
Because most times the attempt to stamp the feminist label on a chicks comments is just wrong
There are those who then can’t even man up after admit they were mistaken and apologize
They just go back in spoiling for another fight
Another opportunity to spit feminist in some chicks face before you ask her intent
Stop it
And if you can’t control yourself… then just stop typing ~JS
Doug
Did I misunderstand your remarks? I thought you said community property law was adopted in the 70s. I have never dealt with, nor studied, any other system. Community property law existed in California before 1969. I am unaware of the other systems and have no comment on them. Anything earned by the community would be subject to 50/50 division. Community property law was inherited in California from Mexico and fixed in its constitution.California’s No Fault Divorce law, adopted in 1969, did not change that.
I didn’t go to law school in any of the nine western states that apparently inherited it from Spain, even such norther ones as Idaho (how did that happen??) some googling on the history of it has revealed to me.
I might be wrong that 50-50 began in California in 1969. Something about it did happen then though.
I’m not wrong that it only spread around the country in effect, usually under the title of equitable distribution in the 1970′s under a feminist push for “equal partnership marriage, including economically”. It amazes me that the Spanish long had an equal division of what’s earned in marriage rule. Then again I imagine the Spanish conceived of as divorce only happening in their Catholic realms due to great marital fault on the part of the husband, such as abandonment and not merely adultery. The English common law sure as hell didn’t have community property or something functionally pretty much equivalent in England in 2000, or in America beginning in the 70′s, usually called equitable distribution.
I’d guess there was no alimony in Spanish/Mexican law. Do you know?
tvmunson–
Ah, ok. That’s what I was mixing up. It sure as hell should have changed it.
*in England until 2000
My personal beliefs on divorce are really situation dependant.
I think there should be a penalty for fraud and cheating that is not gender exclusive.
JLo cheat on Chris Judd with Ben Afleck… so even though they were only married 9 months he deserved the 6.6M he got.
Brittany had to pay Kevin Federline in excess of a million dollars in addition to 20K a month in child support.
Totally fair he was the stable consistent parent… which is scary considering who we are talking about… but based upon the length of marriage and lifestyle I think the judgement was very fair.
Kathy Griffen had to pay her husband Mathew Moline an undisclosed amount even though he stole 72K from her personal accounts.
This is gutter behavior and completely breaks trust I know people this has happened to and I have had an ex steal checks from the last pages of my check book…
So male or female this type of behavior should get jack… especially considering that their are no children.
But in this case their pre nup didn’t make provisions or assumptions of theft so he got the amount agreed upon in the pre-nump even though he deserved squat.
I think that there is no perfect solution in dividing the spoils of marriage because human beings are involved… and we are all so flawed ~JS
Jhane Sez—
Aren’t you special!
No one does personal attacks more than American feminists, who I can’t stand. I’m most definitely anti-feminist (well I’m for basic feminism).
No and no. They may not always be current leading edge radical feminist, which is what most women mean today they don’t agree with when they say they aren’t feminist, but that doesn’t mean they don’t want to continue to profit from very misandrous unfair to men feminist inspired laws.
Jhane Sez—
Don’t agree he should get squat, though only if she wouldn’t in a reverse situation.
I don’t know about the million dollars but it’s fair she has to pay child support due to being so unstable and the clearly less fit parent during that time period. 20K a month though does seem excessive and inclusive of also stealth alimony, but if women routinely get that men should too. I don’t think either should, to that degree.
Yeah that’s just pablum and squid ink. You support the current extremely misandrous American divorce law and family courts system.
Provide stats for this or shut up. Men cheat more than women do. How do you account for that in divorces initiated by women? He breaks the contract, she files. Sounds fair to me. Yes, there are frivolous divorces, but I’d like to know what percentage of female-initiated divorces they are. I think this theme is exaggerated and overblown in the manosphere echo chamber.
I’m very surprised by the description of divorce in Norway. Scandinavia is always held up as an example of progressive, feminist, even socialist policy.
Amen and God bless Jhane Sez. Doug has totally derailed the entire thread with his grandstanding and hyperbole. Every time a woman disagrees with him, he claims “feminist bullshiite.” Munson knows what’s up.
The problem is no-fault divorce gives frivolous cases the same result as ones with infidelity.
@Munson
Really, you think so? I thought both of his descriptions of the victim in Bonfire as an “honor student” and of Freaknik in Atlanta were pretty frank.
To be honest, I have known only one couple to divorce at the wife’s behest. It was a family with 6 children, and she became pregnant with a 7th by another man, moved to Portland, OR and left her husband with the six. It later came out that three of those six were not his. She cuckolded him four times.
I have known three couples to divorce when the husbands revealed, in their 40s, that they were gay and felt the need to live an authentic life. I know a couple that divorced after the wife found the husband fucking his admin. asst. on top of the coats on their bed during the annual holiday party. Another couple, very wealthy, divorced when she confessed that she was having an affair with her tennis pro (how cliched) and he responded that he was gay and had been having sex with randoms for years.
I know one couple that got divorced when the Orthodox husband couldn’t live with his wife’s budding interest in Buddhism. I know one couple who got divorced when the husband finally realized that he was married to the world’s worst woman. She is one of the only people I have ever truly loathed, and I am glad he got out.
I also know two couples in the neighborhood who divorced after having affairs with each other’s spouses. Each couple remarried and remained in one house or the other.
All of these stories are about acquaintances and neighbors, though. I have not experienced that difficult scenario when good friends divorce and allegiances are tested. So I would have to say that mostly I’ve been spared. These stories I’ve shared were no more than neighborhood gossip.
“The problem is no-fault divorce gives frivolous cases the same result as ones with infidelity.”
This is not true… at least not in Illinois
Illinois has no fault divorce laws based on living separate and apart for six (6) months, if both parties agree in writing.
If only one spouse brings the action for divorce, the laws for living separate and apart require a period of two (2) years.
In addition to no fault grounds, Illinois laws also allow the following fault grounds for divorce:
1. Impotency;
2. Adultery;
3. Willful desertion or abandonment for at least one (1) year;
4. Habitual drunkenness for at least one year;
5. Gross habits caused by excessive use of addictive drugs for two (2) years;
6. Attempting the life of another;
7. Extreme and repeated physical or mental cruelty;
8. Conviction of a felony; or
9. Infecting the other spouse with a sexually transmitted disease;
Not the same at all ~JS
@ Susan
“Ouch. Even if that’s true, do you really think that’s what women want to hear? That’s one hell of a big red pill.
“I don’t find you smoking hot. Well, not even sexy. As matter of fact, you’re not very cute. Wanna date?””
Really? Not what I said but okay. I meant men are capable of finding a variety of women pretty. In uni I would say I would have gladly started a relationship with 8 out of 10 women. Some were cute, some were drop dead gorgeous. The difference between cute and sexy for your average guy in an LTR is zero.
As for knowing yor partner doesn’t find you sexy.
Is that not what your doing when encouraging them to find betas and not alphas?
Men don’t like hearing it but fact of the matter is unless your alpha she can’t find you sexy. She can love you but she will never lust for you. I don’t like the thought of it but in reality thats what every beta male faces every day. Myself included.
“Men cheat more than women do. How do you account for that in divorces initiated by women? He breaks the contract, she files. Sounds fair to me. Yes, there are frivolous divorces, but I’d like to know what percentage of female-initiated divorces they are. I think this theme is exaggerated and overblown in the manosphere echo chamber.”
I’m paraphrasing, it goes something like this… women initiate the divorce filing 70% of the time citing adultery as grounds 60% of the time
Adultery is the number one cited reason for divorce.
I don’t know about other states but ‘frivolous’ divorce is expensive if the couple are not in agreement… especially if there are children.
Contrary to popular belief, at least here in IL, your spouse can’t just kick you out of the house that you paid for… as evidenced by the rise in separated and divorced couples still residing in the same house because they can’t sell it.
You see a LOT of this where I live… which ironically was voted one of the best places in America to raise kids~JS
@SW
“Provide stats for this or shut up.”
I’m not sure what percentage of divorces are at-fault vs. no-fault. But it’s estimated that about 95% of divorces are uncontested, meaning the two parties agree on the division of property and child custody without the court getting involved. I’m not suggesting divorce is painless or never one-sided, but it seems that in a lot of cases the two adults can behave rationally. I hope to never go through it, but the lesson is clear: marriage is great, if and only if you’re in it with a very compatible and faithful partner.
FWIW, you’re never going to win with the “I hate statistics” crowd. Every fact that doesn’t conform can be tossed out because of this “hypergamy” notion, or some other sinister reason. The sweeping generalizations have become pretty tedious to slog through. Not to mention repetitive, like a broken record.
What happened to the forum? The new posts have disappeared. It’s like the forum went back in time.
Wrong. My BF is definitely not alpha and I lust for him every day. Girls build attraction over time, and emotional attachment is part of sexual attraction. I think it’s something guys will never understand, being the more visual “love at first sight” gender.
On the other hand, I like what Jesus Mahoney says about natural alphas and betas… there’s no such thing, there are only alpha and beta traits. My BF exhibits mostly beta traits, but I’ve seen a little alpha mixed in, and I won’t lie, it’s hot. However, the fact that he exhibits mostly beta traits doesn’t make me lust for him any less.
Olive´s last [type] ..Christmas Trees
572 Susan Walsh December 17, 2011 at 2:49 pm wrote:
I see.
18534413 SuperCoolGurl wrote:
557 Susan Walsh December 17, 2011 at 1:56 pm wrote:
Well, on Recent Comments box
link is
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/12/15/relationshipstrategies/the-grim-beeper/comment-page-4/#comment-82988when correct link is
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/12/15/relationshipstrategies/the-grim-beeper/comment-page-5/#comment-82988That was from new window to which I was given URL on location bar:
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/12/15/relationshipstrategies/the-grim-beeper/comment-page-4/#respondThat
Preview-button changes font size undeterminated way between lines.I do not have yet figured out, how to give stable link to comment.
/ Kari Hurtta
I would have to echo Olive’s comments. I’m no Mystery, but I can certainly attract my fiancée.
Jason´s last [type] ..If
“I have known three couples to divorce when the husbands revealed, in their 40s, that they were gay and felt the need to live an authentic life.”
I was just running through a list in my head of all the celebrity beard marriages… both alleged and verified.
Star Jones, Rene Zellweger, Drew Barrymore, Terry McMillian… Lou Diamond Phillips.
I wonder what percentage of divorces filed citing adultery are a result of sexual orientation.
Cheating is cheating but it goes to a whole another level when you find that your partner has lied about their sexual preference or orientation.
This also brought to mind the recent discussion on 3 somes and the like within marriages and LTRs… I have read more on mansphere regarding the fear men have of being cuckold, with no mention of the possibility of being dumped for another woman.
Its not that far fetched… I have known and heard of a couple of women doing just that, specifically where the couple got into 3 ways and the two women fell in love and ran off.
I’m seeing more and more of my peer group of women 40+ opting for romantic relationships with each other… one girl I know said that she does every thing else with her girlfriends she might as well.
And among my daughters peer group she is pointing out more girls who are dating girls… a trend that has been growing since she was in junior high. I admit I felt kinda sad because I didn’t have to figure out how to turn down the advances of another girl until I was in college and she had to politic that when she was 11.
I read about men going their own way on the mansphere blogs… encouraging each other to opt out of marriage and to enter into relationships with suspicion of her financial motives.
So now I have got to wonder if part of the fall out will be women forming relationships with other women so that they have partners and financial, emotional security.
I think we need to rethink our adversarial positions because nobody is winning… we are just scoring points off each other ~JS
”Finally, Russell Simmons has words for those who have decried the $20, 000 per month he is paying for each daughter ($480,000 per year in child support) and those who have labeled his ex-wife as an opportunist and gold-digger.”I want to say that Kimora is an excellent mother and is doing a great job with them,” Simmons states emphatically. “Regarding the money, my kids live a tremendous life. They do have lots of security, nannies, educators, special programs, travel, chefs, on and on. Their mother manages all of those luxuries and I’m happy to provide for that.”
I pulled this quote from an article that Malia linked to upthread (#604)… I think that when child support numbers are often taken out of context, especially if you don’t have children.
In IL a person who earns 50K per year if they were paying the max in support for one child would be $833.33… and that may sound like a lot of money to support a child that is in school all day but look at the numbers…
Before and After Care 412 per month
School Lunch 60 per month
Groceries just for the child 150
That leaves aprox 211 to cover all of the child’s other expenses, medical, clothing, school fees, field trips, extracurricular school activities, etc.
And all of that is for the sole support of the child without even touching actual living expenses like housing and utility cost.
So if both parents make about the same amount of money it is a wash… and this amount gets reduced depending on custodial time.
This is basic care for ages 5 thru 12 (infants and teens cost more)… no private school, no nannies, no expensive hobbies or private lessons music, theater, or sports are included, all of that would be extra.
Factor in say winter, spring and summer breaks… the YMCA offers camps which will run you about $265 per week… and in the summer you have to pay the $2650 up front in cash before the sessions start… and that only gets you coverage for 10 weeks
Most men shell out what may seem to be large amounts of money because they want more for their children than just the basics.
So yes… someone with Russel Simmons means would gladly shell out a half million a year to cover all the expenses he mentioned because he knows that money is benefiting his daughters… not Kimora.
And in the real world most women I know would gladly accept him paying these expenses directly if he didn’t want to put the money in her hand.
So can we please end the child support is some huge stealth alimony conspiracy… because it just doesn’t add up ~JS
>> Wrong. My BF is definitely not alpha and I lust for him every day. Girls build attraction over time, and emotional attachment is part of sexual attraction. I think it’s something guys will never understand, being the more visual “love at first sight” gender.
This, this, this!!!!!!!!!
Maybe I’m weird, but I’ve often developed crushes on guys who were previously in the LJBF category. There are very few guys who I’m attracted to *right away* (which is another reason why any cold approaches are pretty much doomed to fail). It takes me a while to warm up to people. That doesn’t make the attraction any less real though.
It also goes the other way. There are guys who I initially thought were hot who I’m later completely turned off by, for whatever reason. (ie. they turn out to be stupid, or mean, or whatever).
This link is interesting (you have to scroll through to see the other prenups):
http://www.aisledash.com/2008/01/16/crazy-celebrity-prenups-catherine-zeta-jones-and-michael-dougla/
I don’t think these prenups are that crazy though. I like the idea of a fidelity clause. I’d be fine with signing a prenup, but I’d probably insist on something similar. A divorce that happens because he screwed the secretary isn’t the same thing as me being all “Eat Pray Love”.
Ditto on this also. There are two distinct piles of men for me.
1. Men who I am instantly physically attracted to.
2. Men who become attractive to me over time.
Neither one is better than the other, only different.
Susan Walsh–
Dubious. Women lie down their numbers of lifetime sex partners and cheating partners far more than men lie them up, fake polygraph studies have shown. Men in fact turn out to be roughly accurate, unlike women, who lie down. Even when they think they’re being polygraphed they still are probably lying down, because they’ve convinced themselves, many of them, that a terrible sex encounter doesn’t count, nor a drunken one she only dimly remembers, and so on.
Jhane Sez–
It’s fine if it wants to voluntarily provide that, and it appears he does. It’s obscene for him to be required to provide that, most of which is in effect alimony to his ex wife, who is free to fuck as many hot studs on his money as she wishes, without care as to their ability to provide.
Period.
We have the most unfair to men divorce system in the world.
England’s child support is less than 2/3rds ours from what I’ve been able to figure out. (This stuff is rather hard to web research.)
I am aware of ONE fake polygraph study with n=100, and women reduced their number of sexual partners by half a person, on average. I think they said 3.5 instead of 4, approx. If you have other examples, please provide them. Otherwise, this is just another manosphere trope with little or no basis in reality.
@ Doug1
I agree with Susan. Seriously, put up or shut up.
Norway and Sweden’s percentage of after tax child support=also stealth alimony here, seems to be much lower. Plus Anne has said repeatedly that Norway does property division according to who has title to the real estate, who owns the banking or stock account, and so on (unless there’s a contract to the contrary between the spouses, which she has said is unusual). Like I recommend in an American prenup, as a way of offsetting to some degree out very misandrous divorce laws, which Susan herself acknowledged in the post in chief.
“Men cheat more than women do.”
What do you base this on? Do you actually think any survey can uncover the true extent of female infidelity given that women are very adept at hiding their infidelity due to evo psych?
“Amen and God bless Jhane Sez.”
Well, well, what a curious statement from a woman who supposedly disagrees with feminism.
@Megaman
“I’m not sure what percentage of divorces are at-fault vs. no-fault.”
Correct me if I’m wrong but none of the federal states have at-fault divorce in the books anymore. It doesn’t exist as a legal category in the USA, does it? This is why I’m skeptical of the supposedly 60% of divorce-initiating women citing adultery as grounds for divorce. They don’t have to cite ANY grounds, do they? That’s why no-fault divorce is, well, “no-fault”. I suspect they often just invent some bullshit reason to file for divorce, and adultery is a perfect one. The real reason is often that “they’ve grown apart”, “I’m no longer feeling it”, “we fell out of love” to use female vocabulary.
“But it’s estimated that about 95% of divorces are uncontested, meaning the two parties agree on the division of property and child custody without the court getting involved.”
It may have something to do with the high likelihood that the husband knows he’ll get disemboweled in divorce court if he contests so he just decides not to do so.
“Oh and I meant to say that Miranda is not only beautiful/gorgeous, but is so in a very feminine, engaging, delightful looking way. I mean she just makes me smile. As well many of her pics have this coy feminine quality to them, but also a fun vibe. Delightful!”
Yeah, but by and large she has the same body type as Gisele – which is hardly surprising when you consider they have the same peculiar type of job. That’s one reason I have disagree with the notion that Gisele is somehow reminiscent of a ‘drag queen’.
Susan–
It’s the best study out there that I’ve seen for investigating this hard to investigate phenomenon. The number change was also greater that that.
As well in my personal experience with many, many girls, when I start talking to them about this stuff, at first the give very vague or the impression of very low results, but when I keep encouraging them along the lines of I really like “sexually adventurous girls (which is true for some things), girls some people would call sluts, they’re more fun, and so on, they start to spill, and both events, and numbers, start to multiply big time. I enjoy these stories. I’ve had this experience basically countless times with girls I figured were probably well experienced.
Jhane Sez–
The American theory of child support is that he pays for HALF of the kid’s expenses, she pays for the other half. Actually it’s he pays his proportionate income percentage of them, she pay’s her’s.
Here’s the major rub. There’s never any accounting of what she actually spends from her own income on the kid(s). There’s also no accounting of how she spends the child support=also stealth alimony she gets from him (the more so the more he makes). Also, and this is big, American family courts will attribute income to him quite often when he’s unemployed or underemployed that he doesn’t have, just assuming with no good evidence that he’s shirking. They’ll do it if he used to be say a highly paid big law senior associate, but then decided he’d much rather be a law journalist for a lot less money. Happens on the regular all the freaking time. To men. Almost never to women with custody. If she doesn’t want to work, fine. He pays the same as if she was working for good money. If she wants to pursue a fun job for low pay instead of a more stressful higher paying one, fine again, same result, no imputed income to the female by American family courts.
It’s massively misandrous. And no I’m not a bitter “men going their own way” MRA. I do great with women. But the facts are the facts. I learned about them only during and post my divorce, where I got off relatively lightly, though I still thought it massively unfair. Why the hell should my working but not making much ex wife who rarely cooked for us or did much of anything else around the house (I hired a housekeeper) get almost half of my wealth??? Obscene. I then learned how much worse it is for many men, in an effort to protect myself and men in general from such depredations (divorce theft) in the future.
This is somewhat off-topic, but I’ve looked at the biographies of some Victoria’s Secret Angels after Ms. Walsh raised the subject, and based on what I’ve read it doesn’t seem that young women of highest/supreme status (from a male POV, obviously) have much difficulty securing LTRs with attractive men. Many of them got married relatively young. This appears to contradict the notion that the hypergamy of high-status women goes into overdrive, leaving them lonely spinsters. Maybe they have a better future-time orientation than other women and can control their hypergamy better?
“It’s fine if it wants to voluntarily provide that, and it appears he does. It’s obscene for him to be required to provide that, most of which is in effect alimony to his ex wife, who is free to fuck as many hot studs on his money as she wishes, without care as to their ability to provide.”
Kimora is independently wealthy, Russel does not support her lifestyle and she is not slutting around she is remarried.
Most people with children come to an agreement on support based upon the needs of the child… court ordered support usually occurs when the parents can’t agree or the paying parent doesn’t pay on time or at all.
“We have the most unfair to men divorce system in the world.
England’s child support is less than 2/3rds ours from what I’ve been able to figure out. (This stuff is rather hard to web research.)”
No its not… it took me 2 seconds to find the following…
Under the CSA rules the parent who gets the child benefit from the government (the “parent with care”) can make an application to the CSA for maintenance against the other parent (the “non-resident parent”).
The basic assessment is based on a percentage of the payer’s net income (after tax, National Insurance Contributions and pension contributions) at 15%, 20% or 25% for 1, 2 or 3 or more children respectively (“basic rate”).
The assessment is made on weekly figures (12/52 – months/weeks – of monthly figures, about 23%, not ¼). The following other main provisions apply:
The maximum net income the CSA works on is £2,000 per week. If the non-resident parent has income above that the other parent can apply fortop-up maintenance to the court once the CSA has made an assessment.
Note the percentages are lower because they have national health care and other insurances.
“This is why I’m skeptical of the supposedly 60% of divorce-initiating women citing adultery as grounds for divorce. They don’t have to cite ANY grounds, do they? That’s why no-fault divorce is, well, “no-fault”. I suspect they often just invent some bullshit reason to file for divorce, and adultery is a perfect one. The real reason is often that “they’ve grown apart”, “I’m no longer feeling it”, “we fell out of love” to use female vocabulary.”
There is still fault divorce in IL and other states, also no fault divorce is not just filing and poof your divorced
You either have to both agree and sign off, and even then there is a waiting period, or in most cases you have to wait a minimum of one year and upwards of five.
It seems that alot of these discussions involve more dogma than facts.
I don’t understand why someone would argue a point with no facts to back it up ~JS
Jhane Sez–
Cite your sources.
Wrong. Very wrong. I’ve seen studies at least two sizeable ones, don’t have them at hand at the moment, and the percentages that involved male cheating were vastly lower. WAY below 50%. Below 20%. I think iirc it was in the 10% range. Not the leading cause at all.
The leading causes were a bunch of things I mentioned above that can very reasonably be interpreted as she isn’t feeeeeeling it so much anymore, and wants to go hunting for her next serial monogamy, on divorce theft from her husband.
Jhane Sez–
Those percentages are MUCH lower than the US, and they’re assessed on AFTER tax income, not pretax income (remember we have state and sometimes city tax as well as federal tax). It’s vastly less.
Yes there is a tendency in Europe for social welfare to pay for more of divorced and never married mother’s maintenance. Government as daddy.
Damn women should have to stay married if they want support from other than their own working income. Even if he’s cheated a time or two but hasn’t abandoned or neglected her. Vastly too much female entitlement has gone on. Vastly too much.
>> Cite your sources.
Wrong. Very wrong. I’ve seen studies at least two sizeable ones, don’t have them at hand at the moment, and the percentages that involved male cheating were vastly lower. WAY below 50%. Below 20%. I think iirc it was in the 10% range. Not the leading cause at all.
You’re not citing your sources either!
Doug
‘S cool. I apologize for my truculence.
I’m recalling my domestic relations law. Here goes. Yes I think the Spanish law derived from the Catholic canon law. When a woman married her separate existence was extinguished, thus she “melded” (my wording, and poor) into the marital estate. Thus the “community” is established through the husband. As I understand it this was the practice in Roman times allowing for inheritance by the wife and the Church may have gotten it from them. Now I’m really guessing; when the Spanish law recognized divorce (the Church didn’t-still doesn’t) it would thus be the dissolution of-what? This “indissolvable” community. This may have created the 50/50 split that Spanish law provided.
I do know community property principles were established before Mexico was settled by the Spanish. California was part of Mexico. I do not know what variations from Spanish law Mexico imposed.
As to alimony, I do not know if either Spanish or Mexican law provided for it. I’d be surprised if it was. You derived income from the land, but the cash economy was not like it is now and monitoring alimony in a more barter based one economy would be difficult. At this point we do need a domestic relations expert, but I’ll offer my 2 cents not adjusted for inflation. Although used interchangeably, I understood alimony to be a part of the non-community states attempt to achieve equity ( isn’t divorce part of the equitable powers of the court?) in the distribution of assets. Spousal maintenance is simply to allow the spouse funds to get an education, get on her (usually her) feet, etc. Spousal maintenance has a fixed time limit set by statute, alimony does not. I could be way off; I know I’m outdated.. Plus despite the “no fault” declaration, every divorce lawyer knows that bad behavior can be factored in although unacknowledged in the actual decree.
We also got common law marriage (abolished in Idaho) from canon law.
Class dismissed. Be reminded that Prof. Munson remains available for special tutorials for the nubile young females so desiring same.
“There’s never any accounting of what she actually spends from her own income on the kid(s). There’s also no accounting of how she spends the child support=also stealth alimony she gets from him (the more so the more he makes).”
You are going to have to show me your math.
If a couple goes to court for child support ALL of the child/children’s expenses are gone over with a fine tooth comb.
In IL there is a maximum the courts can award regardless of what the actual expenses are and for one child that is based on 20% of the net income… in part because one of the largest custodial parent expense are education and/or child care, and child care can be covered by pre tax cafe plans as long as you provide proof of payment.
If both parents make 50K per year they are each going to kick in more than 10K a piece just covering expenses the childs expenses…
“Cite your sources.
Wrong. Very wrong. I’ve seen studies at least two sizeable ones, don’t have them at hand at the moment, and the percentages that involved male cheating were vastly lower. WAY below 50%. Below 20%. I think iirc it was in the 10% range. Not the leading cause at all.”
Out of 100 divorces aprox 70 are initiated by women… of those 70 aprox 42 will cite adultery… that would be about 42%
I have read that adultery is listed as the cause in aprox ⅓ of all marriages, followed by a break down of communication and then money.
I will go and find it later… or you can google it yourself and prove me wrong.~JS
@ Doug
“Even if he’s cheated a time or two but hasn’t abandoned or neglected her. Vastly too much female entitlement has gone on. Vastly too much.”
Hell no. Marriage is a contract that includes fidelity (unless written secially) that applies to most married couples. Break the contract forfeit your rights, goes for both sexs.
@ Sassy
“Ditto on this also. There are two distinct piles of men for me.
1. Men who I am instantly physically attracted to.
2. Men who become attractive to me over time.
Neither one is better than the other, only different.”
Ask any guy which group he would rather be in. (Hint: its not number 2.)
Personal story time. I had a former girlfriend who I’d been going out with for about 9 months. (Most recent ex actually.) TBH I think I could have married her.
She for some completely un-understandable reason decided to inform me that:i) I was part of group number 2, ii) when we first met she found my friend more attractive than me.
She never gave me a reason to suspect her of cheating or even thinking about it. I’m not sure which of the two things were worse but she is my ex for a reason. It was literally just as bad if I had learned she was a reformed carousel rider.
My point in bringing up the ideas of feminine beauty was actually for a more basic reason. The defintion of alpha physically givne here by both men and women is: tall, fit, lean.
How many men can that possibly apply to?
If we assume tall as over 6′ thats 15ish% of the male population. Throw in lean and fit and you drop it even further. Therefore most guys can’t be alpha=attractive. So in reality the male standard of beauty is ridculously unattainable.
The female standard of beauty I promoted was pretty much unattainable, but lets accept it thats what people want because that what the media industry tells us. Its unrealistic but atleast its fair.
176 Olive December 15, 2011 at 7:02 pm wrote:
Of course, if comments are deleted, it does not make sense to participate on discussion. Also, if comments are deleted or moderated, you do not know if someone is participating or is it only that you do not see comments. †
@ Lokland
>>Hell no. Marriage is a contract that includes fidelity (unless written secially) that applies to most married couples. Break the contract forfeit your rights, goes for both sexes.
Hear, hear!
And that was an awful thing for your ex to say! (And obviously the cheating is inexcusable as well).
For me, I don’t just have these groups:
“1. Men who I am instantly physically attracted to.
2. Men who become attractive to me over time.”
…but also a third (and possibly largest) group:
3. Men I never develop a sexual attraction for.
So the guys from pile #2 still have a special place for me. I would never tell a guy if he was in pile #2 though, in the same way that I wouldn’t want him to tell me that he wished I was Miranda Kerr. It’s just a mean thing to do.
I also agree with you re: height discrimination. If a guy is out of shape or poorly dressed, that’s something that can be changed, but there’s not really anything that you can do about your height. I can be picky when it comes to some things, but I’m actually fairly lenient when it comes to height. I’m tall for a girl (5’10), and I’ve been known to date shorter guys. People actually used to make jokes about the height difference between me and my previous boyfriend (tbh, I think it bothered him a lot more than it bothered me.) I know a lot of girls who REFUSE to date any guy who’s shorter than them, but if I do that then I automatically filter out half of the male population based on that one trait. I have other things that I’d rather be picky about haha.
191 Michael of Charlotte December 15, 2011 at 8:49 pm wrote:
On section there should be text
@Emily 694
Re Short Guys
I guarantee you it ANY guy you date who is shorter than you will be bothered. Being short really messes a guy up. It’s why so many weight lifters are short. In fact, guys call it “short man syndrome”-so many out and out assholes are short dudes. Also lots of good trial lawyers, most actors, rock stars (not only short, often with too large heads-I mean literally). I’ve also heard from many chicks that interracial dating is ok but they would never date a shorter guy. I’m also 5′ 10″ so average. any chick as tall or taller would be unusually tall. If you wore pumps, you’d be taller than probably 65-70% of the guys.
Susan Walsh–
How much child support is she paying for that brood of six she left him with, three of which weren’t even his own kids?????
Is the court imputing income to her at the highest level she could earn, if she felt like it???
Thought not.
Yeah the divorce system in this country is fair, innit?
tv munson–
Your last two graphs above are hilarious.
Your points about Bonfire are well taken too. Loved that book. Love Tom Wolfe in general, read most of his books.
@ Emily
I think you got my point, mostly.
It was that in a world where men are expected to not be polygamous women should expect to be held to a standard as equally high as men.
If women set a standard that is unattainable for 50% of the population the standard of female beauty must be much the same simply because people are monogamous.
Fact of life, you can’t have a bunch of 6-10 women running around while men are scattered from 1-10. It just doesn’t work for a monogamous society. The solution is to take the female standard of beauty and move it up to that of mens. Do it though and you get a tongue lashing like no other.
@Munson
Heres how I got labelled with short man syndrome once.
Me and my then girlfriend (now fiance) were at a club. I went to get us some water and when I get back some guys hitting on my girlfriend. I go sit next to her and say “I’ll take it from hear bud.”
“Get lost midget.”
. He gets club security. They pick me up and throw me out. Cops are outside, asshole follows me out accusing me harrassing him when he was hitting on a chick.
Cop nonchalantly says I have short man syndrome. I get cuffed.
At this point my girlfriend finally manages to push her way through the couple hundred people between our table and the door and starts explaining to the cops what happened. I get let go, let back into the club. An hour later same asshole was still there and didn’t face any kind of trouble.
To make two notes, I didn’t drink that night. The asshole was hammered.
Ya, thats how a short guy gets laballed with short man syndrome.
Jhane Sez–
Balderdash. That’s why the extra amount of child support=also stealth alimony in most states only goes up by about 1/3 and sometimes less for a second child. Alimony detected.
@ Munson
Cont’d from after the get lost midget bit.
We eventually get to the point of yelling at each other. He finally gets the message and leaves. And goes and gets the security.
@ tvmunson
In my experience, the guys who love my height tend to be either on the shorter side or the taller side. Guys of average height don’t seem to care either way. YMMV though.
Lokland–
Except it doesn’t go for both sexes in the typical female hypergamous marriage. Not only does she automatically almost always get the kids if she wants them, she gets ginormous child support=also stealth alimony as a percentage of his after tax income, if he’s a strong earner in N.America (well I’m assuming Canada is similar on that), but she also gets half his considerably and often much higher accumulated wealth, and in many states alimony as well if she hasn’t been working and in California and Mass among other places, just because she makes a good lot less than he does.
She gets that just the same if she’s the one that’s cheated and has refused to stop, and stopped wanting to have sex with him to boot. Some punishment of her for breaking the marital fidelity contract. He’s the one’s that punished just as much as if he had cheated and wouldn’t stop and she pulled the plug for contract violation.
How in hell is that “just the same” ????????????????????????????????
people like different things and they can like a variety of body types.
i have liked thin, tubby, muscular guys. guys with different hair colour or who were balding or had different personalities.
i have a slim figure but got no better attention than my curvier friends.
i have always found its what you WEAR that made a guys head turn.
Lokland–
As well what about cases where he’s cheated because she stopped wanting to have sex after awhile except grudgingly once every two or three months, or blew up like a sea lion, cause she has that marital contract security blanket???
Women in the Anglosphere and particularly the US are FAR too entitled in their feminist wrangled state imposed adhesion “marriage contracts”.
205 Ceer December 15, 2011 at 10:29 pm wrote:
Some HTML is accepted.
Let’s do some test
♦
X <blockquote>XbR</blockquote>⇒
X
♦
X <q>XbR</q>⇒
X
♦
X <a href="/">XbR</a>⇒
X XbR
♦
X <em>XbR</em>⇒
X XbR
♦
X <cite>XbR<cite>⇒
X XbR
♦
X <code>XbR<code>⇒
X
XbR♦
X <strong>XbR</strong>⇒
X XbR
♦
X <i>XbR</i>⇒
X XbR
♦
X <hr>⇒
X
♦
X <img src="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/2487febed5d69c21786e80654a31a7b4?s=25">⇒
X
♦
X <b>XbRz</b>⇒
X XbRz
♦
⇒X <var>XbRz</var>⇒
X XbRz
♦
X <span title="Strange">XbRz</span>⇒
X XbRz
♦
X <abbr title="Hooking Up Smart">HUS</abbr>⇒
X HUS
All these tags work with
preview-button, but it does not mean that they work on posting./ Kari Hurtta
@ Doug
Were on the same page.
I agree that current marriage is basically allowing women to cheat without punishement.
I’d prefer a system were both sexs are punished for cheating but I’d take one where neither is punished over a system in which only one sex is punished.
But I would still prefer the first system where cheating a no-go all around.
As for the situation where a wife refuses to have sex. If its a validated medical concern, hormonal issue then yes it seems reasonable. It would also seem reasonable to allow the husband out of the house to have fun as well. (I know one couple like this, her sex drive is non-existent, he leaves to have his fun and comes home at the end of the night. They are very happy.)
If it is her refusal to have sex I think the reason needs to be identified. If she has cheated and she doesn’t find her husband sexually atrractive anymore then yes her fault. If hubby went total placating beta, I can’t blame her so his fault.
I think a case by case examination of it would work far better than general, over-arching law.
Also, as a note a divorce case in Canada a few years ago resulted in this.
Mommy makes 30k
Daddy makes 30k
2 kids (not sure on the ages)
Divorce (reason unknown)
Mommy gets house, kids and 60%(18k) of Dads paycheck in mixed alimony-child support.
Therefore
Mommy gets House, 2 kids and 18k.
Daddy gets 12k.
Lets do some numbers. Assuming Daddies 12k is what is required to live for an adult per year. Mommy + Daddy = 24k per year. That leaves 36k from the total household income to be given to kids and house.
Therefore Daddies net worth pre-divorce is 30k, 1 kid, 1/2 house.
1/2 house + 1 kid = 1/2 36k= 18k +30k = 48k
Post-divorce Daddies net worth is 12k. Net-loss of 36k per year.
Lets look at Mommy. Her net worth was equal to Dads pre-divorce.
Post-divorce however. 1 house + 2 kids = 36k +30k = 76k.
Net-gain = 40k per year.
Robbery much?
Thats kind of the defintion of theft isn’t it?
(Note: This was the highest divorce settlement to date in Canada.)
210 OffTheCuff December 15, 2011 at 11:10 pm wrote:
IUI = intrauterine insemination ?
/ Kari Keeper-of-Acronyms
212 J December 15, 2011 at 11:12 pm wrote:
DH = designated hitter ?
No ?
How about
DH = dear husband ?
/ Kari Keeper-of-Acronyms
@ Olive
“In my experience, it’s not the people who “cause the drama” who are to be avoided, it’s the people who silently act like they’re the nicest people in the world and then stab you in the back when you aren’t looking. In other words, it’s the people who hate conflict and avoid it like the plague, and don’t have the balls to say shit to your face, but they’ll gladly bad-mouth you when you’re not around. I had 2 friends like that, twin sisters. Everybody loved them, respected them, built them up, and they were super nice to your face. But I learned not to trust them when I realized how willing they were to throw me under the bus, then act like I was some sort of parasite. Don’t need people like that in my life, thanks.”
Good point. I had a situation like that with a roommate, where she didn’t want to tell me to do things differently because she wanted to be “nice” and avoid conflict, but it only led to her building up resentment against me and culminated in a huge fight after which we never really talked much (for six months!). I also overheard her badmouthing me and saying that she had acquiesced to something I’d asked her for because she was “being nice.” Girls definitely do this more than boys, and it’s definitely because we’re raised to “be nice” and don’t know how to assert ourselves without coming off as bitchy or aggressive. I know it’s something I’m trying to learn.
“And BTW, I STILL think those girls are bitches for the way they acted, and I’m trying to be very choosy about my friends these days. Things are slowly getting better, but I will be honest, I do think most girls are bitches and have actively been avoiding large groups of girls. I’ve been treated horribly by girls since I was 4.”
Yeah, I have had horrible experiences with girls too, from elementary school to middle school to high school. I was lucky to find a really great group of girlfriends in college, but I guess the thing is that some of them are very explicitly not interested in meeting men/dating, and are not your typical girl, really, being more tomboyish (but not lesbians either). I still get nervous meeting more ‘normal/typical’ girls whose *main* interests are shopping and getting boys to buy things for them.
@lok #700
Hey, I didn’t say it was always fair. But it got to be a saying for a reason, right? I mean, some white guys CAN jump.
216 Anacaona December 15, 2011 at 11:45 pm wrote:
<blockquote cite="http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/12/15/relationshipstrategies/the-grim-beeper/comment-page-2/#comment-82080"
[blockquote]I think one thing that tricks women into thinking they have forever is the large number of births to older celebs that are reported as natural when they clearly aren’t.[/blockquote]
Try
<blockquote>I think one thing that tricks women into thinking they have forever is the large number of births to older celebs that are reported as natural when they clearly aren’t.</blockquote>
It gives
/ Kari Hurtta
[ edit ]
216 Anacaona December 15, 2011 at 11:45 pm wrote:
Try
<blockquote>I think one thing that tricks women into thinking they have forever is the large number of births to older celebs that are reported as natural when they clearly aren’t.</blockquote>
It gives
/ Kari Hurtta
(
Preview-button seems not work very well. )I don’t think there is any good reason for cheating. Marriage is not a war, two people should be able to work this out. What happened to counseling? I understand you can end up enemies, but you cannot force someone to have sex with you out of duty. If you used to go at it like rabbits and you’re dependent on keeping that going, get a contract which says “Intercourse must happen at least once a week”.
@ Doug, statistically though, men get wealthier after divorce. It doesn’t seem like they are generally being ripped off. Only reason men may lose money is if they have children with a woman and then meets a new one and have children with her. But that shouldn’t come as a great surprise, having children is costly.
@ Myself
“Therefore Daddies net worth pre-divorce is 30k, 1 kid, 1/2 house.
1/2 house + 1 kid = 1/2 36k= 18k +30k = 48k
Post-divorce Daddies net worth is 12k. Net-loss of 36k per year.
Lets look at Mommy. Her net worth was equal to Dads pre-divorce.
Post-divorce however. 1 house + 2 kids = 36k +30k = 76k.
Net-gain = 40k per year. ”
These numbers are so fricking wrong its embarrassing. I’ll take my time to redo it.
Both parents had a revnue of 30k per year. 60k total.
Assuming 12k each in costs that leaves 36k for kids and house.
Lets assume the kids are also 12k each. That leaves 12k for the house.
I consider kids and house an investment so thats 18k each. Net gain per year.
So lets conisder post divorce.
From the 60k combined salary 12k goes to Dad. That leaves 48k for Mom. But Dad also loses all of his past investment on the house and 2 kids. So Dad is at at net-loss of 18k per year + 1/2 of kids and house at time of divorce. Mom gets a net-gain of 18k per year + 1/2 of the kids and house at time of divorce.
Lokland,
I mean yeah, ask any girl and she’ll tell you she wishes she was prettier. I guess what we’re telling you is it doesn’t really matter whether you fall into group 1 or 2, as in many cases, group 2 is preferable. It is for me anyway. I might find a guy easy on the eyes, but when he opens his mouth, I’m finished. Not interested. In the same vein, I can be eh about a guy, but once he starts talking I’m hooked.
Well that was incredibly stupid. Good thing she’s out of the picture!
To be fair, she probably still lusted for you, at least at some point (otherwise you wouldn’t have dated for 9 months). Most girls don’t date a guy just because he seems like he’d be a nice boyfriend, there has to be sexual attraction.
Yeah I totally agree with this. Ladies have to lower their standards a bit. It wouldn’t be hard for them to do so, I guess that was my original point in bringing up that girls build attraction over time.
I don’t follow you here. Are you saying that because women have such high standards for “male beauty,” it’s only fair that men have high standards for feminine beauty?
Olive´s last [type] ..Expectations
@Doug #699
The racial themes in those books are extensions of the theme he developed in an essay called “Mau-Mauing the Flak Catcher”. It’s about how inner city blacks, in order to get federal funds, go to great lengths to prove their authentic blackness (dashikis, head stuff-hell spears and waterbuffalo hide shields) to the dispenser of funds (the flakcatcher). Mau mau was an indigenous rebellion on Kenya early 60s involving the violent overthrow of British rule. Robert Ruark wrote 2 good books about it: “Something of Value” (Pulitzer I think) and “Uhuru”.
Lok #700
Don’t conflate what I said to infer lack of manliness. Baddest dudes I ever knew were shorter guys. Sonny Barger listed himself as 5 10-he weren’t (saw him once; I’d go 5 7 tops). Rose to the top of the Bay Area Hell’s Angels (basically heads all the chapters in the world) and he didn’t get there ‘cuz of his ballroom dancing. Also best trial lawyers.
purplesneakers,
You should read Anacaona’s blog, she has a fantastic post about the way girls become friends and interact with each other. Here’s the link:
http://4stargazer.wordpress.com/
Olive´s last [type] ..Expectations
@ Anna
“I understand you can end up enemies, but you cannot force someone to have sex with you out of duty. If you used to go at it like rabbits and you’re dependent on keeping that going, get a contract which says “Intercourse must happen at least once a week”. ”
Yes you cannot force someone to have sex with you. Although I would argue its wrong for either spouse to force their SO to be celibate. If the situations were reversed I would say the wife is in the right to leave her husband.
For example, me and my fiance both work-out, run, swim etc. If I decided to stop tommorow it would be wrong of me to make her stop as well. She should be able to keep going to the gym.
The same applies for sex. However the problem is if you want your husband to be monogamous you have put him in a no win situation.
He can be a good husband with no sex or a bad husband with sex. Theres no way for him to win which is wrong to do to someone you care about.
@ Olive
“I don’t follow you here. Are you saying that because women have such high standards for “male beauty,” it’s only fair that men have high standards for feminine beauty?”
Yup.
Theres two solutions to get to monogamy in this SMP. Either women lower their standards, men raise theres or a bit of both. Frankly I don’t care which as long as it balances out.
@ Munson
No worries, I was just pointing out how easy it is to have that label thrown on you just because a person doesn’t sufficiently understand the circumstances. I should mention I was civil until he touched her, thats when I went off the handle at him.
i admit i mostly skimmed the last 200 comments or so, but this one was a good one:
#658 susan
“Men cheat more than women do. How do you account for that in divorces initiated by women? He breaks the contract, she files. Sounds fair to me. ”
great comment because again, it is so simple, so convenient.
and because it reminded me of this great post by crime and federalism:
http://www.crimeandfederalism.com/2011/05/female-ownership-of-male-sexuality.html
“Guess what ladies, if you are not having sex with your men, then you cheated first. You have no moral superiority, and, if anything, are the ones who drew first blood. Take care of your men, drain their nut sacks, and they won’t have the energy to fuck around behind your backs.”
Rivelino´s last [type] ..I don’t think this fuck buddy thing is going to work out
@ Olive
Let me extend what I was saying before.
If men are expected to be non-polygamous they should adopt a mild form of hypergamy. Again if I could not have quantity I would go for quality.
I’m not suggesting we trade up every few years, nor do I think women should but if I can only have one I better make sure its the best one possible.
Currently a man looking for an LTR only has one attraction test. Called the “boner test” by many. After that its the other qualities that become important. If women are picky this sets men up in a losing game, the solution is to become more picky yourself.
Regarding American women ranging from too nice to downright bitchy and agressive-
I feel thatAmerican culture doesn’t teach us how to be assertive YET retain our femininity and sweetness. If we’re super sweet all of the time and please others, we’re doormats and told to toughen up. If we stand up for ourselves, we’re considered hostile and masculine.
I have a Vietnamese friend that says her culture grooms women to be soft, yet not put up with anyone’s crap . You can be assertive and powerful without having to be bitchy and aggressive. It’s something that all of us have to learn. If a person still isn’t respecting you despite you being assertive, simply walk away and leave. There’s no reason to fight, swear, yell and get in people’s faces.
+1!!
Olive´s last [type] ..Expectations
Lokland,
Had a major blockquote fail that got stuck in moderation, so I’ll try this again.
I agree. I would strongly favor option 1, though. Otherwise you have a bunch of hotties getting with each other at the top and the rest of us feeling cheated. The solution, then, is for women in the less-attractive 80% to start going for the less-attractive 80% of men. I’m cool with that; that’s what I’ve chosen, and it seems like many regular female commenters here have chosen that as well.
Now here’s where I don’t necessarily agree. It’s true that a man should go for the best girl he can get, emphasis on can get. If he’s shooting too high (ahemRivelino), then he’s just as bad as all those picky women.
But I don’t think it’s fair to equate female picky-ness with the female desire for monogamy. I’m probably not a “quality girl” by anyone’s standards (I definitely don’t look like Gisele or Miranda or whoever those people are), but I could never deal with a 1-way open situation. And just because I desire monogamy doesn’t mean I’m overly picky about how my men look.
Olive´s last [type] ..Expectations
@ rivelino
http://www.crimeandfederalism.com/2011/05/female-ownership-of-male-sexuality.html
That rubbish cost me 2 minutes of my life I’ll never get back, but I’ll take the time to put the record straight.
First of all – almost everybody masturbates, it is normal for men and women to do so even in relationships. For a woman to be outraged by a man who masturbates, is an exception.
Then again, it is clear from the article that the author bases it all on his personal experiences, and there are several things which indicates that he is a Gamma and hates women. For instance:
“It’s a Friday night, and you’re horny as hell. Your girl is tired, not in the mood, or just being a fucking cunt.”
Surely this is not a serious blog?
“Monogamy, to me, means you have sex with me only, and I have sex with you only. It doesn’t mean a girl gets to not have sex.”
Women are not looking to end up in a sexless relationship. Their goal is not to have a boyfriend they do not have sex with. If that situation occurs, it is usually because the sparkle is gone and the guy you entered the relationship with has turned into..well, the article author. I wouldn’t want to have sex with him either.
“Take care of your men, drain their nut sacks, and they won’t have the energy to fuck around behind your backs.”
Completely untrue. It is well known that women primarily cheat when unhappy in a relationship, men cheat even when happy. It is a result of wanting variation, lack of moral or inability to resist temptation. Even men who can get sex regularly in their marriage, do cheat.
Anna, Riv,
I, too, am always surprised when I read stories of women who don’t have sex with their husbands, then get pissed at them for masturbating. I mean wtf, I’m in a LTR and I masturbate all the time (full disclosure for you lol).
Also, maybe it’s because I’m 23 and childless and haven’t been married for 15 years, but at the moment I have a really hard time picturing a day during which I wouldn’t want to have sex. In fact, I could probably get it on 4 times a day if the circumstances were appropriate (i.e. if my BF and I lived alone and didn’t have other shit to do).
However, I do believe the stories. I especially believe the lack of sex thing… women probably aren’t looking to jump in bed when they took care of screaming babies all day, they’re probably exhausted. But I like what Susan has said about being tired but doing it anyway. The masturbation thing is just weird though… maybe those ladies come from a different era? I always thought it was normal until I started reading these blogs.
Olive´s last [type] ..Expectations
@ Olive
Yes I agree, it is difficult to imagine the situation of every other woman. At 21, I would want to have sex every day and whenever I’ve been seeing someone we’ve usually had sex several times a day. But I cannot speak for women who’s been married 20 years. Could very well be that they said the same as me when they were 20 and never though they’d end up in a sexless marriage.
#726 anna
“That rubbish”
are you english? if so, sexy.
if only pretending to be, not so sexy, but still amusing.
Rivelino´s last [type] ..Book recommendation of the day
#726 anna
“If that situation occurs, it is usually because the sparkle is gone and the guy you entered the relationship with has turned into..well, the article author.”
that was actually funny! are you a really man, pretending to be a girl?
Rivelino´s last [type] ..Book recommendation of the day
#727 olive
“maybe it’s because I’m 23 and childless and haven’t been married for 15 years, but at the moment I have a really hard time picturing a day during which I wouldn’t want to have sex. ”
bless your soul. so innocent, so idealistic.
Rivelino´s last [type] ..Book recommendation of the day
Yeah I thought about that lol. Well at least now we know where we could end up? I’d like to hope that at 40, I remember that time back in the day when I read HUS and other such blogs and think about the implications of a sexless marriage.
Olive´s last [type] ..Expectations
@rivelino
You keep equating simple concepts and complicated execution. Can you really not tell the difference? It is simple to recognize that when a person cheats on a spouse, they have violated a contract. It’s also not debatable. It is also simple to recognize that the contract is rendered invalid by that violation of deceit and betrayal.
However, this turn of events, initiated by the cheater, makes life anything but convenient for the victim. Whether the person stays or goes, everything about the marriage is now complicated and most probably extremely inconvenient.
Making it through Christmas as a family? Inconvenient.
Selling the house? Inconvenient.
Getting back into the dating stream? Inconvenient.
Hiring a lawyer? Inconvenient.
Financial expense of marital dissolution? Inconvenient.
Custody of children or pets? Inconvenient.
Negotiation of friendships with other couples? Inconvenient.
Rivelino, I know you’re trying to be sassy and glib, but the sarcasm is a fail when you don’t use proper language. You’d be better off just saying what you mean to say.
Susan,
Why did you delete my post to tvmunson?
Speaking of sex drives, did any of you ladies have a much higher sex drive in your teeens? My sex drive was off the roof as a teenage girl, but slowed down once I got into long-term relationships in my 20′s. However, there was stress in these relationshps that may have hindered my sex drive.
It seems that the stereotype is that women think about sex as they get older, but that doesn’t seem to be the case for me. I sure wish I had my teenage sex drive back, but I also wasn’t dating back then. When you don’t have sex, you think about it more maybe? Hmm..
I wanted to add that I thought that I would NEVER be that kind of woman that was too tired to have sex. But, it happened. Working long hours, relationship issues, insecurity over your body, family issues, chronic back pain….all can factor in your sex drive.
I have found that porn/erotia can be a good sex-drive booster, but my last boyfriend didn’t even like me watching porn. Funny, because it’s usually the other way around!
When I break up with someone and am single again ,I also notice my sex drive gets higher. It’s weird.
mark,
Because you said Africans are a primitive race. That shit doesn’t fly around here (and I have a friend from Kenya who would bite your head off for saying that).
WarmWoman,
Weird, I am the opposite. Once I lost my virginity a year ago, sex drive went through the roof. Before, all the other stuff was fun and cool but I would’ve rather just cuddled. Yeah not anymore.
Olive´s last [type] ..Expectations
@ WarmWoman:
I am perpetually single and my sex drive is high.
Shoot me.
SayWhaat-Are you a man or a woman? I read a study saying that women’s sex drives increase when they’re in relationships, but it hasn’t been the case for me.
Olive- I hit puberty earlier than other girls as a kid. So, maybe I went through my peak and am now settling down. I will be 30 in a few years, so maybe it will go up again!
WarmWoman,
IDK, I hit puberty pretty early too (small girls often do, they stop growing sooner). Who knows, I guess we’re all just different.
mark,
State what, that Africans are not a primitive race, or that your post got kicked because of what you said? I know for a fact Susan does not tolerate racism, she’s said it many times to others, so that’s why your post got killed.
Not here to argue with you about the merits of “racism.” It’s clear that no amount of arguing will change your mind anyway.
Olive´s last [type] ..Expectations
#734 susan
“It is simple to recognize that when a person cheats on a spouse, they have violated a contract. It’s also not debatable. It is also simple to recognize that the contract is rendered invalid by that violation of deceit and betrayal.”
susan you are thinking with your heart, not with your head.
i know cheating is a very touchy subject. it is scary and it is threatening. it brings up a lot of emotions. if you think about it, for married people — married people who LOVE the comfort and security that marriage brings — the two scariest thing have to be death and cheating. nothing is more threatening to the peace and love of a marriage.
so i’m with you. cheating is fucked up. cheating is a violation of trust, a breach of contract, etc.
but so then what? so then all these cheating men, all these cheating men who cheat on their wives, get divorced, and then abandon their kids — what are they, monsters? emotional criminals? sociopaths?
i know that’s the cultural meme out there. men are pigs. men are gross. men can’t be trusted. men are assholes. yeah, i get it.
but is it true?
i tried to call out the brilliant ben casnocha on this meme, but he didn’t bite:
http://ben.casnocha.com/2011/11/things-men-will-never-understand-about-women.html#comment-6a00d8341c85c753ef015437bd6da5970c
susan, there are A LOT of great men out there. you know, you seemed to have married one. but it also seems that you also work hard at your relationship, and by that i mean sexually.
men are very sexually. men need sex constantly, in a way women will never understand. we need it like air and like food. daily. every. day. horny. every. freaking. day.
and some women are kind and loving and “take care” of their men — and some don’t.
you might think this story is exaggerated, but it’s not.
http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/the-ultimate-shit-test-marriage/
here’s an excerpt:
“Think that you’ll start having sex again after buying that ridiculous fucking rock? Dream on – it gets WORSE. You’ll be lucky to get laid on your birthday from now on. And when you do get laid it will SUCK. The term “doggystyle” will be like a fucking cuss word in your house. Anything cool and interesting that ever happened in your bedroom will be a long lost memory.”
so when you say — again, very conveniently — that whoever cheats has violated a contract, and should pay through the nose — well i reply, it’s not so simple.
i mean, i am not a lawyer or anything, but aren’t there terms for crimes committed that actually have “mitigating circumstances” or something — things like crimes of passion, or entrapment, or self defense, all these things.
many times, things are not so simple, and the law attempts to take this into account, and reflect the complex nature of situations.
i am not trying to make excuses for men, i am just trying to help women — especially young women on this blog, the ones whose views are still being shaped — trying to help them see that men are also out there seeking love, seeking marriage, seeking a family, seeking long term joy and companionship — we are people too! we are not just cads and jerks and wimps and losers! — and that women need to be aware of our incredible constant need for sex, and need to help us stay satiated.
cause if a man is not sexually satiated, trouble is bound to happen.
and like it or not, that IS a woman’s problem.
and if a man cheats, and she blows up the entire family over it, and makes her kids hate their father, and takes them away from him — there IS fallout from that.
it is easy to hate a cheating husband, and the law is definitely on the side of the woman now, and yeah, i am sure revenge is sweet, but when divorce happens — with kids, i mean — everybody ends up a loser.
everybody suffers.
that is why i recommend marry +10 years , or maybe more realistically, +7 to +10 years, and give your husband the occasional threesome, maybe once on his bday, and once on valentine’s — AND EVERYONE IS HAPPY.
rivelino saves the day once again.
Rivelino´s last [type] ..I love pressure
@ WarmWoman:
“SayWhaat-Are you a man or a woman?”
HAHAHA oof. I’m a 22yo woman. Do I sound masculine on these threads? Now you really must shoot me! XD
#736 warmwoman
“My sex drive was off the roof as a teenage girl, but slowed down once I got into long-term relationships in my 20′s”
“When I break up with someone and am single again ,I also notice my sex drive gets higher. ”
sex in relationships is TOUGH. women get all comfortable and cozy, and less sexual — i think we can confidently state this as a fact — and men get antsy and still are horny and start thinking about variety.
it’s like god didn’t want couples to stay together for 40 years.
Rivelino´s last [type] ..I love pressure
@Mark
Because you’re a racist.
No saywhaat–I thought you were a woman when you responded to me, but just wanted to make sure.
Rivelino-Familiarity is a good explanation. All of us get very excited when we meet someone new, but familiarity can tone down the lust. One of my ex-boyfriends said “When you know you can get sex easily, it’s not as exciting.”
@ Rivelino
I think your post on cheating contains a lot of argumentation which is valid in itself and some cliches but doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.
What I can take from it is:
- I agree that cheating is bad and can ruin a marriage and a family. Cheating is fucked up. But does that make men pigs? Not all men are pigs. There are a lot of great men out there.
Not a whole lot of things in there I haven’t heard before. Susan has never said all men are pigs. What the majority of women here is saying is that men who cheat are pigs. Of course there are a lot of good men out there. Those who don’t cheat. Clear enough?
It’s easy to go down the anti-feminist road with the “men hatred these days”. Majority of women do want to get married, they do get married if they meet someone and they do go on dates, which means they like men and they are actually quite optimistic. I’m surprised women aren’t more cynical than they are, considering how many have been humped and dumped or cheated on.
“and if a man cheats, and she blows up the entire family over it, and makes her kids hate their father, and takes them away from him — there IS fallout from that.” “Everybody suffers”.
Are you saying this to make women more aware of the possible consequences of cheating? I can assure you, we know. I am guessing your alternative is to stay with the cheating husband? (Or in the short-sighted mans view: have more sex with him so he doesn’t cheat in the first place. As I pointed out, that is not the case, men in happy relationships cheat too, even if they get laid on a regular basis). To spend the rest of your life with a man you can barely look in the eyes? I will not raise my children with a man with no spine or moral compass. That’s just the way it is. Perhaps easier for me to say as I have inheritance and can support myself and children without a man, but I would nevertheless give the same advice to a woman in an unfortunate financial situation.
Most people have several long-term relationships before they get married. Hopefully not with the same type of woman all over again, you will experience that women come with different personalities, several levels of sex drive. Some women will want sex every day, even 3 years into a relationship, other don’t have the energy. If you are incapable of finding a woman that is right for you, or if no woman want to have sex with you often and experimental enough (first of all, recognize the possibility that maybe you are not a person women love to have sex with), consider whether you are actually the marrying kind. I have all possible respect for a man that recognizes that he is not suited for breeding and remains an eternal bachelor.
@Susan
I forgot which post, but the one where you talked about the divorce experiences in your clique (I am using the term broadly; I mean something like milieu). I am surprised, and impressed. It sounds like you Boston brahmins (I know it’s unfair, probably inaccurate, but I’ve waited my whole life to write that I really have0 avoided the “lemon tart” trade-in. That is really something, and worthy of an exposition by you. Why? If I’m going to rethink my opinion of you chardonnay-brie-andgodknows I’m entitled to an explanation.
#749 anna
“What the majority of women here is saying is that men who cheat are pigs. Of course there are a lot of good men out there. Those who don’t cheat. Clear enough?”
anna,
i used to also be very idealistic — and rigid — in my 20s.
as i grew older, i realized that life is rarely so simple.
not to open a whole other can of worms, but i’ve been trying to think of a good example of when “a crime is not a crim”e, if you know what i mean, and this is the best example that finally came to me:
when lorena bobbit chopped off her husband’s cock, was that a despicable crime, should she have gone to jail for 20 years or whatever?
OR
or was her crime somehow “justified” because her husband had abused her for x number of years?
see what i am trying to say?
so the husband cheats. he gets caught. is is that simple?
or did his wife “abuse” him by not giving him sex for 2 years straight, by never sucking his dick, by ignoring his sexual advances and good behavior, to the point that he was so desperate for sexual affection, for FLESH, that he went and fucked some other girl.
i know you are young, and life seems simple right now, but maybe one day you will see that things are rarely as simple as they seem to be.
as for susan, she should know better. i guess it’s just all the feminist programming, takes years and years to undo.
but i have faith.
Rivelino´s last [type] ..Olive on spoiled chicks
Anna-” (first of all, recognize the possibility that maybe you are not a person women love to have sex with),”
If a woman seems to have lost interest in sex, here are possible reasons
1) She’s not happy in the relationship or she’s unhappy with how she’s being treated. As much as we women want to deny it, a lack of emotional intimacy and fighting contstantly can dampen your sexual attraction to the other person.
2) She’s just plain not attracted to you, yet can get instantly turned on by some hot celebrity. Sadly, some women marry men that they’re not attracted to. Why? The reasons could be fear of being alone, feeling pressured by others to marry, or just craving stability.
3) She needs help relaxing and getting into the mood. There are ways to do that.
LORENA BOBBIT NOT GUILTY
and there you go: woman cuts off a man’s cock, but she is found to be “not liable” for this violent action because of the external circumstances — meaning, since he had abused her in so many other ways, that basically, he deserved it!
so the next time a man cheats on his wife, we have to think, maybe she deserved it?
excerpt:
She stated that her husband sexually, physically, and emotionally abused her during their marriage. She added that her husband flaunted his infidelities, and had forced her to have an abortion. Several witnesses provided testimony supporting her claims. Her defense attorneys maintained that John’s constant abuse caused Lorena to eventually “snap” as she was suffering from clinical depression and a possible bout of post traumatic stress disorder due to the abuse.
However, when Lorena was arrested the night of June 23rd, she told the police, “He always have orgasm [sic], and he doesn’t wait for me to have orgasm. He’s selfish.” John Bobbitt denied the allegations of abuse; however, when he was cross-examined, his statements often conflicted with known facts, severely weakening the prosecution’s case.
After seven hours of deliberation, the jury found Lorena not guilty due to insanity causing an irresistible impulse to sexually wound her husband. As a result, she could not be held liable for her actions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_and_Lorena_Bobbitt
Rivelino´s last [type] ..I always thought this was a woman singing this song
« 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 8 »
{ 10 trackbacks }