Marriage and aging: A generalization.
 

Do you think marriage is good for anything?

I can only speak about where I grew up but I think American women are un-marriageable today. I think state marriage itself is a failed institution. Do you think it should be abolished as a legal contract? I do. For the young men in the U.S. I can say that you should never get legally married, not with an American, much less at a young age. You'll be had like people I know and many others I've heard of. The latest one is a friend of mine duped by a bimbo; I won't get into details.

And regardless of what some naive younger people may think, your "soulmate" is not whoever you met in high school and there is no such thing. Look up the divorce rate. Also if you're a young guy working hard to get high in the world, wait until you have the advantage over the women through money and power. Just have your fun in the meantime. The chicks who told you to get lost when they were young and hot, chased by every guy and got free things will be itching to get with you when they start losing their looks. After they've spent a decade getting banged out by hot guys, the ride will be over for them. Get with a younger, better one instead, but never marry them. Guys have this advantage, we only gain value as we age if we work hard. Not so with female bimbos.

I sense a lot of pain in your heart.

I know a lot of old people who have been married all their lives and young people who are still going strong. What Americans lack is the will power to communicate issues before they grow out of proportion and blow up into something unsolvable.

I would actually rather be together with a person and say we are married than to actually get married just because that way if it doesn't work out its not a big deal, I can move on.

marriage is a purely monetary issue as well as a comfort issue... as mammals we naturally need a den to which we can take refuge whenever we see fit. that place is the home.
it's always easier to get through with a copilot .. that is what a spouse is. he / she is extra money on the table and sex on the side
I do not wish to bash marriage, I hope to be married to a girl whom i love sometime in the future. I am just saying that, bare bones, marriage is about money

and i have to concur with sbmx... your tone is implicit of an unwanted backstory :|

Yeah, but American/Americanized women seem to be failing at marriage and demanding everything. What's their purpose in a marriage beside baby machines? You're stepping into a trap with the whole marriage thing. A male has no reason to get married regardless of what you've been brainwashed to believe. And yes, get ready for the moans and hisses from the neo-feminists who like the system as it is already, but it's your choice to listen to them. I have the stats and they're full of it. And you don't have to get legally married by a failed contract institution to love somebody and start a family.

That's the only way to do it.

American/Americanized women compared to women of what other race or society?
This is global thing.

You can easily say men to be the failing point in a marriage. Sorry... but its true.

This can all be avoided by not marrying bimbos.

Compared to a lot of them including Japanese.

Well, you can say that, but if you look at the hard statistics, in divorce proceedings the majority of divorces are started by women. You can say some other unfounded assumption to explain that, I can pull out another statistic. Assumption vs. statistic. We can be here all day.

That's like saying avoid trouble. Psychics aren't real.

chicks
 

Maybe a bit harsh but very true words.

I sense too that you have had yourself a few too many run-ins with bimbos that screwed you over. What I believe about marriage is that in order for it to work both people need to be on board. You seem to have lost faith in females, and I am sorry that you feel that way. But marriage/building a family is doable and very rewarding if the proper effort is put forth. My parents have been together 43 years and counting and all my aunts and uncles are happily married as well and that's like another 6 couples. Not to mention all of my cousins.. in fact I cannot think of a single divorced relative of mine..

In any case part of the reason marriages fail today is the fact that people can live independently if they want to whereas throughout history that was probably a much tougher road to travel, not to mention, people tend to be lazy, self-centered and when the going gets tough.. they get going.. apart. Somehow society has gotten this idea that love is just this feeling you get and has nothing to do with your attitude and actions, when in reality true love is a choice. People who cannot understand that are probably going to be destined for a divorce someday. And I know that divorce is not always avoidable, so I am not saying there is nobody out there who should not have gotten divorced. But from what I have seen marriage can be a great thing and I look forward to getting married to my GF soon.

You know, I actually agreed with a lot of your points until you said this.

If there is anywhere that marriage is almost a completely financial arrangement, it`s Japan. Men get married to have children and someone to raise them and care for the house - and women get married for the monetary stability. It`s quite transparent, and love / mutual support is really a bonus on top if you`ve got it.

It really sounds like you have a very idealized image of Japanese women... Pretty common and almost always leading to a very bad end.

Anyway - to address the original points.

A marriage is only as strong and valid as those involved in the marriage think it is. If you look at marriage as a trap, then that is what it will become. If you look at is as a way of getting official recognition for a strong relationship - that is what it will be. And if you look at it as a way of screwing the other person (ie. selfishly and for your advantage alone), that is what it will become.
The institution of marriage itself is not at fault - it`s the attitudes toward marriage that are. For those who take it seriously and put a high value on it, it can be a very good arrangement.

I personally do believe in soulmates, or a similar idea - the thing is I think they are very hard to find. In the majority of cases, you`re probably not going to find them. And the majority of people who incorrectly think they`ve found their soulmate with find out the hard way after a few years.

I agree with this. The big problem is that you are applying the behavior of "bimbos" to the entire population of women. Not all women are "bimbos"... But chances are if you`re looking for women in the type of places you find bimbos, that is all you`re going to find. Honest and decent women don`t usually hang around with the "bimbos". And they also usually don`t want to end up with the type of guy who will fall for a "bimbo".

I feel that I`m very far from a feminist - but I still don`t think that marriage should be abolished. I do feel attitudes toward marriage should change very very much though. If you see marriage as something that you can get out of with relative ease later on if you "don`t like it" - then the number of marriages that have not been thought through will go up, and the number of divorces will shoot up with it. If you think of marriage as something that really is for life and not just for as long as I want it... It becomes a much larger commitment with much greater repercussions. People would also be a bit more likely to try to work through things instead of just popping over to annul the thing the first time something big goes wrong.

As it stands though, it is worth as much as you believe it is. If you honestly make marriage a commitment for life and your partner does the same - what is wrong with the situation? You are officially recognized as a team, you both have the security of knowing that things aren`t so easy to run away from, finances are consolidated, etc.

I personally think that there is some issue with feminism in this - too many women feel that they should have all the rights of men, and special ones on top because they are women. If you`re equal, you`re equal - if you`re not, you`re not.

I`ve been married almost 10 years - and it`s all what you put into it. Both my husband and I put our all into the marriage, and we are incredibly happy. We both understand each other (something sorely lacking, I think, in a lot of marriages... Either because of poor communication or a lack of interest) so there is little that could trigger fighting. We`d either both do the same thing in the same situation, or at the very least know what the other is thinking. We also both appreciate each other and accept our roles. I am in debt to my husband for the crap he has to go through to earn enough to support all of us, and he is in debt to me for taking care of everything in his absence and raising our son responsibly. He ranks my effort above his, but I rank his above mine. It all evens out.

technically, a feminist is a person who cares about womans rights, so I am a feminist myself, and I'd hope you'd be as well.
what i think you are saying is "I do not consider myself one of those losers who seek out every possible instance of male superiority and have it reversed (e.g. motioning for "woman" to be changed to "womon" and for "women" to become "womyn") " am i correct in assuming you just want to make it clear that you are not petty like that? that still doesn't mean you are not a feminist.

anyway back to the main topic... marriage was born as a strategy in life to make neg. utility from a break up higher than positive utility.
now, however, marriage is almost purely a womans gain strategy. Women of the world, if you want to make some major bucks, marry a guy, have a kid with him and seek divorce.
as long as there is a kid involved, the woman has a solid 60's - 80's percentile probability of getting custody.. the courts just naturally want to see the mother with the kid... when that happens, 70% of assets go to the mother so she can raise the standard of living for the kid.

anyway, marriage has become a profitable industry for people (mostly women).. hopefully a few gay marriage dissolutions will help move us away from this "mother + kid allways" philosophy

A feminist is one who cares about rights for women... This doesn`t extend to the general rights of people, so in too many cases it takes on the meaning of "women`s rights above all others".
I am an egalitarian. I believe in equal rights for both men and women - not just in rights for women.

This is where what you think of the marriage as comes into play. If you think of it as a temporary arrangement, or one with few consequences for not fulfilling it... That is exactly what it will be.
A marriage isn`t necessary for a happy and productive relationship - it`s just a tool to make things easier, really. This is why I don`t really think that it is something that should be abolished.

This really doesn`t have much at all to do with marriage these days - at least not in the US. A woman can have a one night stand, get pregnant, and then demand a chunk of the man`s income for the child. Live together for a few years and prove you invested anything into the purchase of a house / car / etc - and there is a fair chance of receiving it when a child is involved. Marriage itself isn`t at fault here - it`s the whole attitude toward marriage and the selfishness in these relationships. It`s really just a tool that can be misused.
If marriage as an institution were removed, I don`t see anything really changing. There would be just as many people out there being selfish and screwing each other over in some way. The only difference would be whether they were registered with the government.

This is an interesting topic, though the idea of abolishing marriage is a little silly.

If you are worried about getting divorced there are two things you can do to radically increase the chance of your marriage lasting your lifetime, at least in the US.

1) graduate from college

2) wait until at least the age of 25 to get married.

Statistically those are the two factors that hinge between a majority of life long marriages and a majority of divorces in the US.

I point it out in every thread that does it, but I am not sure what being an American woman has to do with the divorce rate being as high as it is. Marriage is certainly a two-way street, so just because more women initiate divorce than men is no indicator of how awful marrying an American woman is. It may be an indicator of how awful marrying an American man is...who knows?

I am going to go out on a limb and say I am guessing that the rate of initiating divorce in Japan is probably as high if not higher from women as it is from men.

The OP is an extremely cynical view of the institution, but not entirely wrong. Marriage and divorce can be and often is used as a weapon. But if you agree to such a contractual bonding without first truly knowing both yourself and the other person, that is the risk. Lust and "being in love" just won't cut it in the real world.

The courts no longer automatically side with the wife in divorces for either custody or assets. And they are not to blame for the fact that a person does not use good judgement in a relationship. Thinking a person will change after marriage is also a common and severe mistake made by both men and women. We don't change. We just reveal more and more of our true character you failed to notice or convinced yourself was a minor problem.

Marriage is a commitment and as such is basically beneficial to both parties when done sensibily and for the right reasons.

HOWEVER, the legal and financial issues can irrepairably damage the bond and the individuals. I absolutely dissapprove of the tax and other legal benefits accorded to people solely because of a marriage certificate. It is neither just nor equitable..... EVER! I support gay marriage only because it is the single practical way to help equalize people under the law. I would prefer that the government stay completely out of the marriage contract entirely, but that is not going to happen.

The one piece of advice I would add to MMM's is to travel together and then live together for a while as roommates before marriage. I know this goes against the mores of most societies, but there is a logical reason for this.

Even if you find find your "soulmate" (yes, I believe in the concept) it does not automatically mean you belong together as husband and wife. Traveling with them will reveal how your work together under stress, or don't. Living with someone you are forced to face the reality of all sides of their personality and you will have a better foundation for deciding whether to take it further.

I've heard age before, but I've never heard college degree before.
I mean are we talking an associate degree, Bachelors, Masters or PHD.

Does your marriage last longer the better degree you have?
Are we talking the man or the women with a college degree or both?
What about minors?
Don't necessarily doubt it, but just never heard it; at least not in a recent study

I think #3 should be: Have a steady job or the ability to get steady work.

I'll add #4. Love is important for a marriage to last life long :rheart:
Oh... how sweet.

The reason I believe that American women have changed is they overdo it with the equal rights thing. I feel that they think they need to be in charge to be equal. This is what I sensed while dating some and was married to a American woman. I think this is why marriage is doomed in America. I am now married to a Japanese woman and she, and all Asian women I dated before, just treat me differently and I like it. I do treat them as equal even if it is not what they are taught in their culture and they loved being treated this way.
There is nothing wrong in being equal, just do order me around.
(I await your rants Mercedesjin:ywave: )

I guess one way to help your marriage is to think of eachother as equals, so you don't feel so far from eachother and that shorter journey over the bridge that links you will encourage others to want to cross it!!

I don't think you understood what I meant. What you describe is exactly the setup I'm saying is superior to entitled women who don't work yet do nothing in a marriage, often not even take care of kids because of daycare services. Raising children and taking care of the house seems like a huge accomplishment of Japanese women over American ones. That was part of my point.

Straight from the horse's mouth. And believe me, this isn't the first time I've heard this.

The reason American(ized) women act that way is because they have a sense of entitlement that's bestowed upon them the moment they sprout boobs. They're treated differently and given a lot of mercy within an aggressive society. It doesn't matter how many reactionary noobs pop up to say "not me not me not me", we're talking about a general trend here, not your life.

Btw, the comments that have insinuated this is about me, you are wrong. I haven't taken crap from women since college, and even then it was superficial. I just find it sick how all these cat whipped idiots make fools of themselves and believe that it's just normal, or that marriage is normal or necessary. The ones that choose not to listen deserve their fate.

You know, I used to think like you. If you don't drop that mentality you're going to get played someday. I can guarantee it. "women" don't care about what you think or do about their "rights"; obviously that means as some organized group (which does not exist). We mention the fact that women have more rights than ever, are favored in many areas, have special rights and even have a higher rate of university graduation, all that women's rights stuff just makes somebody look like a person who needs better priorities. Believe me, being a "nice guy" will never get you laid, either. Women are not impressed by your faux niceness or obsequiousness and never will be. Women are attracted to aloof a-holes that treat them indifferently. I know, I know, you might be replying to this with "no, not true blah blah blah", you're fooling nobody. I know how you think. I was there.

Far more sensible than marriage, though, is getting married by each other's word only, not the state. Then it means something.

very true. i can't tell you how many times i have been shunned by girls when executing a strategy of "nice guy" characteristics only to find them with jackasses later on
to be honest it's driven me to rape thought - i would never ever do that, but whenever i see a girl i would like to court, she is always with a guy.. i can seem to find them not in a relationship - and i end up imagining what it would be like.. but again, i can't see being able to bring myself to do such an act.

Well then I'm giving you the advice I wish I would have gotten 10 years ago. Don't act nice. Of course show interest but no nice, not a speck of it. In fact try to keep the acting to a minimum unless you're a professional actor. That's about the only valid thing in the whole "be yourself" cliché. Yes, be yourself because most people are naturally jerks and this is what girls find attractive regardless of whatever girly babble they spout.

I am going to strongly agree with this too. If you live together, travel together, spend distance apart, etc... And find some "deal breaker" trait in the person - chances are it will NEVER go away. Never ever assume you can change it or that it will go away. In fact, assuming the opposite - that there is at least one more you haven`t seen, and the one you have will only get worse - is probably best. If it is something you cannot stand while in the flash-burn of early love... Imagine how you`ll feel about it once emotions settle down.

I think there is a lot of cultural influence pushing women to be like men in order to be "equal". The thing is, women aren`t men, and there are things that never will be the same no matter what they do or how they behave. To pull off normal "feminine" stuff without being considered "lesser" (in their minds), there are too many women who overdo everything - to make up for being a woman they go to extremes in attitude.

(I am going to assume you meant don`t instead of do there. :P )
Those types of women need to realize that they don`t have to do "everything a man does and better" to be an equal person.

That might get you laid, but if that is your only interest in a relationship, why not just pay for it and not worry about the whole getting involved bit?
If you actually want an actual relationship, love, etc... My biggest question when people bring this up is - Would you want to be with the type of woman who would jump into bed with a jerk? Do you think a functional relationship could come of that? Sure, you might catch those girls who you think are hot who are in relationships with jerks... but... what would the point be other than something physical?
Maybe I`m just strange, but I can`t imagine a lasting relationship starting that way. A short fling - maybe. And if you ARE a jerk, you probably wouldn`t be trying to be a nice guy to begin with, so "stopping faking" probably wouldn`t get you what you want either.
The advice to stop acting isn`t going to help the REAL nice guys out there, who seem to get the shortest end of the stick.

ETA; I missed this one.

It only means something as long as you think it does - not much different than a legal marriage. And the people who would make a commitment that means something are the people who wouldn`t be screwed over by a normal marriage.

екуфеьуте
 

When you are "nice" you are just boring person for them ;)

That's why you should be nice yet have something else!

For example I myself am nice and caring but also I have a twisted psyco creative mind that people seem to love ^_^

For one thing it’s illegal, but it’s up to anyone else if they want to get involved in that. Second, you pay far more being in a relationship or even getting a girl into bed than "paying for it". Time, effort and even money. And not that I would know for sure about the latter but the former seems like a much better thrill.

Whether they actually do it or not is irrelevant. The greater point is that most women would want to if they did. If they jumped into bed with someone, a boring nice guy would not be their first choice, not even their 10th choice. Sure, if the 11th choice is all they can get, that’s what they’ll go for. That’s just how they’re set up regardless of whatever conscious merits they have. And college age people are going to do this a lot so if you want to play the game (and all guys do), might as well learn to play it well and there's no regrets later.

It may or may not. It’s really not important. Even in the case of seeking a relationship, a girl’s first choice will never be a nice guy. Even if getting dead serious is what a guy wants at that age, for whatever absurd reason, then acting the nice guy will not attract what they want anyway.

There is no such thing as that nice of a guy. Of course there’s plenty of guys who aren’t selfish, but not to the point that they will give a random stranger that much attention like when a so-called nice-guy gives a girl attention. Why would somebody do this to somebody they don’t really know that well or never even met before? Because they’re interested in them, that’s why. Most of them you won’t see entertaining sick little kids at the hospital to make them feel special or volunteering to chat up lonely old people. None of those so-called nice guys are going to be chatting up some other dude that looks depressed to make them feel better, nor any girl they’re not into. What’s so nice about “acting” nice to a girl they like? Nothing worth labeling someone a “nice guy” over. That’s all I’m saying. I mean sure, I could consider myself a “nice guy” if I care for things beyond myself, and I do, but that in itself will not get a guy a thing nor promote goodness in the world. REAL nice guys are going to waste a lot of their time believing otherwise until they finally pick up a weapon. Not that I believe there actually are that many REAL nice guys, because there aren’t.

Besides that flawed definition of “nice guy”. The regular nice guys, that is, the ones a notch above sociopaths are going to fail at getting what they want also if they don’t quit being obsequious pushovers. Nobody wins there except perhaps entitled girls who devour random attention so they can grow their entitlement ego even bigger. And those girls are still going to love giving it to the jerk regardless.

Maybe, maybe not. But in the U.S., the statistics suggest otherwise.

I was under the impression that there were legal brothels - though I can`t say I would know where, or if they would be within traveling distance of everyone out there. I agree that you pay more for getting into a relationship - which is why I brought that up in the first place.
I can`t comment on the thrill, as I`ve never been involved in a relationship that was not serious.

But this has no connection with marriage and getting into a lasting relationship. It has no connection with the rate of divorce, etc... It`s just about picking up short term flings and getting into a girl`s pants. You may be entirely right about what the regular woman looking for sex would go for - but I have a feeling the type of woman a man looking for sex with is not necessarily going to be the same type of woman a man is going to want to be in a long term relationship with.

After reading through your rant about nice guys, I realized that I sort of screwed up on interpreting the phrase. I didn`t really know there was a whole category and set behavior for a "nice guy" - I was taking it at literal value as an honestly nice guy.
Yes, no one is going to go for a pushover. This doesn`t matter whether they are into jerks - it`s just uncomfortable because it usually seems fake, plus that type of "nice guy" usually has been "nice" to another girl in view.

But still, I really get the feeling that you`re up in arms about women and who they choose to have sex with - not anything about long term relationships and marriage. The dynamics of relationships that are not serious or that are only physical are worlds away from those of serious relationships.

They suggest that relationships that don`t commit to marriage last longer than those that do? Where does that figure come from?
I am saying that the type of relationship which would work well with a non-legal commitment is the same type of relationship which would work well in a legal marriage. The attitude toward commitment is the issue, not the method of committing.

Do you think that if marriage was abolished, and individual commitments took it`s place... That there would be fewer relationships ending? Do you think there would be less pain involved in the break up of a relationship if it were a private commitment and not a legal one? Even without legal backing of a commitment NOW (marriage), mothers can secure financial support from fathers. Long term partners can receive settlements when the relationship ends.

Obviously the divorce rate would go down as "divorce" wouldn`t be necessary. But the problem would still be there with another name.

It does. It shines light on the motivation of relationships themselves.

The definition is in the context which it came up in this thread. Acting nice to get with girls.

Maybe not, but that’s the crux of this point. They are into them, never mind assumptions about fakers. They like drama. It doesn’t matter what fake nice guys have or have not done. The girls will pick the jerks first because that’s what they are inherently attracted to and this is what young guys need to understand and use to their advantage. They are not into femme acting guys that listen to them except as pets to talk to about all the jerks they have banged. All the idealist talk is a big fat lie against this point. And that’s my one and only main point with the nice guy stuff.

I’m not up in arms about it, I’ve accepted the reality and am pointing it out. If I'm up in arms about anything, it's anyone trying to deny it. It does have to do with marriage and relationships because it has to do with what women want and how guys should not let them run anything, as the American ball and chain types have done while destroying marriage in the process. I guess my main point is to let guys understand that taking female BS is neither necessary nor the best thing for society. Put them in their place, so to speak.

No, they aren’t. They share prerequisites. Attraction being at the top.

No, the figure is that marriage is failing, that’s all. And legal marriage is screwing the guys in general, so there’s no need to get into it. What advantages does it have? Why should anyone bother with it? Tax breaks? Is that worth getting screwed in divorce? And even while it does last, it was my point about American wives which too many are not doing anything in a marriage.

They can get whatever they want from their fathers (of any children, I assume). Child support? Fine. Alimony? Hell no. The legal backing in marriage is the problem because it’s abused. Anything besides that is between two people. There’s really no need for a state marriage, the presumed advantages don’t come close to meeting the risks. If it’s all about love, etc., why such insistence on making a legal contract about it? Isn’t a relationship supposed to be about trust?

Or maybe people would respect the union more than as a court backed contract. These are all assumptions.

Btw, no, I don't necessarily think state marriage should be abolished. I just think any guy that gets into it (in America with an American woman) is a fool.

This is what I don't get. There are literally millions of American men married to American women who couldn't be happier.

These kind of overgereralizations take away from your argument. Just because you haven't been lucky in love doesn't mean it doesn't happen every day for other people.

The problem is people just go way too fast!

Sorta like drunk driving, Your drugs are the emotions you get from a realationship whether it's a true bond or lust and the more of it you have, the faster you go until you crash and burn.

But if you enter the world of love with a commitment to not drink, a commitment to not let your emotions push you to the road of fail and you pick someone with a pure heart and a pure bond than it will work MUCH better and you'll be MUCH happier

So it isn't "the womans tendency toeard jerks" No matter who you choose, you still gotta take love as the big commitment it is, Don't jump into it. It's actuallybest to be shy at the start of a relationship

Women aren't attracted to nice guys. Logically they say they want a nice guy, but attraction overrides logic everytime.

This topic seems to be less about marriage and more about young people dating.

overgereralization
 

Whoa! Did Xyzone say something about himself or his own negative experience? :)

Even if he says it isn't about him, no one could be that negative and cynical without having a negative personal experience.

negativity
 

Excuse me, but I strongly disagree. He may be just a good observer who collects a certain information from vast majority of his neighbours or co-workers. Furthermore, there are many cynical things in our life. We can talk about, making this particular forum more dynamic or we can keep silence, polishing the reality by soft vax duster. ;)

The very fact that there are literally hundreds of millions of happily married people in the world refutes the general argument.

Either his is talking about his personal experience or personal observations, as you put it, or he is ignoring the fact, for whatever reason, that not all people fit into the roles he describes.

Actually EVERYBODY is trying to fit all people into those roles.

IS THERE ANY RECOGNITION OF THOSE BRAVE ENOUGH TO STAND OUT?!

I made my point.

-Walks out-

No, the loudest demographic of women are attracted to jerks, because that's how the media likes to portray relationships and people get sucked into it. I'm also baffled. The women I know, american or otherwise, aren't like that, and they don't want just sex-based relationships with guys who seem to neither like women (i don't mean sexually, but socially) nor respect them.

I hate the term 'nice guy'. It's become synonymous with weak men and niceness isn't about weakness. I also hate this 'all girls only want jerks' routine, because it's kack. It's not what girls want; it's what they think they're supposed to want, but do you really think the majority LIKE dating someone who's horrible to them? Hell no. And a lot of girls learn that quickly. I firmly believe there ARE are mass of girls who want decent guys, they are just quieter about it. Not 'nice'. Decent. Dating a wet pushover is frustrating, but you're more likely to be with them for a better reason. Dating an aggressive jerk hurts, end of story. Unless you're rather cruel and jerkish yourself.

Actually, that's more my point. The girls who date only jerks either have some issue where they just cycle into bad relationships ~despite~ (or in fact, TO spite) themselves, or they're jerks as well.

BACK TO THE TOPIC~

I think marriage has a place in society. I just think a lot of people have a lot of strange delusions about what it's all about. Not to say that I get it yet, or have the answers, but I think it's neither the solve-it-all dream the romantics push nor the horror that the cynics would portray. It's what you make of it. Neither is divorce the be-all and end-all sin of relationships. Things end. Change happens and it's ok to have the option to call things to a close. Just a generation ago, people tended to be pushed into marriage with partners they probably would have ended things with if they'd been given more time to set things for themselves. There's plenty of people who re-marry into relationships that are more stable and happier than first marriages as a result.

Anyway, this thread looks pretty sorry to me. I agree with MMM, this isn't about popping the rosy delusions of the world or logically being cynical about marriage. It's barely even about discussing marriage. This is a flame on the assumed flaws of american women and rapidly over-generalizing to women's actions in general.

when you titled this post, you failed to make your point strong. Stereotyping men as stupid and women as bimbos is only one end of the spectrum. You can't base your life on something your friend went through.

and women losing their looks, gold diggers and divorce? looks like someone didn't get candy as a kid, it's way too cynical.

Marriage has its place, i don't think it should be abolished as a legal contract,to me, the way you're phrasing it reeks of slight misogynism as to why it should be abolished. Its a structure in society and it's also a reaffirmation of love, not a gold digging plot. And not everyone lives by the latter.

That's being rather nice. The distorted and insulting tone has turned more and more mysognist as support for his contentions has not arisen.

Nice guys are not automatically boring guys. Yes, there are those who are, but they are not the majority. The boring ones are only the ones that get attention because of they whine for pity, or froth with venom later.

Women may notice the jerks of the world, but only the psychologically damaged ones (not the majority!) stay with them once they show their true selves ...... intead of "ACTING NICE", as some here have admitted to doing.

If you are "acting nice" you are being as deceitful as those you complain about because you are showing a false front and deserve to be deceived ("played", "used", whatever term you care to choose) in return. Dishontesty attracts dishonesty.

Marriage is no place for the sort of game playing that is fully evident in the posting of those claim it to be inequal.

Exactly. The trouble with daring to state this fact is there's always someone who will jump in assuming it has anything to do with personal preference. Also, there's always exceptions to anything, but that's not what we're talking about. To deny women like aggressive jerks is like denying guys like boobs; it wouldn't matter how many goofballs jumped in to chime in how they prefer women's feet.

It doesn't matter. The point you're trying to make is like saying ~ 1 in 6 people in the world starving is not that bad because a lot of people get to eat in Africa.

You mean the armies of sitcoms and TV shows that show marriages and people staying married? Everyone is married and staying that way because TV said so. Never mind the truth that about half of marriages end in divorce - and rising. Of course, even when divorce does happen in happyland, it's just that "it didn't work out" and is the most normal thing in the world. It's like a high school break up. Move on and start dating again while the kids dress you and give you dating tips. All's well.

Maybe those women you know take what they can get. Most people do. Because it's funny how the women with the most options, the cheerleader models, etc., strangely, we never see them with "nice guys". Never happens. We see them with aggressive "jerks". Not to mention the fact that I never said women consciously seek sex-based relationships to get used. They fall into them due to being physically attracted to jerks.

Besides that, personal bubbles don't really prove anything and I never presumed to say my personal experience alone proves anything I said. We could have a war of he said she said, or we could look at tangible data instead, like the divorce rate and the amount of single mothers. The fact those single mothers were attracted to jerks is strongly evident if not obvious.

I didn't stereotype men as stupid so much as brainwashed and lacking direction.

All facts. Party girls become some old guy's or some dumb, yet successful nerd's trophy wife once she had her fill of hot jerk guys.

Might as well check off the list of clichéd punishments for me bringing this up.

- fail at relationships
- can't get women to begin with
- gay
- misogynist... wait there it is:

I already conceded that I'm willing to not call for abolishing it. I ask in return that I can rightfully call men who get into those contracts fools without me being called crazy, et al.

Again I ask, why is a legal contract necessary to "reaffirm" love? And do you ignore the divorce rate and the fate of men in most divorces? They lose.

________________
Here's one guy's thoughts about it, I don't agree with some of it, but his main points are right:
YouTube - How Feminism Screwed my Generation