|
Post by Handy on Oct 24, 2019 0:40:07 GMT -5
It has been said on some forums, that if the woman lives as the **"wife appliance" the H is usually willing to keep the marriage.
I think more and more women resent being the "wife appliance" position so they decide to divorce.
**"wife appliance" = run the household, take care of the kids, cook-clean, have sex sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by isthisit on Oct 24, 2019 4:55:11 GMT -5
It has been said on some forums, that if the woman lives as the **"wife appliance" the H is usually willing to keep the marriage. I think more and more women resent being the "wife appliance" position so they decide to divorce. **"wife appliance" = run the household, take care of the kids, cook-clean, have sex sometimes. Wife appliance? Seriously? I have said it before, and no doubt will say it again. Please check the calendar. Handy you’re a gentleman of your generation I know but honestly, the other version of my response had a great deal of swearing in it.
|
|
|
Post by tyler74 on Oct 24, 2019 7:01:24 GMT -5
@elkclan, I grew up in the belief that sex rapidly dropped off after marriage. When it happened to me I thought it normal (not to say it didn't bother me). I grew up thinking women weren't particularly interested in sex and it was mostly procreation and to keep husband happy.
|
|
|
Post by worksforme2 on Oct 24, 2019 7:16:27 GMT -5
In NC Democrats literally ran the state for 100 yrs. Democrat gov, lt.gov. legislature, courts, the whole shooting match, for 100 yrs. You can imagine how 1 sided virtually everything became. The results of divorce for men became so punitive that a significant % simply left the state rather than face the slow death of child support and alimony. Finally after 100 yrs. in spite of gerrymandering the voting precincts to assure democrat wins the state flipped totally Republican and reforms in the court system began. Much of the power judges had was taken from them and statewide statutes replaced arbitrary judges decisions. Now although it isn't perfect the system is much fairer to men, especially fathers.
|
|
|
Post by sadkat on Oct 24, 2019 11:43:25 GMT -5
Well, I think we may have explored this topic as much as we could. I think it’s now time to focus on you men. But, I’ll start another thread so everyone can keep track😊.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Nov 10, 2019 16:35:42 GMT -5
csl , your stat is also interesting. But do you really mean no-fault? I figured it was a thing of the past that any blame had to be assigned to get a divorce. Perhaps, do you mean no-alimony (like Texas) or equal-parenting? It would be interesting (and a sad statement) if alimony alone was the major factor; one would expect the kids and custody to play a significant factor. You might be right about that. As I said, I read this several years ago, and the pith of what I remember is that where men felt that they could get a fair shake in the courts, the filings for divorce were more evenly divided. As to the reason, I am wracking my memory to remember where I read it, but I can't recall it. FOUND IT!!! And the citation was in a blogpost I wrote four years ago. The article I was remembering was from the LA Times, from 2001. Here's the link? Male Version of the 'Walkaway Wife'
|
|
|
Post by baza on Nov 11, 2019 0:34:26 GMT -5
The figures quoted in that article from the Los Angeles Times were - "Of all U.S. divorces, about two-thirds are petitioned by women"
That's about 66% in the US (where, as I understand it, various states may have different legislation)
In my jurisdiction it's about 70% (where the divorce legislation - no fault - is federal covering all states and territories)
So the figures (66% and 70% of divorce initiators being women) are pretty much comparable.
A quick google got me to an article in The Telegraph newspaper in England and an article saying that wife initiated divorces were at 66% there too (but note that these were 2011 figures)
In this ILIASM group (a miniscule sample in the bigger scheme of things) I reckon the figure of wife initiated divorce is about 75%, for what that's worth.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Nov 11, 2019 12:21:51 GMT -5
This is the paragraph that I remembered:
The frustrating this is that they don't give the citation for the study that they are referencing!
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Nov 11, 2019 15:52:42 GMT -5
What I see is men lose money and women don't have enough money to run a household in many cases.
Bottom line for many men and women, money is in short supply. Do men resent giving up money more than women knowing she won't have enough money to maintain a lifestyle? That is one of the $64 dollar question.
|
|
|
Post by ironhamster on Nov 11, 2019 18:28:10 GMT -5
What I see is men lose money and women don't have enough money to run a household in many cases. Bottom line for many men and women, money is in short supply. Do men resent giving up money more than women knowing she won't have enough money to maintain a lifestyle? That is one of the $64 dollar question. Choices are almost always compromises. Is the emotional cost of cohabitation justified to live a better life financially? There is no right or wrong answer, and everyone's situation is different. Once I realized how much I had been played, the emotional cost of staying was substantially higher than it had been. I could live with less. I have a friend that stays, because he'd rather have the stuff. My girlfriend stays for her kids, but with an open marriage. The husband has roommate status until the kids are grown. A mountain biking friend of mine has a wife that encourages him to outsource, which he has been very successful at. She does not want to divorce. She cares about him. She just no longer cares for sex. That is one picture of what love looks like.
|
|
|
Post by shamwow on Nov 11, 2019 18:47:54 GMT -5
What I see is men lose money and women don't have enough money to run a household in many cases. Bottom line for many men and women, money is in short supply. Do men resent giving up money more than women knowing she won't have enough money to maintain a lifestyle? That is one of the $64 dollar question. Choices are almost always compromises. Is the emotional cost of cohabitation justified to live a better life financially? There is no right or wrong answer, and everyone's situation is different. Once I realized how much I had been played, the emotional cost of staying was substantially higher than it had been. I could live with less. I have a friend that stays, because he'd rather have the stuff. My girlfriend stays for her kids, but with an open marriage. The husband has roommate status until the kids are grown. A mountain biking friend of mine has a wife that encourages him to outsource, which he has been very successful at. She does not want to divorce. She cares about him. She just no longer cares for sex. That is one picture of what love looks like. Love of what, exactly? It doesn't seem like love of a person, but love of stuff. I've got less "stuff" than I used to, but for the first time I know what love looks like. ballofconfusion and I were discussing her neighbors last night. Windows are open in her area so you can hear everything. She was screaming at him about sleeping in separate bedrooms and how he hadn't done anything for her financially. There is a porche and sporty audi in the million dollar townhouse. We believe he is gay and she is an absolute bitch. Lots of stuff but miserable. Stuff don't keep you warm at night.
|
|
|
Post by ironhamster on Nov 11, 2019 19:04:06 GMT -5
Choices are almost always compromises. Is the emotional cost of cohabitation justified to live a better life financially? There is no right or wrong answer, and everyone's situation is different. Once I realized how much I had been played, the emotional cost of staying was substantially higher than it had been. I could live with less. I have a friend that stays, because he'd rather have the stuff. My girlfriend stays for her kids, but with an open marriage. The husband has roommate status until the kids are grown. A mountain biking friend of mine has a wife that encourages him to outsource, which he has been very successful at. She does not want to divorce. She cares about him. She just no longer cares for sex. That is one picture of what love looks like. Love of what, exactly? It doesn't seem like love of a person, but love of stuff. I've got less "stuff" than I used to, but for the first time I know what love looks like. ballofconfusion and I were discussing her neighbors last night. Windows are open in her area so you can hear everything. She was screaming at him about sleeping in separate bedrooms and how he hadn't done anything for her financially. There is a porche and sporty audi in the million dollar townhouse. We believe he is gay and she is an absolute bitch. Lots of stuff but miserable. Stuff don't keep you warm at night. Well, no, it doesn't, but in my mountain biking friend's case, his wife cares about him enough to want him to get his needs met. In our old age, we can't expect to slow down at the same rate. This is far more loving than insisting one's spouse must be miserable for the sake of the relationship. My ex, I believe, got some sort of sadistic arousal out of refusing me. At minimum, the deal was all about what was in it for her. My discomfort was only a concern when she realized I was at my breaking point. It wasn't love for her. It was control.
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Nov 12, 2019 1:28:30 GMT -5
Shamwow Love of what, exactly? It doesn't seem like love of a person, but love of stuff.
Shamwow, what I had in mind was people that had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to live separate. I was thinking about a man and a woman barely getting by on their own VS living somewhat comfortably together and mostly ignoring each other. It isn't really about the stuff being that important but deciding to live a life of just getting by and supporting 2 households. This is sort of what I have.
My W seems to be concerned that I stay healthy but not so much about my emotional satisfaction. We are also on different lifestyle paths.
|
|
|
Post by h on Nov 12, 2019 9:39:07 GMT -5
Shamwow Love of what, exactly? It doesn't seem like love of a person, but love of stuff. Shamwow, what I had in mind was people that had to scrape the bottom of the barrel to live separate. I was thinking about a man and a woman barely getting by on their own VS living somewhat comfortably together and mostly ignoring each other. It isn't really about the stuff being that important but deciding to live a life of just getting by and supporting 2 households. This is sort of what I have. My W seems to be concerned that I stay healthy but not so much about my emotional satisfaction. We are also on different lifestyle paths. Yeah, I'm one of those bottom of the barrel types. It's not about the stuff, the luxuries, the expensive things. It's about having enough just to survive with a roof over my head, a reliable car to get to work (no public transportation here), be able to cover the bills, have enough extra in the budget for emergencies, and then have to pay spousal support on top of that. If you're already just barely getting by, staying may be a necessity for some people, or at least delaying a split for a while. Anyone can say that emotional health is more important than "stuff", but what if that "stuff" is having a home at all.
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Nov 12, 2019 10:09:49 GMT -5
Choices are almost always compromises. Is the emotional cost of cohabitation justified to live a better life financially? There is no right or wrong answer, and everyone's situation is different. Once I realized how much I had been played, the emotional cost of staying was substantially higher than it had been. I could live with less. I have a friend that stays, because he'd rather have the stuff. My girlfriend stays for her kids, but with an open marriage. The husband has roommate status until the kids are grown. A mountain biking friend of mine has a wife that encourages him to outsource, which he has been very successful at. She does not want to divorce. She cares about him. She just no longer cares for sex. That is one picture of what love looks like. Love of what, exactly? It doesn't seem like love of a person, but love of stuff. I've got less "stuff" than I used to, but for the first time I know what love looks like. ballofconfusion and I were discussing her neighbors last night. Windows are open in her area so you can hear everything. She was screaming at him about sleeping in separate bedrooms and how he hadn't done anything for her financially. There is a porche and sporty audi in the million dollar townhouse. We believe he is gay and she is an absolute bitch. Lots of stuff but miserable. Stuff don't keep you warm at night. It's complicated though, and given the rates of child custody being awarded in contested cases (80+% to women), I think it presents men with a disadvantage - generally. Most households start by adopting lifestyle and habitation expenses somewhere on par with their household income. Especially in metropolitan areas like where I live, very modest semi-detached houses cost somewhere close to a million. If kids are present and custody is split evenly, the household now doubles its expenses -including habitation. Most people don't have a spare million laying around, or equivalent upkeep, to house the kids in now TWO dwellings, withing the same school district, working off the same net household income. Even if you sell the marital home and split cost, you still don't have enough to buy two, still fitting two kids. This provides a strong incentive to push for full custody, and have the other parent fund the household with the kids. So one partner gets the kids and the home, the other partner is sent to exile in a basement bachelor with a hot plate, to find the money to fund the other home. Even with the most cooperation possible, splitting couples are still left with the problem of how to fund a 3 bedroom or two bedroom household for one parent and kids, plus a separate dwelling for the other parent. Where I live, separated couples often co-habitate. Sometimes they do a birds nest, with parents swapping in and out to an apartment. Or they just don't separate but start dating others, having affairs, and gets toxic.
|
|