Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

In the spirit of the original idea of this thread, the most important question that Aestu and USD would ask before marriage appears to be: Do you have a vagina? An affirmative answer to this question is a deal-breaker for marriage, but it doesn't mean we can't hang out... or have sex, or something. Then you could go home...and I'll keep my stuff.

All kidding aside, marriage clearly isn't for everyone. I suppose a more important question someone would need to answer is: Is it even possible for me to be with someone and to be happier with them than I am alone? I believe some people are simply happier completely untethered.

As happy as I am being married, I have many friends and family who were even more unhappy. Strangely, though, almost all of them give it another try (some multiple tries) because apparently, for them, the only thing worse than being married is being alone.

Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension

Dibs and a his/hers Fleshlight/Vibrator.

One has nothing to do with the other. Marriage is no less desirable or applicable to Usd or I than anyone else. We just have a bit more common sense in understanding its implications in the world of today. If this feminist crap was not in play then we would have no objection whatsoever to getting married. But it is, and you can't just ignore that.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Seriously. What unprotected asset do you have that any woman would marry you to get, anyway? Women aren't all that scary, aren't smarter than you, and aren't out to get you. Hell, you could always craft a pre-nup covering things you worry about, right? What is the real issue?

Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension

This is a stupid and baseless insult and you should feel bad for making it. You suck at thinking if the best you can do to defend your argument is appeal to fear or ego. Dismissing the reasons that have been explained to you without good reasons of your own is willful ignorance.

There's no reason to believe this and it makes no sense, even less given that regarding our romantic disposition towards women in general Usd and I could not possibly have less in common.



I made an analogy with engagement rings. Motivations are not always so clear cut. Actually it is not even an analogy because it is in fact exactly the same thing, the engagement/marriage is motivated by romantic considerations but when that doesn't work out, there's no reason to not make a cash grab.

I have told you repeatedly that "protected asset" means nothing. Things get pretty freaky when you get into the realm of "the law is whatever some activist judge writes on a piece of paper."

Alimony and child support ignore ability to pay. A lot of former husbands are literally thrown behind bars for being "deadbeat" when the truth is they simply don't have any money.



Stupid and bigoted argument. Women are no more guileless or incapable of evil than men, and it wouldn't matter even if they were. The entire point of this system is to overwhelmingly throw the odds in the favor of the basest urges of the stupidest women. And smart women have never needed the help.



You have been told REPEATEDLY this is not true. If you are not interested in actually learning something then don't ask rhetorical questions.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

An engagement ring is a gift. It becomes hers as soon as you give it to her. And, she owns that asset prior to marriage.



I posted you a link from Forbes briefly summarizing what is protected in divorce proceedings. Don't pull out the boogieman judge lurking out there to screw you over. Silly argument is silly. Stop acting as if all men are too stupid to take advantage of mechanisms that are in place to protect them.



That's the deadbeats' side of the story. You clearly have no experience in this area and know no one who has been through this. I do, and I can tell you from their experiences that what you typed here is complete and utter horseshit. I know several men who were very strained to make these payments, but succeeded. I know at least three who lost jobs, or had to accept pay cuts and petitioned the court for revision. Usually, child support is based on a percentage of disposable income. And, I'm sitting right now with a deadbeat named Dave who never paid a child support payment for 15 years(his daughter is now 35ish), and he's never been to jail for it (admittedly, I know at least one who went to jail for non-payment. He was there for 3 days and still doesn't pay). I know you'll disregard my personal knowledge of this since I can't link it, but then, you ignored facts that I linked, as well.



I never said women are guileless or incapable of evil. I said they all aren't out to get you.



I have been repeatedly told this is not true...by someone who doesn't know anything about it.




I just saw this part of your response. Oops. Apparently, I struck a nerve. I didn't mean it as an insult, and I don't feel bad for my opinion on why you're continuing to defend arguments that have been refuted. You continue to bring Usd into this even though he stopped his "women are after my stuff" argument when he read that link and realized he is smart enough to protect himself if he ever chose to go the marriage route. So are you.

The truth is that you know you are vulnerable. You want a woman to want you so badly that you know one could easily hurt you. Maybe that's already happened. It makes more sense than most of this other stuff.

Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension

A court decides who owns what and the law is whatever they write on a piece of paper.



Forbes is not a credible source on anything, the world is not a very nice place, and the latter part of your argument is just pure bigotry.

If you think that the non-stupidity of men is a valid argument then it logically follows that you think women are stupid. How else would it be expected they would lose on the basis of men not being stupid when the playing field is skewed beyond all reason in their favor?



You linked no facts. What you are trying to do is make the outrageous sound reasonable because you don't want to challenge your own ways of thinking.

Those sacrifices should never have been asked of those men in the first place. They did not choose to break up the marriage, and now that it is gone, what business does the homebreaker have still living off him as if they're still part of the same household? If the father isn't getting the benefit of seeing his child when he wants, why should he pay for its upkeep?

And why should anyone put themselves in a position to go through those things? Did they see it coming? Should they have? Would they agree with your interpretation of their problems and insist the system that totally screwed them over is fair? No? Then what makes you think you're in a position to second-guess both them and a disinterested third party?



And I never claimed that they were. Strawman is strawman.



Neither do you. Your "knowledge" is based on anecdotes that you skew beyond all reason according to your own biases. Certainly the sources of those anecdotes wouldn't agree with your interpretation any more than you do (presuming that their situation is reasonable or that they should have seen it coming or somehow deserved it) so to even cite them is both arrogant and willfully ignorant.

You're doing the rhetorical equivalent of robbing from Peter (second-guessing the sources of your anecdotes) to give to Paul (using the same misconstrued anecdotes to tell someone else they're wrong). The only common element is you - your efforts to skew both sides of the picture.

As for your understanding of gender relations on a day-to-day basis, that is 50 years out of date. The game has changed, by design.



You're proving my point.

So you have no fucking clue about anything related to my life. But you simply *assume* that the facts of which you know nothing nor have any reason to believe such facts even exist MUST exist because they would HAVE to in order for your position to be cogent. Circular reasoning much?

Nor can such assumptions be reconciled with what you already know. Generally speaking, I am not a vulnerable person. I do not have difficulty talking about issues and feelings I take seriously, or adjusting my viewpoint when given good reason to do so. I neither have an intense need for connections to other people nor am I afraid of having such connections. I neither fawn over women nor do I fear or despise them. People have seen me cooperate with, court, seduce, disdain or punish individual women with equal pragmatism and ease.

Across basically every personality/value/behavior axis, Usd sits pretty neatly at the other end of the spectrum. Not that in this context it makes him a worse person, merely so different as to debunk your argument. We cannot arrive at a certain conclusion for reasons that by definition cannot apply to both of us at once.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Whether you're being sincere or just being catty about being handed a red card, and whether I was offended or merely annoyed, makes no difference. It adds up to exactly the same thing which is that there would be no other reason to say such things but trying to insult or appeal to fear.



He said no such thing. His last post was on page 5 and indicated no acceptance of your claims. Presumably, unlike me, he has a life and gave up on the discussion.



This argument would only sound plausible to a totally arrogant person.

A smart person is not smart because he knows how to get out of trouble, a smart person is smart because he knows how to avoid it in the first place. The same principle holds true if you're faced with the choice between walking through a tough neighborhood or simply going around. A tough guy doesn't need to put himself in such a position if he can avoid it.

Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.

Neighborhoods don't start out tough.

I'm more worried about my paycheck than my property, I don't own anything valuable that can't be replaced.

30% of my paycheck is already taxed, I'm not willing to give up half of the rest to some woman just because she doesn't want to hang out anymore, and considering the custody lopsidedness I'm not even going into the children debate.

Wow, I leave for a long weekend and find a thread has blown up to 7 pages!

I think Aestu and Usdk are very right. Marriage is way riskier for men. Women initiate more divorces. The courts fuck men over pretty much in every scenario. From an economic perspective, marriage is fucking dumb. If you are risk averse...don't do it. You can still have kids and not need to be married. You can still live together and not have to get married. I think for Aestu and Usdk, those are the only options...that or celibacy.



That said, as a child of divorce, I've also seen my father be remarried happily for 19 years. He won't be getting divorced again. He's going to be with my step mom until he's dead and in the ground.

Boredalt is right, sometimes it's simply worth the risk. You're making a relationship as official as you can make it. And, in theory, you're saying "til death do us part" That means a lot. That means, in theory, this person will be by your side, for better and for worse, when you are old, ugly, and slightly senile. There's a lot to be said for that kind of commitment, and it's extremely rare nowadays.

Divorce used to not really exist because of stigma, economic barriers, etc. Now that that is gone, marriages that last are ones that are truly meant to last. Ones where communication is #1. Where compromise is #1-a, and where true devotion comes through in the end.

You're right Aestu, these feminazi women and cosmopolitan, and Twilight, and all this social noise has warped a majority of females into never being able to stay married. At the same time, Maxim, Spike TV, and other male social noise have done the male psyche no favors when it comes to marriage.

Society has made marriage one of the hardest things possible to get right. Truth is, you likely won't get it right...which is what this thread is all about...it's all about discussing the things and thinking about the things that will help you get it right. If you communicate, and figure out all this business BEFORE taking the plunge....you are more likely to stay married. Back to what I said in my first post...if both parties look at marriage as "til death do us part" truthfully...then I think that's huge. If you work towards the same goal...that's huge.



Me? I want to get married. I've seen what broken marriages can do...and I want a chance to do it right. If I lose a shit ton of money in the process and get my heart ripped in half...so be it. Because if it pays off, I'll have a companion for life. Notice I said companion...meaning I support them, and they support me. Equal. A pair.

I think one is the loneliest number, and so I'm willing to take a risk to avoid it.

Aestu, the "50 years" comment... nice. "Take thy beak from out my heart."

Usd, prenups are all the rage. Or shacking up. However, you have to be careful just living with someone, as well.

Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension

I'm more of the casual encounter type of person, given the choice.

Though when I find someone worth keeping around, I'm as loyal as can be.

pretty sure Fred Flintstone was at Boredalt's wedding!!!!

[13:56:01] [W From] [Slimecrack]: I just wanted to tell your brown that when I look into its one brown eye, I see joy and love, thank god for your ass, PRAISE JESUS!

There's a lot of truth to what Aestu and USD said, but as everyone has pointed out, there are a lot of other variables underlying the problem. Women do initiate the bulk of divorces, and sometimes it's just because they're being juvenile, self-involved bitch monsters, but there's got to be at least a few cases where the husband is in the wrong. Some people do try to make it work, and they can't.

Some of you say that you shouldn't marry someone if you don't trust them enough to believe they'll stay with you for the rest of your life. I'm not sure from where this trust is supposed to come. I can't tell you how many times I've had a friend or family member get involved with a woman I knew, and went from thinking "why is SHE with HIM???" to being totally disappointed when the woman in question turned out to be something other than what I thought she was. I'm generally pretty good at gauging people, and I can generally predict how people will react in most situations, so if someone I grew up with turns out to be something other than what I thought they were, how much faith am I going to be able to place in someone I've been dating for a year or more?

Divorce still seems really weird to me. My parents were together until my mother died. I didn't realize how odd that was until I started working after high school. A few times I'd say something about living with my parents, and the people I worked with would ask me if I meant my mom or my dad...it didn't occur to them that they'd both be in the same house. That's a big fucking problem, as far as I'm concerned. People have an expectation that parents don't stay together...at least people who are on the lower end of the economic scale. I've seen some data that suggests divorce is rare among the the upper-middle-class to wealthy.

I don't think things would be so bad, but there are almost no negative consequences for women in divorce. They may have no incentives to stay married, but there are definitely few, if any, disincentives for them to divorce. There's no longer any social stigma attached to divorce. They're practically guaranteed custody of their children. Woman rarely have to pay the man they divorce after the marriage ends, but men will often pay alimony...I don't even want to bring child support and how ridiculous and contentious that can become into it.

My marriage didn't end because I was a bad husband. Or maybe it did, but I'm not entirely sure why it ended, because I wasn't there when the other person decided things were done. I was on a submarine in the middle of the Atlantic when she decided she wasn't happy being a married woman anymore and traded down to some white trash loser who lived in a trailer with his mother. The majority of guys I know or meet who are divorced or on their way to it feel the same way: what the fuck did I do wrong that I deserve this? I'm sure there are a few women out there who feel that way, too, but it's hard to her them sobbing in the background behind all their "sisters" high-fiving one another over ditching "that man."

I'd like to be married again in the future, but I'm not sure how that could happen. I like having a woman in my life. Not "women," a--as in one--woman. I did the different-girl-every-other-weekend thing when I was in my twenties. I'm not going to lie and say it wasn't fun, but what's fun in your twenties is fucking tiresome and sad when you're my age. The women my own age I've dated are/were train wrecks. At least one was probably certifiably insane, the others at least had serious personality issues. The majority of them had a drinking problem...which sometimes was a necessary part of their psychological issues. I dated one woman I grew up with who clearly was starved for an emotional and physical connection with another person who would only open up physically and emotionally when she was drinking--heavily. The women I've dated who are "too young" for me aren't much better, and even the one or two who seemed OK didn't want to spend the rest of their lives with an older man...they just wanted a good time.

We're all hosed. You're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't. Might as well just do what you want and say fuck it to the consequences. That seems to be the thing to do now.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste