OT/ ” I Have The Pu–y, I Make The Rules”

[NotCranky]

[quote=justme][quote=Russell]

The alimony and child support doesn’t scare everybody to the same extent.

[/quote]

Oh, yeah, the old just-be-a-man-about-it argument.

Alimony and child support is not about being “scared”. It is about the real damage that divorce court does to men.

It is the same tactic used when women say that men are “afraid” of commitment. What nonsense. It is just a cheap-trick tactic designed to manipulate men into making a commitment even when it is a bad deal for them.[/quote]

I was scared to death of commitment, but wasn’t ever pushed into one and I don’t feel vulnerable to getting screwed by the courts so that is my perspective. In general though I think you want to stay out of court. It doesn’t surprise me if some men or even most, get screwed in some ways in divorce court. I still think if they had lived differently in marriage they would have had a better chance at equity in child support, alimony and visitation. Divorce and subsequent life probably would have gone better overall. If the courts make decisions based on how the
couple/ family/children actually lived I can’t blame them.

[ucodegen]

@CA renter

Slight problem with statistics on this one. Notice the careful wording they are using:

Recent studies have proved that as many as 53.4% of the single mothers with children are below the poverty line.

They are not removing unwed mothers with children born out of wedlock, teen mothers etc. Note that they said single mothers and not divorced mothers. Notice that it has a problem aligning with the next statement:

In addition, studies also prove that while men tend to experience only a 10% drop in incomes post-divorce, women are likely to experience as much as 30% drop in income after divorce.

Note several things here:
1) The number for the men at 10% drop is an average.
2) The number provided for women is ‘as much as 30%’ or a maximum amount.
To get 53.4% under poverty line, they would have to be awfully close to the poverty line to begin with to have the 30% drop them below.

The main reason for this is that when women tend to start their careers after taking a long break from their careers, they do not get hired for highly skilled jobs.

Depends. If they had a skilled job to begin with, they can restart their careers near where they left off.

Let’s face it, NOBODY “wins” in a divorce. **Everybody** is much poorer after divorce because, after divorce, they have to pay for TWO households instead of one, and both get HALF of the marital assets, leaving each with half of what they once had.

This is one of the biggest problems with divorce, but you also then step back and ask yourself that with these costs, are they ahead or behind, when compared to individuals who have been single the entire time, because of the period of time they were married.

I’m focusing especially on divorced mothers, because there is a tremendous difference between divorced with kids (BIG deal), and divorced without kids.

Age of the kids also has a significant contribution to this difference too.

Divorce sucks — for mothers, fathers, and especially the kids.

Sometimes.. and this is from a former ‘kid’ who grew up in a divorced family. Sometimes the peace and quiet and reduction in stress is worth the reduction in material goods.

[ucodegen]

@CA renter

Slight problem with statistics on this one. Notice the careful wording they are using:

Recent studies have proved that as many as 53.4% of the single mothers with children are below the poverty line.

They are not removing unwed mothers with children born out of wedlock, teen mothers etc. Note that they said single mothers and not divorced mothers. Notice that it has a problem aligning with the next statement:

In addition, studies also prove that while men tend to experience only a 10% drop in incomes post-divorce, women are likely to experience as much as 30% drop in income after divorce.

Note several things here:
1) The number for the men at 10% drop is an average.
2) The number provided for women is ‘as much as 30%’ or a maximum amount.
To get 53.4% under poverty line, they would have to be awfully close to the poverty line to begin with to have the 30% drop them below.

The main reason for this is that when women tend to start their careers after taking a long break from their careers, they do not get hired for highly skilled jobs.

Depends. If they had a skilled job to begin with, they can restart their careers near where they left off.

Let’s face it, NOBODY “wins” in a divorce. **Everybody** is much poorer after divorce because, after divorce, they have to pay for TWO households instead of one, and both get HALF of the marital assets, leaving each with half of what they once had.

This is one of the biggest problems with divorce, but you also then step back and ask yourself that with these costs, are they ahead or behind, when compared to individuals who have been single the entire time, because of the period of time they were married.

I’m focusing especially on divorced mothers, because there is a tremendous difference between divorced with kids (BIG deal), and divorced without kids.

Age of the kids also has a significant contribution to this difference too.

Divorce sucks — for mothers, fathers, and especially the kids.

Sometimes.. and this is from a former ‘kid’ who grew up in a divorced family. Sometimes the peace and quiet and reduction in stress is worth the reduction in material goods.

[ucodegen]

@CA renter

Slight problem with statistics on this one. Notice the careful wording they are using:

Recent studies have proved that as many as 53.4% of the single mothers with children are below the poverty line.

They are not removing unwed mothers with children born out of wedlock, teen mothers etc. Note that they said single mothers and not divorced mothers. Notice that it has a problem aligning with the next statement:

In addition, studies also prove that while men tend to experience only a 10% drop in incomes post-divorce, women are likely to experience as much as 30% drop in income after divorce.

Note several things here:
1) The number for the men at 10% drop is an average.
2) The number provided for women is ‘as much as 30%’ or a maximum amount.
To get 53.4% under poverty line, they would have to be awfully close to the poverty line to begin with to have the 30% drop them below.

The main reason for this is that when women tend to start their careers after taking a long break from their careers, they do not get hired for highly skilled jobs.

Depends. If they had a skilled job to begin with, they can restart their careers near where they left off.

Let’s face it, NOBODY “wins” in a divorce. **Everybody** is much poorer after divorce because, after divorce, they have to pay for TWO households instead of one, and both get HALF of the marital assets, leaving each with half of what they once had.

This is one of the biggest problems with divorce, but you also then step back and ask yourself that with these costs, are they ahead or behind, when compared to individuals who have been single the entire time, because of the period of time they were married.

I’m focusing especially on divorced mothers, because there is a tremendous difference between divorced with kids (BIG deal), and divorced without kids.

Age of the kids also has a significant contribution to this difference too.

Divorce sucks — for mothers, fathers, and especially the kids.

Sometimes.. and this is from a former ‘kid’ who grew up in a divorced family. Sometimes the peace and quiet and reduction in stress is worth the reduction in material goods.

[ucodegen]

@CA renter

Slight problem with statistics on this one. Notice the careful wording they are using:

Recent studies have proved that as many as 53.4% of the single mothers with children are below the poverty line.

They are not removing unwed mothers with children born out of wedlock, teen mothers etc. Note that they said single mothers and not divorced mothers. Notice that it has a problem aligning with the next statement:

In addition, studies also prove that while men tend to experience only a 10% drop in incomes post-divorce, women are likely to experience as much as 30% drop in income after divorce.

Note several things here:
1) The number for the men at 10% drop is an average.
2) The number provided for women is ‘as much as 30%’ or a maximum amount.
To get 53.4% under poverty line, they would have to be awfully close to the poverty line to begin with to have the 30% drop them below.

The main reason for this is that when women tend to start their careers after taking a long break from their careers, they do not get hired for highly skilled jobs.

Depends. If they had a skilled job to begin with, they can restart their careers near where they left off.

Let’s face it, NOBODY “wins” in a divorce. **Everybody** is much poorer after divorce because, after divorce, they have to pay for TWO households instead of one, and both get HALF of the marital assets, leaving each with half of what they once had.

This is one of the biggest problems with divorce, but you also then step back and ask yourself that with these costs, are they ahead or behind, when compared to individuals who have been single the entire time, because of the period of time they were married.

I’m focusing especially on divorced mothers, because there is a tremendous difference between divorced with kids (BIG deal), and divorced without kids.

Age of the kids also has a significant contribution to this difference too.

Divorce sucks — for mothers, fathers, and especially the kids.

Sometimes.. and this is from a former ‘kid’ who grew up in a divorced family. Sometimes the peace and quiet and reduction in stress is worth the reduction in material goods.

[ucodegen]

@CA renter

Slight problem with statistics on this one. Notice the careful wording they are using:

Recent studies have proved that as many as 53.4% of the single mothers with children are below the poverty line.

They are not removing unwed mothers with children born out of wedlock, teen mothers etc. Note that they said single mothers and not divorced mothers. Notice that it has a problem aligning with the next statement:

In addition, studies also prove that while men tend to experience only a 10% drop in incomes post-divorce, women are likely to experience as much as 30% drop in income after divorce.

Note several things here:
1) The number for the men at 10% drop is an average.
2) The number provided for women is ‘as much as 30%’ or a maximum amount.
To get 53.4% under poverty line, they would have to be awfully close to the poverty line to begin with to have the 30% drop them below.

The main reason for this is that when women tend to start their careers after taking a long break from their careers, they do not get hired for highly skilled jobs.

Depends. If they had a skilled job to begin with, they can restart their careers near where they left off.

Let’s face it, NOBODY “wins” in a divorce. **Everybody** is much poorer after divorce because, after divorce, they have to pay for TWO households instead of one, and both get HALF of the marital assets, leaving each with half of what they once had.

This is one of the biggest problems with divorce, but you also then step back and ask yourself that with these costs, are they ahead or behind, when compared to individuals who have been single the entire time, because of the period of time they were married.

I’m focusing especially on divorced mothers, because there is a tremendous difference between divorced with kids (BIG deal), and divorced without kids.

Age of the kids also has a significant contribution to this difference too.

Divorce sucks — for mothers, fathers, and especially the kids.

Sometimes.. and this is from a former ‘kid’ who grew up in a divorced family. Sometimes the peace and quiet and reduction in stress is worth the reduction in material goods.

[CA renter]

ucodegen,

True. However, the fact that single mothers constitute a disproportionate number of people living at/below the poverty level makes me think that single/divorced women with children suffer financially compared to women without children. Whether we’re discussing divorce OR lack of marriage — as some are advocating here, the end result is the same.

Question: would you have preferred that your parents divorce, or have them work on developing a better marriage and staying married?

I guess I see more options that just “stay married and miserable” or divorce. Not to get too personal, but our relationship/marriage SUCKED for the first couple of years. We worked very hard on changing the way we related to and treated each other (via an exceptionally good counselor in San Clemente), and ten years and three kids later, we have one of the best marriages we’ve ever known. It truly exceeds anything either one of us could have hoped for. In other words, just because a marriage seems very bad, does not mean that it can’t be turned around. I firmly believe we are taught to give up too soon, especially when kids are involved.

[CA renter]

ucodegen,

True. However, the fact that single mothers constitute a disproportionate number of people living at/below the poverty level makes me think that single/divorced women with children suffer financially compared to women without children. Whether we’re discussing divorce OR lack of marriage — as some are advocating here, the end result is the same.

Question: would you have preferred that your parents divorce, or have them work on developing a better marriage and staying married?

I guess I see more options that just “stay married and miserable” or divorce. Not to get too personal, but our relationship/marriage SUCKED for the first couple of years. We worked very hard on changing the way we related to and treated each other (via an exceptionally good counselor in San Clemente), and ten years and three kids later, we have one of the best marriages we’ve ever known. It truly exceeds anything either one of us could have hoped for. In other words, just because a marriage seems very bad, does not mean that it can’t be turned around. I firmly believe we are taught to give up too soon, especially when kids are involved.

[CA renter]

ucodegen,

True. However, the fact that single mothers constitute a disproportionate number of people living at/below the poverty level makes me think that single/divorced women with children suffer financially compared to women without children. Whether we’re discussing divorce OR lack of marriage — as some are advocating here, the end result is the same.

Question: would you have preferred that your parents divorce, or have them work on developing a better marriage and staying married?

I guess I see more options that just “stay married and miserable” or divorce. Not to get too personal, but our relationship/marriage SUCKED for the first couple of years. We worked very hard on changing the way we related to and treated each other (via an exceptionally good counselor in San Clemente), and ten years and three kids later, we have one of the best marriages we’ve ever known. It truly exceeds anything either one of us could have hoped for. In other words, just because a marriage seems very bad, does not mean that it can’t be turned around. I firmly believe we are taught to give up too soon, especially when kids are involved.

[CA renter]

ucodegen,

True. However, the fact that single mothers constitute a disproportionate number of people living at/below the poverty level makes me think that single/divorced women with children suffer financially compared to women without children. Whether we’re discussing divorce OR lack of marriage — as some are advocating here, the end result is the same.

Question: would you have preferred that your parents divorce, or have them work on developing a better marriage and staying married?

I guess I see more options that just “stay married and miserable” or divorce. Not to get too personal, but our relationship/marriage SUCKED for the first couple of years. We worked very hard on changing the way we related to and treated each other (via an exceptionally good counselor in San Clemente), and ten years and three kids later, we have one of the best marriages we’ve ever known. It truly exceeds anything either one of us could have hoped for. In other words, just because a marriage seems very bad, does not mean that it can’t be turned around. I firmly believe we are taught to give up too soon, especially when kids are involved.

[CA renter]

ucodegen,

True. However, the fact that single mothers constitute a disproportionate number of people living at/below the poverty level makes me think that single/divorced women with children suffer financially compared to women without children. Whether we’re discussing divorce OR lack of marriage — as some are advocating here, the end result is the same.

Question: would you have preferred that your parents divorce, or have them work on developing a better marriage and staying married?

I guess I see more options that just “stay married and miserable” or divorce. Not to get too personal, but our relationship/marriage SUCKED for the first couple of years. We worked very hard on changing the way we related to and treated each other (via an exceptionally good counselor in San Clemente), and ten years and three kids later, we have one of the best marriages we’ve ever known. It truly exceeds anything either one of us could have hoped for. In other words, just because a marriage seems very bad, does not mean that it can’t be turned around. I firmly believe we are taught to give up too soon, especially when kids are involved.

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredycat]re; emotional damage; I wasn’t advocating one side or the other. I was just observing that women sometimes withhold child visitation or extract a price for compliance with visitation from men. Men value that visitation at some particular dollar price. I was just thinking out loud that if the shoe were on the other foot, and men had the power to manipulate the system by withholding visitation, that the price men could extract from women in general would be higher, since I think women in general stereotypically would be more “pained” by even one missed weekend. I don’t know what any of this means, and I’m not saying that people or the system shouldn’t be fair, but whenever you set up a system, people and their lawyers look to game it for maximum advantage. and men and women aren’t on an even keel in terms of the price they would pay for very regular visitation. Look, I love my kids, I raised them solo for several years when it became necessary. i see them every day, have diner every night, and on avg spend more time than the avg dad, i think. But i still don’t feel the physical pain, the yearning, when we are apart for a few days. I just think guys are built that way. Women in general seem to get a little batty on even short separations.[/quote]

Very true, scaredy.

It’s a fact that children are biologically more valuable to women than they are to men for the following reasons:

1. Women bear the children, and often risk their looks, health, and even their lives to do so. Men don’t have to do a single thing in order to have kids (except have sex, but that’s not sacrificing anything in order to have kids). A woman knows about every single child she has, while men can have thousands of children and never even know about a single one.

Like it or not, the act of bearing a child creates a very different relationship between a child and a mother. You are forever changed physically, mentally, and emotionally after having biological children. While many good fathers also bond with their children, and love them unconditionally, **in general** women have much stronger bonds (sometimes good, sometimes bad) with their children.

2. A woman has a very limited window during which she can have children, which means that as she grows older (as in mid-life divorce), she can’t have any more. This makes her existing children even more valuable to her.

3. Barring multiples, a woman can generally have approximately one child per 10-12 months. This limits the number of children she can have and this scarcity makes them more valuable as well. We’ve all seen/read about the men who got multiple partners pregnant at one time. Children are more like commodities to many of these men, while women (in general) highly value each child she bears.

There is no question that women and men form different bonds with their children. Women often have to take leave from work because of pregnancy-related complications, and then afterward, if she’s nursing and raising her own babies. IMHO, the mother-child/father-child bonds are complementary, especially when the parents get to raise the children together.

When divorce happens, the complementary nature of the mother/father child-rearing styles is diminished because there is less balance. Also, divorced parents tend to become more focused on their new relationships, jobs (out of necessity), depression, etc., and the children can really suffer because they lose their place in the center of the family. Add to this new marriages and children born to these new unions, and the first children tend to feel like remnants from some failed relationship.

I’ll say it again: divorce sucks **for everybody.**

(edited)

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredycat]re; emotional damage; I wasn’t advocating one side or the other. I was just observing that women sometimes withhold child visitation or extract a price for compliance with visitation from men. Men value that visitation at some particular dollar price. I was just thinking out loud that if the shoe were on the other foot, and men had the power to manipulate the system by withholding visitation, that the price men could extract from women in general would be higher, since I think women in general stereotypically would be more “pained” by even one missed weekend. I don’t know what any of this means, and I’m not saying that people or the system shouldn’t be fair, but whenever you set up a system, people and their lawyers look to game it for maximum advantage. and men and women aren’t on an even keel in terms of the price they would pay for very regular visitation. Look, I love my kids, I raised them solo for several years when it became necessary. i see them every day, have diner every night, and on avg spend more time than the avg dad, i think. But i still don’t feel the physical pain, the yearning, when we are apart for a few days. I just think guys are built that way. Women in general seem to get a little batty on even short separations.[/quote]

Very true, scaredy.

It’s a fact that children are biologically more valuable to women than they are to men for the following reasons:

1. Women bear the children, and often risk their looks, health, and even their lives to do so. Men don’t have to do a single thing in order to have kids (except have sex, but that’s not sacrificing anything in order to have kids). A woman knows about every single child she has, while men can have thousands of children and never even know about a single one.

Like it or not, the act of bearing a child creates a very different relationship between a child and a mother. You are forever changed physically, mentally, and emotionally after having biological children. While many good fathers also bond with their children, and love them unconditionally, **in general** women have much stronger bonds (sometimes good, sometimes bad) with their children.

2. A woman has a very limited window during which she can have children, which means that as she grows older (as in mid-life divorce), she can’t have any more. This makes her existing children even more valuable to her.

3. Barring multiples, a woman can generally have approximately one child per 10-12 months. This limits the number of children she can have and this scarcity makes them more valuable as well. We’ve all seen/read about the men who got multiple partners pregnant at one time. Children are more like commodities to many of these men, while women (in general) highly value each child she bears.

There is no question that women and men form different bonds with their children. Women often have to take leave from work because of pregnancy-related complications, and then afterward, if she’s nursing and raising her own babies. IMHO, the mother-child/father-child bonds are complementary, especially when the parents get to raise the children together.

When divorce happens, the complementary nature of the mother/father child-rearing styles is diminished because there is less balance. Also, divorced parents tend to become more focused on their new relationships, jobs (out of necessity), depression, etc., and the children can really suffer because they lose their place in the center of the family. Add to this new marriages and children born to these new unions, and the first children tend to feel like remnants from some failed relationship.

I’ll say it again: divorce sucks **for everybody.**

(edited)

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredycat]re; emotional damage; I wasn’t advocating one side or the other. I was just observing that women sometimes withhold child visitation or extract a price for compliance with visitation from men. Men value that visitation at some particular dollar price. I was just thinking out loud that if the shoe were on the other foot, and men had the power to manipulate the system by withholding visitation, that the price men could extract from women in general would be higher, since I think women in general stereotypically would be more “pained” by even one missed weekend. I don’t know what any of this means, and I’m not saying that people or the system shouldn’t be fair, but whenever you set up a system, people and their lawyers look to game it for maximum advantage. and men and women aren’t on an even keel in terms of the price they would pay for very regular visitation. Look, I love my kids, I raised them solo for several years when it became necessary. i see them every day, have diner every night, and on avg spend more time than the avg dad, i think. But i still don’t feel the physical pain, the yearning, when we are apart for a few days. I just think guys are built that way. Women in general seem to get a little batty on even short separations.[/quote]

Very true, scaredy.

It’s a fact that children are biologically more valuable to women than they are to men for the following reasons:

1. Women bear the children, and often risk their looks, health, and even their lives to do so. Men don’t have to do a single thing in order to have kids (except have sex, but that’s not sacrificing anything in order to have kids). A woman knows about every single child she has, while men can have thousands of children and never even know about a single one.

Like it or not, the act of bearing a child creates a very different relationship between a child and a mother. You are forever changed physically, mentally, and emotionally after having biological children. While many good fathers also bond with their children, and love them unconditionally, **in general** women have much stronger bonds (sometimes good, sometimes bad) with their children.

2. A woman has a very limited window during which she can have children, which means that as she grows older (as in mid-life divorce), she can’t have any more. This makes her existing children even more valuable to her.

3. Barring multiples, a woman can generally have approximately one child per 10-12 months. This limits the number of children she can have and this scarcity makes them more valuable as well. We’ve all seen/read about the men who got multiple partners pregnant at one time. Children are more like commodities to many of these men, while women (in general) highly value each child she bears.

There is no question that women and men form different bonds with their children. Women often have to take leave from work because of pregnancy-related complications, and then afterward, if she’s nursing and raising her own babies. IMHO, the mother-child/father-child bonds are complementary, especially when the parents get to raise the children together.

When divorce happens, the complementary nature of the mother/father child-rearing styles is diminished because there is less balance. Also, divorced parents tend to become more focused on their new relationships, jobs (out of necessity), depression, etc., and the children can really suffer because they lose their place in the center of the family. Add to this new marriages and children born to these new unions, and the first children tend to feel like remnants from some failed relationship.

I’ll say it again: divorce sucks **for everybody.**

(edited)

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredycat]re; emotional damage; I wasn’t advocating one side or the other. I was just observing that women sometimes withhold child visitation or extract a price for compliance with visitation from men. Men value that visitation at some particular dollar price. I was just thinking out loud that if the shoe were on the other foot, and men had the power to manipulate the system by withholding visitation, that the price men could extract from women in general would be higher, since I think women in general stereotypically would be more “pained” by even one missed weekend. I don’t know what any of this means, and I’m not saying that people or the system shouldn’t be fair, but whenever you set up a system, people and their lawyers look to game it for maximum advantage. and men and women aren’t on an even keel in terms of the price they would pay for very regular visitation. Look, I love my kids, I raised them solo for several years when it became necessary. i see them every day, have diner every night, and on avg spend more time than the avg dad, i think. But i still don’t feel the physical pain, the yearning, when we are apart for a few days. I just think guys are built that way. Women in general seem to get a little batty on even short separations.[/quote]

Very true, scaredy.

It’s a fact that children are biologically more valuable to women than they are to men for the following reasons:

1. Women bear the children, and often risk their looks, health, and even their lives to do so. Men don’t have to do a single thing in order to have kids (except have sex, but that’s not sacrificing anything in order to have kids). A woman knows about every single child she has, while men can have thousands of children and never even know about a single one.

Like it or not, the act of bearing a child creates a very different relationship between a child and a mother. You are forever changed physically, mentally, and emotionally after having biological children. While many good fathers also bond with their children, and love them unconditionally, **in general** women have much stronger bonds (sometimes good, sometimes bad) with their children.

2. A woman has a very limited window during which she can have children, which means that as she grows older (as in mid-life divorce), she can’t have any more. This makes her existing children even more valuable to her.

3. Barring multiples, a woman can generally have approximately one child per 10-12 months. This limits the number of children she can have and this scarcity makes them more valuable as well. We’ve all seen/read about the men who got multiple partners pregnant at one time. Children are more like commodities to many of these men, while women (in general) highly value each child she bears.

There is no question that women and men form different bonds with their children. Women often have to take leave from work because of pregnancy-related complications, and then afterward, if she’s nursing and raising her own babies. IMHO, the mother-child/father-child bonds are complementary, especially when the parents get to raise the children together.

When divorce happens, the complementary nature of the mother/father child-rearing styles is diminished because there is less balance. Also, divorced parents tend to become more focused on their new relationships, jobs (out of necessity), depression, etc., and the children can really suffer because they lose their place in the center of the family. Add to this new marriages and children born to these new unions, and the first children tend to feel like remnants from some failed relationship.

I’ll say it again: divorce sucks **for everybody.**

(edited)

[Author]

Posts