Reflection on Marriage

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...
We all know the typical vows used in marriage ceremonies so I am
sure
those
snipped

The point that seems to be ignored in all of your responses is in over
70%
of marriages that breakup, the marriage vows are terminated and the
joint
relationship is ended by unilateral decisions made by the wife over her
husband's objections. I doubt you will find a man in this NG who
doesn't
understand there is a huge difference between the emotional decision to
initiate divorce and the financial outcomes from divorce. Women
initiating
divorce is the stimulus. Men paying money is the response.

Women are hard wired to be the keepers of the status in a relationship.
They constantly analyze it, make judgments about it, determine changes
that
need to be made, and focus on how men are impacting the relationship.
One
of the problems husbands encounter is wives rarely consider their own
role
in a relationship and how what they are saying or doing might have an
impact
on the results. The whole concept of "growing in different directions"
feeds right into this pattern of thinking. Women say things like "He
has
not grown up" (meaning I have grown but he hasn't) or "He is a different
man
than the one I married" (meaning he has changed for the worse) without
any
analysis that maybe they are setting unreasonable, unilateral
expectations
for men that are unattainable.



Why would men initiate divorce when they know they will pay out the ass in
alimony, if the wife is so inclined to pursue that. They would much rather
stay married, having someone doing all their laundry and cooking and
raising
of the kids. Run out once and a while and get some strange too. Not a bad
deal, eh?

Aw yes! The old "women are treated like slaves" and "men can't be faithful"
feminist BS. Claiming men don't respect women is one of the feminist tricks
to skew the debate by using guilt, shame, and blame. Have you ever heard of
a woman being criticized for not respecting men? Of course not, because
only men are "sexist" and women would never make "sexist" remarks.

I hardly think that stat of 70% is relevant. Would women initiate
divorce as easily if it weren't for the money incentive? Probably not but
time progresses and more women are career oriented, money is not going to
be
the incentive. They will have their own money. In my dealings with men and
women, that last paragraph is true only in the sentence of how women
analyze, ect. They do. But men also don't realize their role in the
relationship and say some of the same things women say about their
spouses,
only in different ways.

There you go again - telling men they don't recognize their role in the
relationship and trying to claim the fact women initiate divorces over 70%
of the time is not relevant. Your sounding more feminist all the time with
statements that indicate you expect men to continue providing special and
preferential treatment for women while denying those privileges exist.

"Kenneth S." wrote in message ...
Phil:

I think we're pretty much in agreement that politicians in the U.S. at
present dance to the feminist tune. Nothing will change until that
ceases to be the case.

At the political level, there have to be organizations that will
promote the interests of men when those interests are in conflict with
those of women. Unfortunately, we are still a long way off the latter
situation.

However, in the meantime, I think there are worthwhile steps that can
be taken by individual men. For example, in private conversations men
can speak up about issues where the interests of the two sexes are in
conflict. That will take us some way in the direction of ending the
current situation where, as Warren Farrell says, "in the battle of the
sexes, only one side shows up."

Men should start to challenge the anti-male comments that women
frequently make, instead of sheepishly agreeing with them (sometimes in
hopes of softening up a woman to whom they are attracted). For several
years, I've been trying to make a practice of doing this. On the one
hand, there's an obvious risk that men who do this will be considered
dogmatic bores. But I've found that it can be done with a light touch.
In a significant number of cases women who routinely make anti-male
comments will back off, and may even reconsider what they are saying.

What kind of anti-male comments do you hear? I sat here for a while
trying to think of soe, but none come to mind.

"Kenneth S." wrote in message ...
Phil:

I think we're pretty much in agreement that politicians in the U.S. at
present dance to the feminist tune. Nothing will change until that
ceases to be the case.

At the political level, there have to be organizations that will
promote the interests of men when those interests are in conflict with
those of women. Unfortunately, we are still a long way off the latter
situation.

However, in the meantime, I think there are worthwhile steps that can
be taken by individual men. For example, in private conversations men
can speak up about issues where the interests of the two sexes are in
conflict. That will take us some way in the direction of ending the
current situation where, as Warren Farrell says, "in the battle of the
sexes, only one side shows up."

Men should start to challenge the anti-male comments that women
frequently make, instead of sheepishly agreeing with them (sometimes in
hopes of softening up a woman to whom they are attracted). For several
years, I've been trying to make a practice of doing this. On the one
hand, there's an obvious risk that men who do this will be considered
dogmatic bores. But I've found that it can be done with a light touch.
In a significant number of cases women who routinely make anti-male
comments will back off, and may even reconsider what they are saying.

What kind of anti-male comments do you hear? I sat here for a while
trying to think of soe, but none come to mind.

"TeacherMama" wrote in message
om...
"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
Phil:

I think we're pretty much in agreement that politicians in the U.S. at
present dance to the feminist tune. Nothing will change until that
ceases to be the case.

At the political level, there have to be organizations that will
promote the interests of men when those interests are in conflict with
those of women. Unfortunately, we are still a long way off the latter
situation.

However, in the meantime, I think there are worthwhile steps that can
be taken by individual men. For example, in private conversations men
can speak up about issues where the interests of the two sexes are in
conflict. That will take us some way in the direction of ending the
current situation where, as Warren Farrell says, "in the battle of the
sexes, only one side shows up."

Men should start to challenge the anti-male comments that women
frequently make, instead of sheepishly agreeing with them (sometimes in
hopes of softening up a woman to whom they are attracted). For several
years, I've been trying to make a practice of doing this. On the one
hand, there's an obvious risk that men who do this will be considered
dogmatic bores. But I've found that it can be done with a light touch.
In a significant number of cases women who routinely make anti-male
comments will back off, and may even reconsider what they are saying.

What kind of anti-male comments do you hear? I sat here for a while
trying to think of soe, but none come to mind.

Here's one. I was in the local Safeway checkout line when a couple of loud
young guys came by on their way out of the store. The checker turned to the
lady in line ahead of me and said, "Obviously those guys have testosterone
poisoning." I calmly told the checker that research has shown testosterone
to be a calming hormone and when men have too much testosterone their bodies
convert it to estrogen causing men act up because their hormones are out of
balance from having too much of the female hormone. The clerk told me she
didn't want to get into a discussion about hormones. Of course, she was the
one who started talking about hormones in the first place with her words
clearly designed to be an anti-male comment.

"TeacherMama" wrote in message
om...
"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
Phil:

I think we're pretty much in agreement that politicians in the U.S. at
present dance to the feminist tune. Nothing will change until that
ceases to be the case.

At the political level, there have to be organizations that will
promote the interests of men when those interests are in conflict with
those of women. Unfortunately, we are still a long way off the latter
situation.

However, in the meantime, I think there are worthwhile steps that can
be taken by individual men. For example, in private conversations men
can speak up about issues where the interests of the two sexes are in
conflict. That will take us some way in the direction of ending the
current situation where, as Warren Farrell says, "in the battle of the
sexes, only one side shows up."

Men should start to challenge the anti-male comments that women
frequently make, instead of sheepishly agreeing with them (sometimes in
hopes of softening up a woman to whom they are attracted). For several
years, I've been trying to make a practice of doing this. On the one
hand, there's an obvious risk that men who do this will be considered
dogmatic bores. But I've found that it can be done with a light touch.
In a significant number of cases women who routinely make anti-male
comments will back off, and may even reconsider what they are saying.

What kind of anti-male comments do you hear? I sat here for a while
trying to think of soe, but none come to mind.

Here's one. I was in the local Safeway checkout line when a couple of loud
young guys came by on their way out of the store. The checker turned to the
lady in line ahead of me and said, "Obviously those guys have testosterone
poisoning." I calmly told the checker that research has shown testosterone
to be a calming hormone and when men have too much testosterone their bodies
convert it to estrogen causing men act up because their hormones are out of
balance from having too much of the female hormone. The clerk told me she
didn't want to get into a discussion about hormones. Of course, she was the
one who started talking about hormones in the first place with her words
clearly designed to be an anti-male comment.

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...
We all know the typical vows used in marriage ceremonies so I am
sure
those
snipped

The point that seems to be ignored in all of your responses is in over
70%
of marriages that breakup, the marriage vows are terminated and the
joint
relationship is ended by unilateral decisions made by the wife over
her
husband's objections. I doubt you will find a man in this NG who
doesn't
understand there is a huge difference between the emotional decision
to
initiate divorce and the financial outcomes from divorce. Women
initiating
divorce is the stimulus. Men paying money is the response.

Women are hard wired to be the keepers of the status in a
relationship.
They constantly analyze it, make judgments about it, determine changes
that
need to be made, and focus on how men are impacting the relationship.
One
of the problems husbands encounter is wives rarely consider their own
role
in a relationship and how what they are saying or doing might have an
impact
on the results. The whole concept of "growing in different
directions"
feeds right into this pattern of thinking. Women say things like "He
has
not grown up" (meaning I have grown but he hasn't) or "He is a
different
man
than the one I married" (meaning he has changed for the worse) without
any
analysis that maybe they are setting unreasonable, unilateral
expectations
for men that are unattainable.



Why would men initiate divorce when they know they will pay out the ass
in
alimony, if the wife is so inclined to pursue that. They would much
rather
stay married, having someone doing all their laundry and cooking and
raising
of the kids. Run out once and a while and get some strange too. Not a
bad
deal, eh?

Aw yes! The old "women are treated like slaves" and "men can't be
faithful"
feminist BS. Claiming men don't respect women is one of the feminist
tricks
to skew the debate by using guilt, shame, and blame. Have you ever heard
of
a woman being criticized for not respecting men? Of course not, because
only men are "sexist" and women would never make "sexist" remarks.
I

I never said anything to the fact that women always respect men or that
women don't make sexist remarks. Where is that coming from? I never said
women are treated like slaves and that only men are unfaithful. I made an
example as to WHY a man would be less likely to file for divorce.


I hardly think that stat of 70% is relevant. Would women initiate
divorce as easily if it weren't for the money incentive? Probably not
but
time progresses and more women are career oriented, money is not going
to
be
the incentive. They will have their own money. In my dealings with men
and
women, that last paragraph is true only in the sentence of how women
analyze, ect. They do. But men also don't realize their role in the
relationship and say some of the same things women say about their
spouses,
only in different ways.

There you go again - telling men they don't recognize their role in the
relationship and trying to claim the fact women initiate divorces over 70%

of the time is not relevant. Your sounding more feminist all the time
with
statements that indicate you expect men to continue providing special and
preferential treatment for women while denying those privileges exist.



Me? You have been more sexist in your remarks...... it has all been about
the women not being able to define her role, it is all her fault... blah
blah blah. What I stated above, if you would actually take the time to see,
is non-gender bashing, stating that typically the same things men say about
women, women say about men. Where did I say men should provide special
treatment?

T

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...
We all know the typical vows used in marriage ceremonies so I am
sure
those
snipped

The point that seems to be ignored in all of your responses is in over
70%
of marriages that breakup, the marriage vows are terminated and the
joint
relationship is ended by unilateral decisions made by the wife over
her
husband's objections. I doubt you will find a man in this NG who
doesn't
understand there is a huge difference between the emotional decision
to
initiate divorce and the financial outcomes from divorce. Women
initiating
divorce is the stimulus. Men paying money is the response.

Women are hard wired to be the keepers of the status in a
relationship.
They constantly analyze it, make judgments about it, determine changes
that
need to be made, and focus on how men are impacting the relationship.
One
of the problems husbands encounter is wives rarely consider their own
role
in a relationship and how what they are saying or doing might have an
impact
on the results. The whole concept of "growing in different
directions"
feeds right into this pattern of thinking. Women say things like "He
has
not grown up" (meaning I have grown but he hasn't) or "He is a
different
man
than the one I married" (meaning he has changed for the worse) without
any
analysis that maybe they are setting unreasonable, unilateral
expectations
for men that are unattainable.



Why would men initiate divorce when they know they will pay out the ass
in
alimony, if the wife is so inclined to pursue that. They would much
rather
stay married, having someone doing all their laundry and cooking and
raising
of the kids. Run out once and a while and get some strange too. Not a
bad
deal, eh?

Aw yes! The old "women are treated like slaves" and "men can't be
faithful"
feminist BS. Claiming men don't respect women is one of the feminist
tricks
to skew the debate by using guilt, shame, and blame. Have you ever heard
of
a woman being criticized for not respecting men? Of course not, because
only men are "sexist" and women would never make "sexist" remarks.
I

I never said anything to the fact that women always respect men or that
women don't make sexist remarks. Where is that coming from? I never said
women are treated like slaves and that only men are unfaithful. I made an
example as to WHY a man would be less likely to file for divorce.


I hardly think that stat of 70% is relevant. Would women initiate
divorce as easily if it weren't for the money incentive? Probably not
but
time progresses and more women are career oriented, money is not going
to
be
the incentive. They will have their own money. In my dealings with men
and
women, that last paragraph is true only in the sentence of how women
analyze, ect. They do. But men also don't realize their role in the
relationship and say some of the same things women say about their
spouses,
only in different ways.

There you go again - telling men they don't recognize their role in the
relationship and trying to claim the fact women initiate divorces over 70%

of the time is not relevant. Your sounding more feminist all the time
with
statements that indicate you expect men to continue providing special and
preferential treatment for women while denying those privileges exist.



Me? You have been more sexist in your remarks...... it has all been about
the women not being able to define her role, it is all her fault... blah
blah blah. What I stated above, if you would actually take the time to see,
is non-gender bashing, stating that typically the same things men say about
women, women say about men. Where did I say men should provide special
treatment?

T

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"TeacherMama" wrote in message
om...
"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
Phil:

I think we're pretty much in agreement that politicians in the U.S. at
present dance to the feminist tune. Nothing will change until that
ceases to be the case.

At the political level, there have to be organizations that will
promote the interests of men when those interests are in conflict with
those of women. Unfortunately, we are still a long way off the latter
situation.

However, in the meantime, I think there are worthwhile steps that can
be taken by individual men. For example, in private conversations men
can speak up about issues where the interests of the two sexes are in
conflict. That will take us some way in the direction of ending the
current situation where, as Warren Farrell says, "in the battle of the
sexes, only one side shows up."

Men should start to challenge the anti-male comments that women
frequently make, instead of sheepishly agreeing with them (sometimes
in
hopes of softening up a woman to whom they are attracted). For
several
years, I've been trying to make a practice of doing this. On the one
hand, there's an obvious risk that men who do this will be considered
dogmatic bores. But I've found that it can be done with a light
touch.
In a significant number of cases women who routinely make anti-male
comments will back off, and may even reconsider what they are saying.

What kind of anti-male comments do you hear? I sat here for a while
trying to think of soe, but none come to mind.

Here's one. I was in the local Safeway checkout line when a couple of
loud
young guys came by on their way out of the store. The checker turned to
the
lady in line ahead of me and said, "Obviously those guys have testosterone
poisoning." I calmly told the checker that research has shown
testosterone
to be a calming hormone and when men have too much testosterone their
bodies
convert it to estrogen causing men act up because their hormones are out
of
balance from having too much of the female hormone. The clerk told me she
didn't want to get into a discussion about hormones. Of course, she was
the
one who started talking about hormones in the first place with her words
clearly designed to be an anti-male comment.



So when a female gets a bit bitchy, you have never said anything to the
effect that it must be PMS? If not, I commend you.

T

Bob Whiteside wrote in message
ink.net...

"TeacherMama" wrote in message
om...
"Kenneth S." wrote in message
...
Phil:

I think we're pretty much in agreement that politicians in the U.S. at
present dance to the feminist tune. Nothing will change until that
ceases to be the case.

At the political level, there have to be organizations that will
promote the interests of men when those interests are in conflict with
those of women. Unfortunately, we are still a long way off the latter
situation.

However, in the meantime, I think there are worthwhile steps that can
be taken by individual men. For example, in private conversations men
can speak up about issues where the interests of the two sexes are in
conflict. That will take us some way in the direction of ending the
current situation where, as Warren Farrell says, "in the battle of the
sexes, only one side shows up."

Men should start to challenge the anti-male comments that women
frequently make, instead of sheepishly agreeing with them (sometimes
in
hopes of softening up a woman to whom they are attracted). For
several
years, I've been trying to make a practice of doing this. On the one
hand, there's an obvious risk that men who do this will be considered
dogmatic bores. But I've found that it can be done with a light
touch.
In a significant number of cases women who routinely make anti-male
comments will back off, and may even reconsider what they are saying.

What kind of anti-male comments do you hear? I sat here for a while
trying to think of soe, but none come to mind.

Here's one. I was in the local Safeway checkout line when a couple of
loud
young guys came by on their way out of the store. The checker turned to
the
lady in line ahead of me and said, "Obviously those guys have testosterone
poisoning." I calmly told the checker that research has shown
testosterone
to be a calming hormone and when men have too much testosterone their
bodies
convert it to estrogen causing men act up because their hormones are out
of
balance from having too much of the female hormone. The clerk told me she
didn't want to get into a discussion about hormones. Of course, she was
the
one who started talking about hormones in the first place with her words
clearly designed to be an anti-male comment.



So when a female gets a bit bitchy, you have never said anything to the
effect that it must be PMS? If not, I commend you.

T

"Mel Gamble" wrote in message
...
Bad logic, Tiffany...

Tiffany wrote:

So you think everyone who gets married should stay married no matter
what? I
don't agree with vows that are apparently unattainable. Apparent by the
high
divorce rate.

You go down town on a Saturday night. You are headed for 8th and Main.
But just off Main on 5th are all the bars and theaters and everyone else
is making the turn to 5th. Do you assume YOU can't make it to 8th?

The divorce rate says nothing about how attainable a lifelong commitment
is. It only speaks to the amount of temptation is out there to stray
from that commitment, how easily many people are tempted and how soon
many of them yield to that temptation. By claiming the vows are
unattainable, you lump yourself (and/or your choice of future mate) in
with those who yield easily.
------------------
And it speaks about how society truly views marriage. The public face is
being all for marriage and families while undermining those very things by
encouraging all sorts of programs which are the antithesis of these.
Claiming the vows are unattainable is just sour grapes, I couldn't do it so
it can't be done, and yet daily, in the newspaper, there is another couple
celebrating their 25th or 50th wedding anniversary.
----------------

Why not make a commitment to stay committed as long as both
parties want to?

Then why bother at all?
-------------
Fine as long as children aren't involved. But like Mel said, why bother at
all? You can make that "commitment" without getting married. The whole
idea of marriage is entering into it with the desire for it to be a lifelong
commitment.
---------------

My approach is that of a generation who has watched their parents be
miserable, all in the sake of staying married. One that has watched
Grandparents die unhappy with the life they had lived with a spouse they
didn't love but stayed together for the sake of the vows.
-------------------
I thought they stayed together for the sake of the kids? Are you speaking
for your entire generation?? My grandparents on my moms side loved each
other madly and died a few years apart. On my dads side, when my
grandfather died young, my grandmother never married again. It wasn't due
to religion or vows or whatever it was due to love and believing in a
lifelong commitment.
-------------------

There are, have been, and always will be a certain number of
disfunctional families...we don't need attitudes, morals and laws that
work to maximize that number.
-------------
And there has been recourse in the law for those marriages where one was
cheating on the other or abusing them, including mental cruelty through
'fault' divorce. No fault divorce just made marriage a joke, little more
than a boyfriend and girlfriend who 'break up'.
---------------

I would never suggest someone stay miserable in order to keep to the
vow.

Maybe not, but what do you say to those who would tell a partner in a
marriage that they are "obviously in a relationship which is making you
miserable"? Do you have any idea how many people are miserable because
somebody else told them they should be, because somebody else told them
they should be expecting more out of life????????

--------------------
Our entire society needs to rethink what is really important. People are
encouraged to do what feels good to them at the moment and to hell with
anyone else. I have heard so many people talking about getting married say
"well, if it doesn't work out we can just get divorced". With this attitude
is it any wonder that the divorce rate is so high? Few go into marriage
with the intention of making it last forever. Sure, I understand that
people make mistakes and bad choices in partners and if someone abuses the
other then they should divorce and move on. But the idea that after a few
years of marriage, when passions have cooled and 'things' aren't like they
were when you first met, you can divorce on a whim and move on, taking half
or more of the 'community property' with you. People don't go into marriage
with realistic expectations. We have been bombarded with messages saying
basically, to thine own self be true, since we were born and the reality of
any long term relationship is that it changes over the years. It starts out
red hot and then, with luck and determination, mellows into something that
will keep you warm and safe and snug and secure as the years go by. Too
many people think that it has to be kept amped up on excitement or it's
boring and thus grounds for divorce. Until people and society start to take
marriage vows, (yep, the old fashion-ones), seriously again things will just
continue to decay, people will continue to be dissatisfied with their lot in
life and children will continue to be unwanted.

~AZ~

Mel Gamble

T
Kenneth S. wrote in message
...
Tiffany:

You reject the idea that people should honor vows they have freely
made. You reject the notion of commitment. So you are rejecting
marriage.

Your approach isn't of course unusual. Unfortunately, it's exhibited
by most of the politicians who make the laws on marriage and divorce.
That's one reason why I argue that, to all intents and purposes,
marriage as a meaningful institution has already been abolished in the
U.S.

When people want to -- or are forced to -- handle change in themselves
and in others, they always find ways of doing so.

Tiffany wrote:

Kenneth S. wrote in message
...
Tiffany:

Have you ever heard the story about the clock that struck
thirteen?
That single event cast doubt on all that had gone before.

You are now telling us that the vows made in a marriage ceremony
are
"basically bull****." So I think we know how much attention to
pay to
everything else you have said.

As for your shallow "growing apart" argument, I think you will
find
that spouses in successful long-term marriages say that their
marriage
went through several phases, and they adjusted to those changes.

That is because they are able to handle change. Not all folks can.


The bottom line is that you think that the institution of marriage
should be abolished. You should simply come out and say so.



Initially I stated that couple should wait until they are older and
more
settle in life to marry. Some people aren't able to adjust to change
in
their lives, others can. If you wait to get married till you are
older
then
atleast you will know if you or your partner can deal with the
changes
that
have taken place.

Yes the old vows are bull****. I don't think one should make
promises
like
that. Every couple should make their own vows as to what is
important to
them. Those old vows might work for some, so by god, use them.

T