U Not Gonna Like This

Several days ago I mented that I found 2 post on the Marriage Strike from the Abolish Alimony blog. One was linked to a blog called One Hand Clapping and here's what was written in the comments section:

If marriage is an unneeded opportunity for "guaranteed" sex, and an unwanted opportunity for responsibility, then what is it for? What's in it for me (if I'm a young male)? It looks like mostly a lose-lose situation unless you happen to be one of the lucky few who finds your soul-mate - and what are the odds of that?
DSmith | 07.15.04 - 9:21 am |

So perhaps that's part of it too - marriage is an unappealing possibility because it's a faily high expense in return for - what? Sex can be had pretty freely. You'll marry if you want kids, but I don't, and neither do a fair number of other people my age. Companionship? Maybe. But you also have to consider the kind of women that are out there.
Devilbunny | 07.15.04 - 11:18 am | #

(cont'd)
A friend of mine who lived in NYC told me some of his horror stories of the dating world there. He was looking for a serious relationship - willing to settle down. On a first date, he was asking her about goals for the future. She told him she didn't want to work. He said, "Great, so you'll take care of the kids!" No, she replied, she figured the nanny would do that. When he asked her just what exactly it was that she planned to do, she told him she wanted to shop and go to parties. According to him, she was in no way exceptional.

Why in the world would you attach yourself to that?
Devilbunny | 07.15.04 - 11:20 am | #

a while back my father asked me a question i couldn't answer. he wanted to know what was in it (marriage/relationship) for me. i found i couldn't answer.

marriage is the only business contract in this country that can be ended unilaterally by one party without consequence. i watched it happen to a friend. it seems that the whole institution is structured with the women as beneficiary and the man as the goat. it was always an institition to protect women and children, but the state has stepped in and taken all the security out of it for the men.

i find that the only reason i want to get married is because i was taught that it was the right way to live. with the fact that the person who taught that to me is now questioning why, in this day and age, i would find marriage to be a good idea, i am not so sure anymore.

i have watched many other romantic notions founder on the shoals of reality. will this one founder too?
Sean | 07.15.04 - 11:19 am | #


As a single man in his late thirties, who has never been married and has no children and who has a stable career as a high school history teacher you would think I would attract interest from some of those women in their thirites that were mentioned above, but alas. Dating at this age is awful. A few points:

1) I meet too many women who made those mistakes in their twenties and now are seeking an instant father for their kids.

2) A general observation that with the feminist movement is that women now have the "equal right" to be as big a jerk to men, as we have been accused of being to them for so long. I am actually toying with the idea of the testosteone version of "Sex and the City" I have had so many bad experiences with rude, selfish and unrealistic women in my age group.....
Bob Diethrich | 07.15.04 - 2:32 pm | #


3) Many women have become career and status obsessed (like the example above who wanted to live a life of luxury while her husband worked) I have actually had variations of this conversation too many times to count:

She: "Oh so you're a teacher. That is so great."

a bit later: "What? That's all you earn in year?!" Nose goes up and the conversation ends.

4) My most cynical point: I really think that many women DO NOT WANT NICE MEN! They want a project; some one they can mold and CHANGE! I have seen so many wonderful women throw their lives away trying to change some total loser, while ignoring the good men that were interested in them.
Bob Diethrich | 07.15.04 - 2:35 pm | #


Devilbunny, don't know if you read the NY Post, esp. the Sunday edition. There's a writer who talked about her struggle to find "Mr. Right". It was interesting, albeit not as much as GM Soltis on chess, but she went from guy to guy, often fooling around on the first date. I understand about the pressures of being in a very fast paced environment, but I don't know of any successful relationships based on a one night matress test.

A problem that has been written about is what I call the "Wedding Day Syndrome". I don't recall the source, but it pertains to all the hype over brides having the perfect wedding day, the best day of her life. As I work on figures/models at night, I hear all the ads for "your perfect day. We walked thru the local mall a year or so ago and saw all of these high priced services, 99% aimed at brides. Cont.

Don Parker | 07.15.04 - 2:37 pm | #

So the wedding day is all that the bride could ask for, everyone's eye is on her(esp. if she's wearing a Victoria's Secret type dress), absolutely perfect, the best day in her life.

So the rest of her life is just downhill, right?

I believe that Rev. S stated that he only marries couples that he has been able to council. I've come to the conclusion that he's correct, what with the exploding divorce within the Christian community.

If marriage is important to our society, then perhaps there should be more study/discussion on the topic. Some ideas for within the Christian community are to: encourage short term marrieds to talk with longer term marrieds; why are Christians divorcing so often; why do some couples stay together so long, til death do they part.

As to the secular world, I don't hold out much hope.

Don Parker | 07.15.04 - 2:50 pm | #


I think most young men today would be fools to marry, given both what they've been taught and the current legal and social climate

They've seen what their mothers did to their fathers and have no desire to repeat the experience.
S3 | 07.15.04 - 9:07 pm | #



TO: Kayse
RE: Ahem....

....I think S3 got it right and rather concisely too. The young'ns saw what happened, right before their very eyes. And lived with it afterwards.

They'll have no part of it.

And we're talking about them, Kayse. Not US good ole guys, here.

And as I said, the feminists will die out in a generation or two. They are not reproducing themselves. Their genes are being irradicated, by their own choice.

This will leave the more family-oriented reproducing themselves, instead.

In the military, we refer to this as a 'self-inflicted wound'. And it's mortal to boot.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. Your math and/or history are off. Ike had his heart attack, the non-lethal one, in '55.
Chuck Pelto | 07.15.04 - 10:11 pm | #


I'm sorry.
Since about 1970, there has never been such a thing as marriage in western culture.
When you can make a promise of love through thick or thin, and then have laws that encourage divorce at the drop of a hat. A situation where the female has a 97% chance of ending up with the entire family contents-kids,house,and your future income - That is NOT a marriage.That is simply called extortion.
Joe2 | 07.15.04 - 10:39 pm | #



If you couple this reality with two other facts:- Children growing up with no fathers figure[ 35%], and it's companion -lower classes exponential growth, you have an End of Civilization : EndofRome situation.

I suggest that those gentlemen stating that they've been married for 20-30 years belong to an already dead world.

In New Zealand the male doesn't even need to get married. 3 Years living with anyone, is enough for them to Legally take half of all your belongings.

[coming to a country near you, very soon...as your governments realize that they can't tax the workers enough to support all the oncoming lower classes with no work ethics.]
joe2 | 07.15.04 - 10:40 pm | #



Kayse: "The old commercial has two sides: If you want a woman to be more of a woman, try being more of a man."

That theory sure didn't work for dad.

Then again he made a fatal mistake. In the wedding rehearsal, completely out of the blue, the bride-to-be looked at the minister (you know that doe-eyed look for protection and support) and asked: it didn't have to be "love, honour and obey" did it. Well the minister put a protective arm around her and said it most certainly did not! "Love, honour and cherish" it was. Dad said many times he knew right then, or if he didn't know he had a strong premonition, of what this was going to be. He should have turned around then and just run, no sorry, no goodbye, just flee for your life.
David Blue | 07.15.04 - 11:36 pm | #

But he didn't turn back, he went ahead as he'd promised to. And that was where it all went to Hell, and eventually of course to many years family court, which is an especially cruel department of hell.

Now when a woman sees in a minister, and lawyers, and every other agent of official and social power a shield and a lever of power for herself as against her husband and kids - and finds that yes it does work that way - that's doom right there, no saving it. The more a man tries to endure, the worse it's going to be.
Eventually Dad figured that out, and betrayed everybody, especially the kids, because he'd gotten sick of bearing things for the kids, and revenge is a human emotion.

Unfortunately, there is very little chance that anyone ever beat that minister to bloody pulp.
David Blue | 07.15.04 - 11:37 pm | #

Whever I see 'em I'll be posting more news and comments on the Marriage Strike. So stay tuned......