Author youngskywalker Posted August 3, 2011 Author Posted August 3, 2011 (edited) Did she pull the "premarital sex is against God's wishes" crap with her other 6 sex partners? Your point is taken. And I called her out on that too, bluntly and to the point. Justification of the past if a powerful thing. *sigh* It didn't get me any farther than how she feels 'today'. That's the problem with most women. They tend to be so fickle and ride on their current emotion or flavor of the day. Mix any kind of religion into it and you have a real problem on your hands. But she is who she is, and I understand where she is coming from because I was raised in a religious family. I still have some religious views but I've become much more open or 'liberal' in the last couple years. TBH she's actually taught me a lot about that. Just not in the area of sex. Edited August 3, 2011 by youngskywalker
zengirl Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 (edited) There is a current issue of Time with a study that says men do a lot more around the house than people think but good luck getting feminists to admit to that. I had clean clothes, a clean house and good food perfectly fine without a wife. It's a myth that men are helpless creatures without a wife. Hey, I read that article! (I'm not sure what it has to do with this thread, tough, as there are clearly other issues at work in his dynamic.) It wasn't badly written, for a TIME article. And it rings true with my experience FTR. (And I'm a feminist, which just means I believe we all should be equal under the law and I shouldn't be oppressed by old white men and ****. So please stop trying to make that word mean "misandrist." You know the right word.) I'd never marry a guy who couldn't keep himself in food and clean his own apartment. When I lived with one of my exBFs (only one I've ever lived with), he did a good amount of the chores. He generally cooked, but I shopped and almost always did the dishes; I would usually do laundry but he'd often do my ironing for me, etc. It was a good balance. The only time he was ironically lax with chore-doing was when he'd gotten laid off and I was still working---I didn't expect him to do MORE just because he wasn't working, but he actually stopped doing anything. I think that was actually more of a depression issue, though, and I was more concerned about that than the chores. My step-father has always done a lot around the house, as he and my Mom both worked. But either way, in a good marriage, it's not really about who washes the dishes more or whatever (unless there are huge disparities in these things, and then it needs to be discussed). When they say "men get a lot from marriage," it's true though. Married men actually have WAY better statistics across the board (health, happiness, wealth, etc) than single men, and to a larger statistical gap than exists between married and single women. I think men actually emotionally crave marriage (those that do, I mean; not everyone of either gender does) than women do because men have less "safe spaces" for emotional intimacy than women do since males are socialized not to go around all emotionally intimate with each other. But that's just my theory. It makes sense that rich men would be less concerned about gold diggers since they can afford to take the loss but your average guy can seriously take a hit if he has to keep paying alimony. Your average man has more to lose. This makes no sense. Unless you live in a state where alimony is awarded all willy nilly. Here, alimony is only awarded if the woman has been like a housewife for a decade or something. I think alimony is relatively rare (and even so, it's been awarded in common law marriage cases as well! So avoiding marriage gives you nothing, as the states without common law almost never give alimony statistically). Child support is another matter, but that has nothing to do with marriage, really. Now, the losing 50% of your assets is another matter. . . but if you're richer, you'd think you'd be more worried about that, no? At any rate, I'm not personally anti-pre-nup, though most of the guys that aren't rich (it totally makes sense if you're rich) and talk about them seem to be anti-marriage anyway (in which case, it's irrelevant and ironically you'll be subjected to the common law stuff if you ever stay with anyone long enough, without the protection of a prenup ). In most of the marriages I've seen in my peer group, it's been the woman who brought up the idea of a prenup or something on paper. It just seems like men who are in "love" mode (and haven't been divorced or burned) don't really think about them. They mostly get prenups that expire after 10 years or so. Edited August 3, 2011 by zengirl
Lucky_One Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 Yes if youngskywalker is satisfied with the intimacy they do have, then that is not the problem. He seems fine with that. When a man makes multiple threads about sexual incompatibilities between him and his GF, then I would say that he is NOT fine and that he is NOT satisfied with their sex life. In 7 months, she has not let him perform oral sex, and in 6-7 sexual relationships, she has never orgasmed, and in her 26 years, she has never masturbated. Sex is a huge part of a healthy relationship. As my aunt told me at my engagement party, it only matters 10% when the sex is good for both partners, and it matters 90% when the sex is bad. But since Luke says he is fine with it this month, then it's all good. I will bow out.
mn311601 Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 This makes no sense. Unless you live in a state where alimony is awarded all willy nilly. Here, alimony is only awarded if the woman has been like a housewife for a decade or something. I think alimony is relatively rare (and even so, it's been awarded in common law marriage cases as well! So avoiding marriage gives you nothing, as the states without common law almost never give alimony statistically). Child support is another matter, but that has nothing to do with marriage, really. Now, the losing 50% of your assets is another matter. . . but if you're richer, you'd think you'd be more worried about that, no? At any rate, I'm not personally anti-pre-nup, though most of the guys that aren't rich (it totally makes sense if you're rich) and talk about them seem to be anti-marriage anyway (in which case, it's irrelevant and ironically you'll be subjected to the common law stuff if you ever stay with anyone long enough, without the protection of a prenup ). In most of the marriages I've seen in my peer group, it's been the woman who brought up the idea of a prenup or something on paper. It just seems like men who are in "love" mode (and haven't been divorced or burned) don't really think about them. They mostly get prenups that expire after 10 years or so. I believe it was Chris Rock who summed up my thoughts on marriage and pre-nups. Everybody needs a prenuptial agreement. People think you gotta be rich to get a prenup. Oh no! You got 20 million and your wife want 10, big deal! You ain’t starvin’. But if you make 30,000… and your wife want 15, you might have to kill her.
Woggle Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 I believe it was Chris Rock who summed up my thoughts on marriage and pre-nups. Chris Rock says it perfectly. It's the average guy who has to worry about being ruined if his wife turns on him.
Enchanted Girl Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 So then . . . I want to be married someday and what I'm getting from this thread is that even though I'm not a gold digger, I should stop dating poor guys because they'll never marry me out of fear that I'll steal the little bit of money that they have?! That all women who want to be married should never date poorer guys? Well, guess I haven't been shallow enough while dating men then. You don't need to worry. This is only a "talking about our expectations" stage, which is healthy for a couple. There isn't a ring on her finger. Then you need to tell her that you never want to be married if that's how you feel. There's no point in lying.
Woggle Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 I never said you should stop dating poor guys but most likely you have to earn a man's trust. Men have their hurdles to jump through to get a woman to trust him as well. It seams some women resent having to do this work and feel a man should blindly trust them before she proves herself.
Enchanted Girl Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 I never said you should stop dating poor guys but most likely you have to earn a man's trust. Men have their hurdles to jump through to get a woman to trust him as well. It seams some women resent having to do this work and feel a man should blindly trust them before she proves herself. And what part of every poor guy should get a pre-nup (like you guys were talking about) relates to the part where poor men eventually start trusting the woman?
Woggle Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 And what part of every poor guy should get a pre-nup (like you guys were talking about) relates to the part where poor men eventually start trusting the woman? Every man poor or otherwise should have an iron clad prenup. A man is a fool if he doesn't.
Recommended Posts