alphamale Posted April 3, 2012 Posted April 3, 2012 Gentleman, would you date such a woman. LOL i'd date her for sex if she was good looking but thats about it...these types of women are major gold diggers - most of them won't even go out with a man unless he is a doctor or attorney
RedRobin Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 You mean, would I date a man who was a SAHD to his children? And put aside a 'career' to do so? Has a degree and is currently living with his parents? Perhaps. I'd have to know more about the circumstances. Why he was living with his parents (is it because they are aging?). Could he demonstrate some ability to be self-supporting? Was he a good husband? I'd rather think his doing all of those things might be an indicator of character. Not necessarily laziness. I'm not interested in the men who abandoned/neglected his family and children to pursue the bigger, fatter paycheck and job title. I prefer balance.
Feelsgoodman Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 A lot of successful men who make good money actually want their wives at home to handle the daily tasks of running a household and to take care of them while they handle their stressful jobs. They want to come home and relax and not hear about their wife's stressful day at the office. If they have kids, that is more of an incentive to stay at home. A lot of women would rather work, so not all SAHM are the same. It's something a couple works out between themselves and not random strangers who approve or don't approve. This would all make sense in a saner society. Thanks to our messed up laws, this sort of thing is very much discouraged. Imagine your wife cheating on you and then dumping your @ss. To add insult to injury, not only would she get 50% of your assets thanks to, but she would also be entitled to alimony because she doesn't have an occupation. Who in their right mind would take that risk?
Soxfaninfl Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 This would all make sense in a saner society. Thanks to our messed up laws, this sort of thing is very much discouraged. Imagine your wife cheating on you and then dumping your @ss. To add insult to injury, not only would she get 50% of your assets thanks to, but she would also be entitled to alimony because she doesn't have an occupation. Who in their right mind would take that risk? Amen brother!
carhill Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 Who in their right mind would take that risk? If one man had not, I would not exist. Dad's first wife took up with another man while he was in Italy fighting the Germans, took their daughters and he returned home with essentially what he had in his duffle bag after the war was over. Yet, a mere seven years later, he took the risk with another woman, with them both choosing for her not to work for a wage and parented the little tyke in my avatar until his death 32 years later. Perhaps that's where my faith in the potential of a SAHM comes from. That era is passed for myself but I can still respect the perspective. Each couple works it out for themselves.
Feelsgoodman Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 If one man had not, I would not exist. Dad's first wife took up with another man while he was in Italy fighting the Germans, took their daughters and he returned home with essentially what he had in his duffle bag after the war was over. Yet, a mere seven years later, he took the risk with another woman, with them both choosing for her not to work for a wage and parented the little tyke in my avatar until his death 32 years later. Perhaps that's where my faith in the potential of a SAHM comes from. That era is passed for myself but I can still respect the perspective. Each couple works it out for themselves. Things were a little different 52 years ago. Different era, different social norms, different laws.
carhill Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 That's the interesting thing about time. It passes. How does time affect a couple who has been married for 25, 50, 75 years? Do they not experience the changing eras, social norms and laws? Or are they forever fixed in the past? In general, I would agree with you but I do find that dynamic of the passing of time to be interesting and inspirational. Perhaps that's part of the synergy I seek with a life partner.
RedRobin Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 Who in their right mind would take that risk? I'm not aware of any real commitments that don't involve some risk.
Oxy Moronovich Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 I'm not aware of any real commitments that don't involve some risk. Some relationships are riskier than others. Guys should try to avoid the relationships most prone to failure. The women in the OP's example are the most prone to failure.
Feelsgoodman Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 I'm not aware of any real commitments that don't involve some risk. It's all about the risk-benefit analysis. At some point, the benefit is no longer worth the risk.
RedRobin Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 Some relationships are riskier than others. Guys should try to avoid the relationships most prone to failure. The women in the OP's example are the most prone to failure. Really? How so? How does being divorced with kids make them 'prone to failure'? The OP mentioned they were divorced. He didn't say how long they were married, or what the circumstances were. I understand that, if you've never been married, you might want to find someone who also has never been married. That isn't the same as just assuming the women in the OP's example are most prone to failure though.
RedRobin Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 It's all about the risk-benefit analysis. At some point, the benefit is no longer worth the risk. You're right. If you see no benefit to attempting to have a committed life-long relationship, then you certainly shouldn't risk it.
Soxfaninfl Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 Really? How so? How does being divorced with kids make them 'prone to failure'? The OP mentioned they were divorced. He didn't say how long they were married, or what the circumstances were. I understand that, if you've never been married, you might want to find someone who also has never been married. That isn't the same as just assuming the women in the OP's example are most prone to failure though. I saw something on the TV the other saying men with kids who are divorced are more likely to have relationships that will fail. My ex-wife left me. I want to be married again someday. I didn't believe in divorce, and I'm finding it hard now to date. I've been rejected because I'm divorced with a child.
Els Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 Um, just curious, OP. Wasn't it you who said that you're not working at the moment?
Oxy Moronovich Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 Really? How so? How does being divorced with kids make them 'prone to failure'? The OP mentioned they were divorced. He didn't say how long they were married, or what the circumstances were. I understand that, if you've never been married, you might want to find someone who also has never been married. That isn't the same as just assuming the women in the OP's example are most prone to failure though. Divorce rates in the U.S. increases with each marriage: Divorce rate in America after first marriage is from 41% to 50%. US divorce rate after second marriage is from 60% to 67% After 3 marriages the US divorce rate is from 73% to 74% Here's the link: Divorce Rate - U.S.A.: AboutDivorce.org Why would I get married to a woman where the chance of divorce is over 60%?
MrNate 2.0 Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 Can I stay at home with her? I could totally be a stay at home dad. 1
Feelsgoodman Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 You're right. If you see no benefit to attempting to have a committed life-long relationship, then you certainly shouldn't risk it. I didn't say there was no potential benefit. I said that the risk was not worth the benefit. With a 50% divorce rate, it's a damn big risk. Think of it this way. If someone offered you a billion to play russian roulette with half of the chambers loaded, would you do it? I personally wouldn't, but not because I don't see any value in a billion dollars...
RedRobin Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 I didn't say there was no potential benefit. I said that the risk was not worth the benefit. With a 50% divorce rate, it's a damn big risk. Think of it this way. If someone offered you a billion to play russian roulette with half of the chambers loaded, would you do it? I personally wouldn't, but not because I don't see any value in a billion dollars... I did and I have. If you dig in deeper to those statistics, you'll find some other info that might be useful. Such as, divorce statistics based on how old they were when they got married, income... even part of the country they live in and religious upbringing. Believe it or not, those who live in the relatively 'liberal' New England states have a much lower divorce rate than the Bible Belt South. I read some time ago that couples who live together before marriage had an 80% failure rate. Anyway... statistics can be deceiving.
Woggle Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 I am proud to be from the state with the lowest divorce rate in the nation. All of those who bash us can chew on that.
Oxy Moronovich Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 I did and I have. If you dig in deeper to those statistics, you'll find some other info that might be useful. Such as, divorce statistics based on how old they were when they got married, income... even part of the country they live in and religious upbringing. Believe it or not, those who live in the relatively 'liberal' New England states have a much lower divorce rate than the Bible Belt South. I read some time ago that couples who live together before marriage had an 80% failure rate. Anyway... statistics can be deceiving. These women are prone to failure for another reason. They've never been able to care of themselves. Me, Feelsgoodman, and other guys in this thread desire a woman who has her sh*t together. We couldn't tolerate a stay at home mom. Some other dude tolerated that and look what happened--they divorced those guys. Why should guys wanna get with those women when there are plenty of other women who can take care of themselves?
RedRobin Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 (edited) These women are prone to failure for another reason. They've never been able to care of themselves. Me, Feelsgoodman, and other guys in this thread desire a woman who has her sh*t together. We couldn't tolerate a stay at home mom. Some other dude tolerated that and look what happened--they divorced those guys. Why should guys wanna get with those women when there are plenty of other women who can take care of themselves? Nowhere in the OP's post does it say who initiated the divorce or why. You are certainly welcome to decide what kind of life you want. Being a SAHM does not mean a woman not have her sh*t together. I know some extremely capable SAHM's. It wasn't MY choice of lifestyle... but I respect those who've made that choice. It will be interesting to see how the guys on this thread find a way to manage having children and work. I suspect you believe it will be the woman juggling both, not you. Good luck with that. Edited April 4, 2012 by RedRobin 1
mesmerized Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 Divorce rates in the U.S. increases with each marriage: Here's the link: Divorce Rate - U.S.A.: AboutDivorce.org Why would I get married to a woman where the chance of divorce is over 60%? You gotta be kidding me! So you meet a perfect woman who for whatever reason is divorced and just because some statistics says the chance of divorce is 60% (which is just slightly higher than 50%!!) you won't marry her??? I wonder how much of a perfect man you are. I highly doubt you're anywhere close to perfect. The close mindedness of people in LS never fails to surprise me. I have to agree with men on not wanting to marry a SAHM though. In this day and age it's not worth it unless you have a lot of money and money is never an issue for you. 1
musemaj11 Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 I have no interest in letting an able bodied adult human to leech off me especially if she won't even let me do that to her either. 1
phineas Posted April 4, 2012 Posted April 4, 2012 I'm 40 yrs old with two little one's of my own. Most women my age who are empty nester's are looking to party it up & I can't do that so i'd be surprised if they'd date me. I'm also not interested in re-marrying or moving someone into my home & disrupting my kids live's any time soon so I would be an unsuitable mark for a woman looking for a man to support her anyways.
Recommended Posts