TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

64

So number one, I know successful unmarried couples exist. But let’s be real they’re treated as subordinate to married couples. It’s just how it is. No one takes girlfriends or boyfriends seriously after a certain age.

So this line comes up a lot. It’s a classic. It’s intended to be flattering and make the woman feel good. The men saying this know damn well that marriage isn’t a piece of paper and they’re not as committed as they could be/should be.

The woman is usually a place holder until someone he actually feels strongly enough about to marry comes around. Look at how many women were with their exes for years sans marriage and then the ex marries the next woman within 2-3 years.

It’s a nice of way telling women “I don’t wanna marry you but don’t want to be alone. Stick around until I find someone I truly love.”


[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women44 points45 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

A good friend of mine is getting divorced after 3 years. He is the most honest, tolerant, compassionate guy I have ever known. His wife is divorcing him because she "found she's a lesbian" and we are "not allowed to question her sexuality". So ya, marriage is just a piece of paper. Apparently, you can find out you're a lesbian at any time and end the marriage and there's nothing to be done about it.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I feel bad for the guy but how did she not know she was gay before hand? It seems improbable or maybe she was deluding herself.

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women11 points12 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

how did she not know she was gay before hand?

I promise you, this question was asked many times. Everytime we asked a question, the response was, "you are not allowed to question her sexuality". Of course, people here don't believe in that, but she does, so that's it.

[–]LCOSPARELT1Purple Pill Man18 points19 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I’ve been with my girlfriend for two years and we are very happy. I don’t want anyone else. However, at any time she can look at me and say “nope, this isn’t for me anymore”. And she is well within her rights to do so. She has every right to leave me whenever she chooses. But I shouldn’t have to pay her for it.

I have a good job and do pretty well for myself. I work extremely hard and I am on pace for a nice retirement in about 20 years. My hard work shouldn’t be thrown in the garbage because she loses interest in me.

[–]ITooHaveThumbsMulticolored Pill Alchemist5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah.. no. Marriage is a scam where women leverage the government monopoly on violence and forced confinement in order to extort access to a man's provisioning indefinitely, regardless of whether or not she lives up to or honors her own marriage vows and commitments. In modern society men have literally nothing to gain and everything to lose from wifing up a woman, and no sane man with even an ounce of sense would consider it.. no matter how magical the pussy was before he put a ring on it ( we all know what happens after she gets that legal gun pointed at her man's head).

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I hear you. Don't get married to her. Especially if she reserves the right to leave for unpredictable and uncontrollable reasons.

[–]BewareTheOldMan-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Your comment is at the top of the thread, but getting lots of downvotes - that's harsh.

Anyway - as much as your girlfriend loves you, one way to "test" that love to do so is with talk of a pre-nuptial agreement. Lots of women love to push marriage, but it's mainly because they gain so much in resources, benefits, and retirement perks...all from legally recognized marriage. The point of marriage is family and legacy as well, but the reality is that marriage is in direct support of financial gain for women and to further generational wealth.

That said, women's natural hypergamy and general disgust for carrying the family's financial burden means that most women naturally seek to marry a higher-earning spouse and someone who will be a workhorse for the duration of the marriage - in case they take either a SAHM long-break or work sabbatical.

What this means is that in divorce the lower-earning spouse, usually the woman, can petition the higher-earner for temporary or lifetime support. This incudes petitioning for a portion of the higher-earner's salary increases and retirement.

The current setup benefits women the most and they assume very little to no risk, whereas you so eloquently pointed out that it's men who assume the most long-term and highest risk in marriage.

The only way to make it fair is that women assume not necessarily equal, but a relatively equal and fair amount of risk. Any woman who refuses to do so by way of a solid and iron-clad pre-nuptial agreement fully understands what she stands to gain in divorce and is a big red flag and question mark for marriage.

I will not assume your woman's intentions, but as someone who is risk-averse while women are out here screaming "marry me," it's time women accepted an equitable amount of risk as well. In short - they have to have something to lose in both marriage and potential divorce.

Also - lots of folks say pre-nuptial agreements are crap.

PRO TIP: Use separate attorneys, video record the signing for both parties with a credible and disinterested third-party witness, and ensure signatures and total agreement to ALL terms at least eight to nine months prior to the wedding to avoid any possible claims of "signature under duress."

Some pre-nups were signed two to seven days before the wedding and were ignored during divorce proceedings based on claims of duress.

Either way - prior paperwork or not, I hope you and your lady work out for the best.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

He should be like “great news im a trans female lesbian, welcome to our new lesbian relationship” and continue on like nothing ever happened. Any time she questions it he can just say her line back to her.

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Very clever! That actually would make sense to those kind of people because you're not allowed to question a person's sexuality.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Honestly i wish my wife would come out as lesbian. Would improve our relationship tremendously. I would open the relationship, let her fuck other women and experience no jealousy whatsoever. As far as the us not fucking thing, it wouldn't be a change from the status quo, so no loss there.

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Something u/nenman88 asked me earlier,

Would you condone people staying together in marriage if the women found out she was a lesbian?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

I would, for sure. I mean my wife could fuck literally 10000 other women and it would not bother me one iota so long as no other males are involved. Open relationship = good for her, good for him because he can pursue other women. Maybe they can even share.

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, some point are not as open-minded as you when it comes to lesbians and marriage.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Legit first time i got called open minded at this sub :D

[–]J_Milton_JrDon't open 'til doomsday...♥32 points33 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

well...people get divorced all the time ...so even if you're married, you dont have the security of not being left by your partner

[–]87AudreyHorne24 points25 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

Also why would you want such power? You should want someone to be with you because they want to be with you, not because they are bound by law...

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.4 points5 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Being married is more committed than not being married for legal reasons that you can’t simply walk away and wash your hands of it but that doesn’t mean people are forced to stay with each other. Or live together. Or be monogamous.

Of course some probably do stay together because they are scared of divorce, much like some people stay together for the kids. For me though, that possibility would not be enough to eschew marriage or not have kids for that matter.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy Link

Being married is more committed than not being married for legal reasons that you can’t simply walk away and wash your hands of it but that doesn’t mean people are forced to stay with each other. Or live together. Or be monogamous.

Then what is the point? Make up your mind here, either marriage is coercive and therefore bad, or it isn't coercive and therefore has no point. To whatever extent it's coercive, 87Audrey's point applies. Why do you want people to remain in relationships where they would rather walk? Why not provide something or maintain the relationship?

Honestly, if you want a relationship to stay GOOD and not merely continue to exist in an increasingly mediocre, mutually unsatisfying fashion, then never commit and never get married. The ever present threat of dissolution keeps people invested. The instant they are no longer invested they can just break up.

Nothing is worse than being with someone who doesnt give a fuck about YOU anymore except as a means to an end, this female goal of "stability" that they willingly sacrifice men on the altar of, for years or decades past the point they stop caring enough to fuck said male. Trust me, I would know.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.1 point2 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Bullshit, just because you view your marriage as coercive doesn’t mean the rest of us do. It’s obviously a bigger commitment. That doesn’t mean you have to stay married. Nobody forces you to.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, and why is it a bigger commitment? Because there are harsh consequences if you split, so again, you're just dodging the initial point of "why do you want to insert an element of coercion into relationships".

Have the gumption to take ownership for your stance.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

No that’s not the only reason. Don’t project your own views onto other people and then have the audacity to act like others aren’t standing up for their positions. That you can’t just walk away and simply wash your hands of the relationship does not mean the only reason marriage is a bigger commitment is because it’s “coercive”. That’s you projecting your own beliefs about what marriage means to you on others.

[–]Mystery_Tragic0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Face the facts, sublime. Marriage is awful. As a lawyer I thought you would have agreed with that.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Don’t play the lawyer card with me. And don’t project your inaccurate beliefs about marriage or divorce for that matter on me either

[–]Mystery_Tragic0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm not playing any cards. Anyway, my beliefs on marriage or divorce are accurate. There is no denying that.

[–]ThisIsJustATr1buteHas what plants crave3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Here’s the thing, people purposely choose to be bound by law for myriad reasons. In the West marriage isn’t much forced at gunpoint. Marriage is choosing to take your love seriously for life, and has legal and emotional benefits.

I don’t think most western people are choosing marriage because they feel their love is weak and somehow needs the law to force them together.

I don’t understand refusing the many practical and social benefits of marriage, thinking of marriage as some sort of crutch for true love. Saying it’s only really love if they choose to stay without vows strikes me as an unhealthy test of the relationship.

[–]ImFreeMan3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

That's the thing, let someone be with you because they want to be with you. And if they do not longer want to be with you, then you separate without divorce and it's nefarious consequences

[–]87AudreyHorne1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Isnt it then better just to not get married rather than to be married and separated? Or is that your point (in which case i agree)

[–]ImFreeMan1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's exactly my point, there is no divorce because there is no marriage

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie89 points90 points  (107 children) | Copy Link

No. The people who say this know marriage is a terrible deal for them.

Now, I'm not saying this is women's fault; it's just their problem. Marriage is the next challenge that SHOULD demand both spouses bring their A game and continue it on into the future.

This is a know-your-audience type of thing. Because what "its just a piece of paper" really means is what the fuck else do you offer aside from what you already are? Because the prevailing attitude is that women offer less once they get married; not more.

And when women answer this, they offer shit they themselves want, not what their men are interested in. Hence just a piece of paper.

[–]DemonConsulting4" Dragon39 points40 points  (32 children) | Copy Link

If they plan on having children, they would have to be an idiot not to insist on marriage beforehand. Giving up your best years, your body, and career opportunities to birth and raise kids without any legal security for the future is incredibly irresponsible.

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie22 points23 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Marriage is absolutely for children. As it needs to be.

[–]MILFBucket25 points26 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Only if you read that oh so very wrong.

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband16 points17 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I believe that's the joke. At least it got a good snort out of me.

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I hope so.

[–]DemonConsulting4" Dragon6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Tbh I agree that marriage for childfree couples and those who live in the same country permanently is not really necessary

[–]SkookumTreeRomantic relationships aren't necessary for happiness!1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Legal and tax shit.

[–]chaddad90003 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Absolutely true. And this thread is full of people saying "marriage is a risk!" "marriage is a bad deal!".

But really it is having kids and buying a house with someone which is the risky deal, not "marriage" itself. Srsly, no kids/no property, you can get divorced for a $200 and a moving van. It is really not very much "commitment". (And even if you don't get married, kids/property will be a business partnership and a risk factor.)

My guess is OP's ex either didn't want kids or didn't want kids with her, and that had more to do with it than it being a placeholder relationship.

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

My guess is OP's ex either didn't want kids or didn't want kids with he

Yeah...I'm thinking she's trying to figure all that out and not have any responsibility over this; hence all the hamstering posts.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I thought these were strooooong, independent women?

[–]DemonConsulting4" Dragon0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Turns out all of humanity was right and feminists are wrong 😦

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

You should still tell the truth at your wedding ceremony and your close friends and family though. If your marriage means "we are going to be together temporarily until it makes sense for me to move on", then that's fine, but tell the truth, don't lie.

[–]nevomintoarcePurple Pill Woman0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Do you think people get married so they can break up later on?

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm not sure how to answer that. I think lots of people get a legal marriage with little or no intention of keeping their marriage vows, yes.

[–]BewareTheOldMan-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Giving up your best years, your body, and career opportunities to birth and raise kids without any legal security for the future is incredibly irresponsible.

I posit that most people agree with that sentiment, but marriage in the current paradigm is a huge one-sided and open risk for men due to women initiating all these divorces at an almost 70 percent rate.

What to do? What to do? Any suggestions on how women intend to mitigate and at best eliminate that 70 percent divorce initiation-rate?

[–]DemonConsulting4" Dragon3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

The most common reason for divorce is infidelity so I guess not cheating would be a good point to start... Women initiate divorce because it doesn't have such a negative effect on them as it does on men. Meaning a man will stay married for financial reasons even when they're done with their marriage and just check out or cheat until his wife makes the decision to "initiate divorce".

[–]BewareTheOldMan-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Infidelity, finance issues, and domestc abuse are all reasons that women initiate divorce, but the main reason seems to be "dissatisfaction."

Lots of articles all list dissatisfaction as the principal reason versus anything else. It's crazy, because if that's the main reason it's' a very solvable problem.

From the article - "Women Initiate Divorce Much More Than Men"

"...women initiated nearly 70% of all divorces...when either partner seeks individual therapy about a marriage conflict that ends in divorce, it’s often the woman who expresses more overt conflict and dissatisfaction about the state of the marriage.

I'll leave you to do your own research.

[–]reluctantly_red-1 points0 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Best years? Women can be back at work within a month after birth.

[–]DemonConsulting4" Dragon11 points12 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I mean best years in terms of attractiveness and fertility, the former often being permanently affected by pregnancy. Traditionally you get those attractive years and healthy offspring in exchange for taking care of her even when she gets old and unattractive. But speaking of career setbacks: Women still tend to be the one who leaves early to pick up the kids from daycare, take breaks to pump milk, don't work overtime or weekends, don't network and socialize after work, don't go on multiple day business trips, aren't flexible in their work hours, take time off when daycare or school is closed or the kids are sick for the 10th time that year, etc. If you look at the statistics on the "wage gap" or earning gap, it doesn't really appear until kids are in the mix. Because women still tend to be the primary care giver (imo as is biologically intended) and families as a unit usually make the choice to have the woman take the career hit rather than the man. Not only do men go into higher paying careers so this choice makes sense, but in many cases your boss will look at you like you're nuts if you as a man want to leave early/exactly on time to pick your kids up from daycare, come to work sleep deprived after doing half the night time feeding, or take multiple days off to stay home with your sick kid. That's what you have a wife for.

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman10 points11 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Wow, super old school thinking here. At all the places I worked father's were given the courtesy to leave early to pick up kids, come in late to drop kids off, take parental leave, and were understood if they were sleep deprived, or had to work remotely because a babysitter cancelled.

I'd quickly run from a place that discriminates against father's like that.

[–]DemonConsulting4" Dragon4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Huh maybe it's an industry thing... I've seen these attitudes in tech, research at University, and government admin type work. Especially once you get into management positions. Not that they like women taking time off for their kids, they just accept the reality and unofficially try not to put mothers or potential soon to be mothers into important positions

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well my comment is about fathers, but yeah. No idk if they "like" it but I think it depends on the individual worker. I'm not a mom and probably won't be one for awhile, it's nice to have the flexibility though to work remotely for Drs appts and everyone gets that. Everyone has a life, dude at my works dog just passed away and he's impromptly been wfh and Mia bc of that. And no one at the company would tell him no, you can't do that. They all would support him

I'd rather work with people who have compassion for eachothers situations. Work breaks to pump breast milk is as natural as work breaks to take a big dump. Who cares, as long as the employees still chug away at what they're doing day by day and work at least 8 hours a day, then why should compassionate employers care ?

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

1 month is kind of short especially if she has a C section and needs to recover from the surgery as well as dealing with a newborn

[–]GroundPole1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Superficially sure they can do stuff.

Realistically, losing 3-4 months is going to set you back. Not because of the patriarchy, but due to the momentum you have on your team in the workplace. Especially if they take a full year like they are entitled to. And even more so if you have 2-3 kids over 5-6 years

I use momentum as a vague and general term because of the differences in work places. In some careers it matters less.

[–]reluctantly_red1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Most people can pick up right where they left off after even a year or more. People take extended leave all the time. If I got hit by a bus and had to take six months off to recover nothing would change. I might be assigned to a different courtroom upon my return that's all. Most jobs are like that. A teacher will pick up where she left off in a new classroom. A cop will pick up where she left off with a new beat/partner. A social worker will just go back into the rotation.

[–]GroundPole4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Hmm maybe it's just the two industries I've been. Tech and consulting.

For project work, its disadvantageous to leave part of the way through. And for constant teams the standard operating procedures slightly change over time and it's hard coming back to be on the same level.

In those industries if you plot your career progress on a chart with x axis being time and y being career progress (or salary potential). 20-35 is where the slope is the highest. Taking maternity would leave the slope as flat during that time, and it wouldn't be as steep as when you come back. It would be some time before the steepness gets up to the same level. And by that time it can be maternity again.

Obviously you don't see these slope change month to month, but if you could, i think thats how it would be reflected.

To provide a male example take, military leave as a reservist / national guard.

[–]reluctantly_red-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

For project work

Project work sucks. I hated doing it. No stability. No future.

[–]PrideInIndividualityLiberal Red Piller-1 points0 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

If they plan on having children, they would have to be an idiot not to insist on marriage beforehand.

The truth is quite the opposite. If you plan on having children, you would have to be an idiot to insist on marriage beforehand.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

What?

[–]DemonConsulting4" Dragon4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

What possible advantage could women and children gain from being illegitimate?

[–]PrideInIndividualityLiberal Red Piller-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

In liberal society, thankfully there's no such thing as "illegitimate" children. Women can actually go out to work, rather than staying in kitchen, which is beneficial to children. Also, if child labor laws are relaxed, children can benefit tremendously as well.

Marriage is fundamentally an oppressive institution, for men, for women, AND for children.

Also, the burden of proof is on conservatives to prove how marriage is beneficial to anyone.

[–]DemonConsulting4" Dragon1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I pointed out in my original reply that a woman gives up her most attractive/fertile years, her body, and major time in her career if she has children. Women can go out to work but they can't put 100% into their work and birth/ care for children at the same time. On average their career takes a much bigger hit than men's since they are physically out of commission for a while after birth and then do the majority of child care. They tend to be the ones who take parental leave, work part time, are leaving early to pick up kids from daycare, stay home when the kid is sick or school is closed, are entirely inflexible in their work hours and location, don't stay after work to network, don't go on business trips because they have a baby, etc.

The way marriage protects women and children in this case is that the decision to have kids and have the woman lose out on her career is seen as a joint one made by both parties. If they divorce she gets 50% of everything, including things like pension funds, since she contributed to the marriage by caring for the kids instead of putting her work first, while the husband got to focus on his career undisturbed. If they're not married and the husband decides to leave her and the kids, she is stuck as a single mom with little money and an underdeveloped career.

[–][deleted] 25 points26 points  (26 children) | Copy Link

“I want half your shit no matter what because I’m already starting to get sick of you”

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie22 points23 points  (24 children) | Copy Link

Yeah no. Women want security and the status of marriage like men want pussy. Most women aren't that pathetic nor do they "feel" that far ahead into the future.

[–]squiddy_s550gtwhy so butthurt?16 points17 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

women want security

Nice way of saying leverage

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie10 points11 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

You think most women are in the business of hustling? Most women, hell most people, aren't that cognizant or self-reflective enough to say it's "leverage".

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Why do women ask for and profit from divorce more than men? Way more in fact...why?

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You've never heard of "oops I didn't mean to" from women? I think most of them literally mean that. They don't start off wanting a divorce. "It just happened".

I think it's a shit answer from a woman that won't take responsibility for her actions, but I also don't think she's going to think like a dude.

Saying "leverage" is dude thought. Women don't feel that way. It's the difference between rationalizing poor behavior after the fact rather than planning on vindictive behavior because they are insidious.

And all the divorce lawyers get to see the insidious bitches and women rationalizing extremely destructive choices. They don't notice or deal with all the women that don't have a serious problem acting like a functional adult.

[–]arcticshqip0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's not a gender issue, it's culture. I've heard many american men complaining about it. I know laws of my country quite well (did my minors in juridical faculty) and here no one profits in divorce.

[–]squiddy_s550gtwhy so butthurt?0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes i do.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope9 points10 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

the status of marriage

It's cultural. Like many women want newest iPhones.

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie11 points12 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Status of marriage is a few orders of magnitude more important than a new iPhone. Kinda like saying a hand job is sex.

[–]squiddy_s550gtwhy so butthurt?1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

You underestimate iPhones

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

iPhones are shit. Samsung Galaxy is the way forward.

[–]squiddy_s550gtwhy so butthurt?2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

While i agree.

iPhones have quite the cult

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Apple are good at leading the sheep. Baa Baa

[–]darudeboysandstormSoup on the stove, bread rising, apple pie0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

TBF samsung is sort of the same, if youre truly cultured your only phone is a motorola razor.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

And handjobs

[–]rus9384Misanthrope2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Status of marriage is a few orders of magnitude more important than a new iPhone.

Then, Porsche Cayenne. However, in that case (at least where I leave) most men will think she sucked rich man's dick to get it. For iPhone it's less prevalent.

[–]PrideInIndividualityLiberal Red Piller5 points6 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Nurture is actually the product of nature. The reason why women get status of marriage is the same way men get status of getting the hottest pussies.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

My point is that the idea that being married makes you a more valuable woman is cultural.

[–]PrideInIndividualityLiberal Red Piller2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I understand the point. I'm just expanding on your point that culture is the product of biology.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, and I see that marriage gives status in more traditionalist societies.

[–]nevomintoarcePurple Pill Woman2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

In all societies.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not really.

[–]Zippo-Cat0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Women want security and the status of marriage like men want pussy.

You have absolutely no way to prove that and you know it, so I don't know why you sound so certain of it.

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I know it, and I don't have to prove it to you. I think it's damn obvious though.

[–]Zippo-Cat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The absolute state of "discussion" in the sub

[–]arcticshqip0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

That problem would be solved by getting married in different country or signing a prenupt. (Most places allow you to use the laws of the place where you were married in case of divorce)

[–]friggandfrayed16 points17 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

It is women’s fault because women fought for and create no-fault divorce.

[–]i_have_a_semicolonPurple Pill Woman24 points25 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The National Organization for Women opposed the introduction of no-fault divorce in New York State because it would allow a party who actually is at fault to obtain a divorce in which "alimony, maintenance [and] property division" would be determined without the judge considering "the facts, behavior and circumstances that led to the break-up of the marriage".[14]

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.11 points12 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I believe actually it was men who wanted and sought no fault divorce. Although the idea no fault divorce ruined everything is a myth

[–]BewareTheOldMan-2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I believe actually it was men who wanted and sought no fault divorce. Although the idea no fault divorce ruined everything is a myth

It makes very little sense that men would petition en masse for no-fault divorce. They spend too much time complaining about its negative and disastrous effects.

In a scenario where men have potential to lose half or more marital assets, pay temporary or lifetime alimony, lose daily and direct access and influence to their children, endure the frustration of numerous court appearances, and pay exorbitant attorney fees...it's a safe bet that men want to know to whom and where to direct to blame.

Also - when a woman can commit infidelity, produce a child/children with another man while maried to her husband and commit paternity fraud, and/or refuse to fullfill her wife duties consistent with the husband's expectations and requirements and still recieve alimony and half or more of her soon-to-be ex-husband's assets and marital property...it's easy to make the statement that "no fault divorce ruined everything."

If you can offer a logical counterpoint, I have interest in an explanatory defense of your statement.

[–]friggandfrayed-4 points-3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Ha ok keep believing that...

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I mean where are you getting either idea from? What is your basis or evidence here?

[–]friggandfrayed1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

See above please. History is linked in the thread! It's not an idea, its fact. The NAWL literally championed the notion of no-fault divorce in the USA, finally winning over California in 1969.

[–]PrideInIndividualityLiberal Red Piller8 points9 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

*Liberals fought for no-fault divorce. There are conservative women out there too.

[–]friggandfrayed5 points6 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

You’re right. Conservative women divorce rape too but it wasn’t their initiative. Good point.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew14 points15 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

no fault divorce actively lowered divorce settlements by not allowing the court to consider fault in most states. the first no fault law in th eUS, california, was fought for by a male bachelor divorce attorney

[–]friggandfrayed5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

California became the first state to pass no-fault divorce laws in 1969. Prior to this:

By 1960, only 27.4% of American women 20–24 years old were single. The divorce rate had slowed, reaching a low point of 8.9 per 1,000 women 15 years of age and older, or 368,000 divorces, in 1958. The fertility rate was 122.9 per 1,000 women compared with only 79.9 per 1,000 in 1940.

Then, in the 1950s, the National Association of Women Lawyers began campaigning for no fault divorce by pursuing a "woman's rights agenda within a professional framework". Take a look into the history, it's fascinating. Women created this problem and coupled it with the completely fabricated "plight of women" a la de Beauvoir and Friedan to turn it into the second wave feminism bullshit that helped torpedo this nation's society into the disgusting state we see today.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2220&context=facpubs

and here is a law review article that says otherwise

the feminist project failed

[–]friggandfrayed1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I linked a history of no-fault divorce, which states facts.

The title of your Law Review article it states "A Perspective". I'm not looking for an opinion on the matter, the facts speak for themselves. They're linked above.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

the facts are contained in the article and footnotes

you linked some abstract. the national association of women lawyers project failed. the male bachelor lawyer who pushed no faul tin Cali succeeded, and feminists DIDNT like it, and the california model was followed by most of the rest of the states

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

absolutely false

[–]87AudreyHorne7 points8 points  (28 children) | Copy Link

I honestly dont know what else should men or women offer asside from what they already are after they get married

[–]abqkat19 points20 points  (25 children) | Copy Link

For me, personally, I didn't live with my now-husband (or anyone prior I dated) before formal commitment, ie marriage. So, I agreed to, and do, all our laundry, most of our chores, all cooking and dishes and cleaning. Because I refused to play house without commitment, and yes, if you live together and act like a faux-wife, marriage offers little. For me, there were tangible changes in expectations and implied permanence and logistics with marriage that didn't exist in dating.

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie18 points19 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I always love to see women that can articulate this. To me, it indicates a wife or woman that at least has a semblance of understanding of men and what they are interested in.

Most clueless women will see this as "I'm not his mother" which is completely missing the point.

[–]abqkat18 points19 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Totally. I have kind of traditional views on marriage and pairbonds, so, yes... I put that into action. Do I always love it? Course not. But that's the burden of marriage as a woman, and he takes on similar burdens as a married man. We're equal, but... Not the same, and that, to me, is okay.

[–]87AudreyHorne7 points8 points  (21 children) | Copy Link

Why didn't you want to live with them before?

Why did you do all the chores?

I mean you can live with someone and marry someone while having a fair and equal relationship...

[–]abqkat11 points12 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

My views on marriage are pretty traditional (antiquated, to some, I suppose). There are things I do as a wife, who benefits from marriage, that I wouldn't do as a live-in girlfriend. I didn't want to play house without commitment. To me, our relationship is fair and awesome and equal, but that looks different to me in marriage vs dating

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

I'm going to need to take some advice from you, honestly. Lol. My perception has been blurred of what a gf should be doing and what a wife should be doing. I have been doing the wife thing when I was only the GF and also not living together. I genuinely enjoy doing it - but people / men of course, do not appreciate it when they have it. I have left all of my ex's Alpha Widowed - where they have expressed they need and want to have to me back and apologetic letters of not appreciating me and fear of never finding someone like me again. And I'm taking ex's from 6+ years ago and I'm only 25 - though marriage was only talked about with one as it was age / maturity appropriate (and there was so also no rush on my part to ask for it. He insisted)

But your are so right. It has been my mistake not defining what I will do as a gf, and what I can provide as a wife. It's the marriages that see a difference and appreciate that difference that last because all cards weren't laid out from the get go - and you gain as you grow.

Damn thanks girl. Needed to read this lol

[–]rus9384Misanthrope1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Now I'm starting to think RP's "a 8 plate who treats me like a king and cooks and cleans" is not that impossible. At least in the West.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Let me tell you - from now on idk how to cook, clean or take care of anything. We gonna learn everything together and come to a compromise lol

[–]rus9384Misanthrope1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I mean, girls in Russia are like that. Russia is red pilled, and women too. In RPW way.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Can you explain a bit more, if you don't mind ? I'm getting all the tips I can atm lol

[–]rogicar-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Fair enough. Not arguing but want to add to the discussion. How would the guy know this is the deal? From my experience GFs have never really been in any sense played a traditional wife role in where she would regularly cook, clean etc. until now and it has been a big selling point for my current GF.

Prior to this any idea of cleaning up after me (never expected, I always clean up after myself till today), cooking, doing my laundry because, though never explicitly said, it was deemed degrading by my GF to do that stuff for me, but would be totally cool if I do it for some reason. The few times she'd make something for me would usually have some remark in where I'd be questioned in when I would be cooking something for her or I'd be asked to do the dishes, or help prepare. There was always a very transactionary tit for tat nuance to this type of stuff. When she came over to my place I'd be occasionally bugged to clean my room more but they'd never bother to do any of it because obviously that would be degrading to her as a woman/s since that's the culture trend that's dominating where I'm from.

Anyway, the point is that it seemed more than obvious that as wives this aspect of cohabitating was never going to change much. How am I suppose to know if they were going to suddenly go from feminist snob to lovely housewife when it came to domestic chores given the very regular track record they set? Even if they explicitly say they're going to go housewife if I sign the paper what kind of assurance would I have that they actually would? So if you were the hypothetical GF in this example I would dismiss this as any incentive to marry. I've seen women promise so much more important things and fail to deliver when the paper is signed. One of the important lessons that RP has taught me is to believe what I see, never what I'm told.

My current GF for example would never have to promise this, I could see that it's part of who she is as a partner and have no reason to believe that she'd be otherwise as a wife. I'd definitely take her being the lovely housewife aspect into consideration if I were to consider marrying her.

[–]GroundPole1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

So my autistic side wants to know, Where can I find the full list so I know what goes into the live-in category and what in the married one.

For example, I assume I'll still do the handywork in both cases, just curious on what other categories are. You might think they are common sense and implied but I think that seems to be a lot more diverse now.

[–]nevomintoarcePurple Pill Woman8 points9 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

It can lead to the man not wanting to marry if he gets sex, companionship etc. Why buy the milk?

It can also lead to staying together or marrying because your lives are entangled or some other bullshit and, of course, that means marrying the wrong person and thus => higher divorce rates. And studies prove this.

[–]87AudreyHorne7 points8 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

It can lead to the man not wanting to marry if he gets sex, companionship etc. Why buy the milk?

This is so 50ies lol. Probably 90% people who get married today already had years of sex and living together fully monogamous and all.

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This is so 50ies lol.

Its an understanding of men you don't have. Has nothing to do with 1950's bullshit. Like I indicated and now it's clear you fit into this category -

Most clueless women will see this as "I'm not his mother" which is completely missing the point.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

And then she stops putting out before the ink on the marriage cert is even dry

[–]RenzololPurple Pill Man0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

So what if it's 50s? Not everyone wants to live in degenerate "equal" 2019.

[–]87AudreyHorne2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

What is degenerate about equality?

[–]RenzololPurple Pill Man0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

degeneracy and equality are two separate problems

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well for one, it creates women that have very little understanding of men and vice versa. I think only fools try to make equality happen by believing there isn't any differences between the sexes.

Any pursuit of equality requires you to understand differences rather than be clueless to their existence. Hell, even the LGBT community is expanding their categories to show their differences. Yet when it comes to heterosexual couples there is no differences; only sexist 1950's dudes trying to subjugate women. Absolute madness

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

It can lead to the man not wanting to marry if he gets sex, companionship etc. Why buy the milk?

This line of thinking only makes sense if the man you are with looks at you as the provider of a service (sex, affection, etc.) that he's suckered, rather than a partner whom he genuinely loves, respects, and enjoys being with. Why would you want to marry the first man in the first place? Most men don't think like that (thank god).

[–]nevomintoarcePurple Pill Woman-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

the provider of a service (sex, affection, etc.)

a partner whom he genuinely loves, respects

Men look at women as both those things.

Most men don't think like that (thank god).

They act like that.

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

How would you know that? I’m speaking from experience. I’ve been living with mine for about 4 years now. If what you said was true of every man, he wouldn’t want to marry me. But he does. Because he loves me, he respects me, and we are best friends. There are so many men who view the women they are with as more than a pocket p****, and it makes me sad that you don’t see that.

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I know. Which is a problem women have and men shoulder when they shouldn't. But you can see when you ask that how many women have never even thought of it, which often times sets the marriage up for failure.

[–]87AudreyHorne2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't think men or women should be anything else once they get married. If they loved their partner and had a good relationship then why should a marriage change anything rather than just add some legality they might care about for whatever reason. Why would you want your partner to change in the first place?

Can you explain your point?

[–]TheReformist940 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women aren't owed marriage anyway

[–]nevomintoarcePurple Pill Woman0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

They don't know anything except that they don't want to marry the woman they say this to. I know many guys who said that to an ex and then married another girl after a year or something.

[–]Mr_SmoogsThe 2nd most obnoxious poster here72 points73 points  (57 children) | Copy Link

Went out with a couple last night where the guy got brought through the ringer in divorce court from his previous marriage. He calls his gf of 4 years his “life partner,” and makes it clear that she’s NOT his “forever girlfriend”. Implying relationships aren’t serious or real if you can’t drag his balls through court upon dissolution is typical female manipulation, but obviously incorrect.

[–]MaxwellPancakesMcgee13 points14 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

My partner and I call each other just that, 'partners' it happened not long after shit got truly serious and we became financially and otherwise more seriously entangled in each others lives. We both run our own businesses, so if we split we can each survive, we have no kids, no reason to drag the government into it. Sometimes he mentions marriage, but that's not what we agreed to at the start.

[–]abqkat6 points7 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

And while there is a lot of jargon and other words, most people still call it BF/GF. For better and worse, most people (in the US, anyway) treat and think of marriage as a different pairbond than dating/ living together/ partnerships. It's valid to forgo the many benefits of marriage, but imo, it's still a different pairbond

[–]MaxwellPancakesMcgee6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Different, but marriage is in decline and I think the flexibility of language allows for terms to be reallocated or allocated in general. If there is a need to differentiate seriousness in non-marital relationships, it may turn into something. It's like we usually view cohabitating pairs as more serious than non cohabitating pairs now days.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

in the US, anyway

Kinda proves the US is lagging behind.

[–]happycheese86No Pill0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

The old keep themselves in power and luxury and if their kids don't marry or bend to their will, they get disowned. Great way to pass on those 'christian family values'.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

The old keep themselves in power

What a dilemma. Refreshment would result in drastic negative economical changes. But would be good for renewal of values.

As a side note, I don't think heritage should be the thing.

[–]happycheese86No Pill0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't think inheritence should be a thing. It just guarantees that our top % works like a monarchy.

[–]clindh0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

omg you sound perfect

[–]MaxwellPancakesMcgee0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thank you, but I assure you, I'm a PITA and a horse gal, so crazy af to boot.

[–]squiddy_s550gtwhy so butthurt?18 points19 points  (17 children) | Copy Link

He just needs to manup.

[–]concacanca 1 points [recovered]  (11 children) | Copy Link

Where are all the good men?

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼9 points10 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Married.

[–]worldnewsie7 points8 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

That must be why the divorce rate is so high.

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼5 points6 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

The fact that good men get scooped up for marriage is not at all impacted by (wildly varying by demographic) divorce rates.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

wildly varying demographics

Yes, we get it, you're a rich girl from a nice place who never has any problems unlike those icky proles who get what they deserve

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you always get this upset about widely known statistics?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Hey! Im married. I must be a good man.

Thanks!

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

“All squares are rectangles” is not the same thing as “all rectangles are squares.” Sorry.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

She said i have a square jaw guys! Im kickin ass at ppd man women here love me

[–]officerkondoRedder Shade of Purple Man8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

The majority of which are initiated by women. Lest you think that is the man's fault, the divorce rate for lesbian marriages is by far the highest. Women hate being married to women more than they hate being married to men.

Guess who has the lowest divorce rate? Gay men.

[–]Hambone_Malone0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm generalizing here, but could it be that gay men tend to be more open sexually in their relationship. Like they participate more in open relationships, threesomes, orgies, etc.

Just a thought.

[–]Mr_Smoogs 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy Link

Man up and take care of my demon spawn

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Spawn? A child?

[–]Million-SunsMarriage is obsolete0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

A child is worse than a demon.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (29 children) | Copy Link

Except that women invented “common law” and “palimony” to get their talons into his wallet any way so why not give her the piece of paper?

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew8 points9 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

palimony was invented by/for the gay male lovers of wealthy men lol, not women (not really, some tried tho). it barely existed in the past and has been mooted by domestic partnership/gay marriage. i dont feel like looking but in my memory almost every famous palimony suit failed, youre just repeating a meme of our generation. where those things exist its because the COURTS construed them, courts made up of NOT women.

common law marriage wasnt "invented" by anyone, let alone women. thats why its called "common law", it derives from british common law (court case law). it is no different than any constructive agreement. since women have gotten political power common law has almost disappeared in the US. in every state in which it is recognized the couple must hold themselves out to the public as married

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Palimony was invented by a woman who sued the actor Lee Marvin.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

it was invented by her LAWYER, not her and her suit failed. almost all the famous palimony suits failed, one was settled out of court

is there some brainfold in MGTOWs that makes them all think BRINGING a lawsuit or case is the same thing as WINNING one? you all always bring up situations in which , yeh, some action was brought against a man but the woman loses (this case, mattress girl, etc)

[–]3vilg0dAbsolution1 point2 points  (23 children) | Copy Link

That's Australian Problem. In rest of the world, it's not that serious.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew5 points6 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

in several canadian provinces you are a common law couple after 2 years of cohabitation irrespective of whether or not you "hold yourself out" as married"

[–]3vilg0dAbsolution1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

You could get away with all your assets by hiring a good lawyer in Canada. Only in Australia common law is strict.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

goalposts moved, as always

[–]3vilg0dAbsolution0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Nope, I said it was Australian Problem. In other places, Common Laws aren't strict and thus don't pose any problem.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

show me evidence you can "get away with all your assets" in a common law divorce in canada

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (11 children) | Copy Link

Guys living together in a community for 2 years. Now they are gay.

But at least maybe it's the way for polygamy.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew1 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

gibberish

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (9 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, but that's a problem with such laws. If people share a house in trio, how does it work?

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew1 point2 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

bigamy is illegal in all common law nations, so it doesnt. in all common law states marriage, common law or official, is composed of two

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

So, just live in trio and you will remain unmarried. Take it up, Aussies.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

one member of the trio could make a case for a common law marriage existing between them and another member of the trio

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Wtf Canada get your shit together

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

It's a recent change

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

That’s even weirder

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]reluctantly_red0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

These only apply in rare circumstances.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

They keep moving the goalposts. Hell, one guy in Canada was actually ordered to pay CHILD SUPPORT after agreeing to help a single mom out by babysitting for her for free. She figured hmmmm he was kind enough to help me out for free let me obligate him to pay our rent and a judge agreed.

[–]DaphneDK42King of LBFMs20 points21 points  (48 children) | Copy Link

What's the problem with being a "forever girlfriend"?

[–]xKalistoSAHM of Yurop11 points12 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Depends if kids are involved. I'd never have a child without marriage. It's at least a semblance of stability even if simply symbolic.

[–]reluctantly_red4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Lots of couples with kids just let people assume they're married.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

If you want stability keep fucking your man. Its that simple.

The fact that you, and most women, seem to want an outside pressure to force the man to stay with you is highly suspect in a world of post-marital plummeting female libidos.

[–]xKalistoSAHM of Yurop1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

It's not suspect. Women are just not morons and know what's in their best interest.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

My wife got me a shirt yesterday that says "I love my waifu"

Picture me wearing it all day while stone faced, grumpy and seething with my usual internal resentment over the lack of sex. Like a pet hamster or lapdog that a 50 year old frumpy lady put a doggie sweater on. My face contrasted with the shirt would've been the peak black comedy moment if my life were a sitcom.

You think she did it ironically? Wouldn't put it past her

[–]xKalistoSAHM of Yurop0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Your wife sounds like she sucks.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

She doesn't, that's the whole problem

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot11 points12 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

well its very rarely "Forever" first of all and then you get to sit their with your decaying ovaries in your hand while your "life partner" marries the next girl he dates after 8 months

[–]DaphneDK42King of LBFMs5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Nothing is forever. Marriage isn't forever either.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

ok well the rate of "forever" for married couples is much higher for non married ones

[–]DaphneDK42King of LBFMs2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Perhaps. But has it anything to do with the marriage? Or is it merely that couples that intent to stay together for long, tend to get married. And if its merely the institution of marriage that keeps them together, why would that even be desirable?

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

"forever" actually is rare. Even in marriage.

[–]abqkat7 points8 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Nothing, if both people are content to forgo the many benefits of marriage. For those that aren't, and will still be called "girlfriend" after decades together, and potentially navigate childrearing as a dating couple, wanting to be married is very valid

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

wanting to be married is very valid

A thing is only valid if it describes the actual thing it is claiming to describe. Marriage describes a promise to love a person until they die or you die. It does not describe loving a person until you find out you are a lesbian.

[–]abqkat1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Marriage, like you say, is many things. The love portion is valid, but... it's not the entire purpose that marriage serves. Marriage combines a couple's interests, and effectively guards against the prisoner's dilemma in life; an unmarried couple has no truly tangible combined interests (feelings aside), but a married couple has placed some of their "best interest" in this third thing- the marriage- and will be far more likely to logistically and otherwise choose "us" over "me."

[–]nemma8831/F/UK INFP -t. Engaged0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Marriage describes a promise to love a person until they die or you die. It does not describe loving a person until you find out you are a lesbian.

Would you condone people staying together in marriage if the women found out she was a lesbian?

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

It depends on what the wedding vow was. Was the wedding vow "do our best to take care of each other and stay married until one of us dies"?

[–]DemonConsulting4" Dragon8 points9 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

It's not a stable environment to raise kids in or generally build a life together. Women's careers take a huge hit from having children since they are missing work for giving birth, recovering, taking care of a newborn, taking time off if the child is sick, planning around limited daycare hours, lacking flexibility in when they can work, etc. abd they usually do most of the chilscare. It's a major life decision the couple makes as a unit.

If they're not a legal unit, they can't really afford to make major life decisions as if they are since there is 0 security. No taking time off to have and raise kids, no traditional division of labor, no buying a house together, no relocating for your partner's job, nor forgoing to accept that much better job offer on the other side of the world for the sake of your relationship.

[–]reluctantly_red0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

My baby mamas went back to work without their careers taking a hit. They were a librarian and social worker.

[–]DemonConsulting4" Dragon7 points8 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Tbh I don't know how much those jobs pay in the US but here neither of those would let them maintain a middle class life if they end up a single mom... Just housing would be barely affordable in most cities

[–]Texastentialismshe's got a tattoo and two pet snakes0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Same in the US.

[–]Sir_KoopamanSexually Identifies as a Potato3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Both of which are low paying careers that barely allow those who do them to eke out a middle class existence unless they marry.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Just curious to your answer.

What's the problem in being a "beta - provider?"

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not him, but: Some men don't want to be ones.

[–]DaphneDK42King of LBFMs0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not that I see the comparison, but nothing. On the wholesomeness of being a beta buck

[–]azngirl7689[S] -3 points-2 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

Why not just Effin marry instead of playing house?

[–]87AudreyHorne7 points8 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

But why though? If you want status quo to change you need a good reason

[–]abqkat7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

If you were a director of your company, and that came with benefits, stipends, freedom, a salary bump.... Would you be content to be called the office assistant? Titles matter, and most people see the need to convey their title and implied permanence in a way that marriage grants, and dating does not

[–]87AudreyHorne3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't see any benefits for an average person. I can potentially see some, for example if you trust your partner about medical decisions more than your blood family, or if either one of you wants to cover the other with life insurance or something, but for a lot of people this isn't much of a factor. I don't even know anyone who is on life insurance for example..

So, it could be but usually getting married doesn't give you any of the

benefits, stipends, freedom, a salary bump

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Would you be content to be called the office assistant?

Come up with new terms, lol.

[–]UnleavenedDread9 points10 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

This becomes very real as a man once you've been betrayed. My wife had all the signs of being a loyal, great marriage partner. I never wanted to marry and she was so convincing that I did it anyways.

Now what? She's 9 months deep into an affair.

This is the most pain I've ever felt, and she's going to have financially fleeced me and rode my coattails. We did have a great relationship and she was a great person when we married. But I will NEVER stick my neck out like this again.

It's not playing house. It's not setting yourself up to be fucked by the legal system once you realize that people can turn on you as soon as some chemicals are stimulated in their brain.

This is a major trauma for me and I'm not doing it again. Love is nothing but dopamine and oxytocin.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

This becomes very real as a man once you've been betrayed. My wife had all the signs of being a loyal, great marriage partner. I never wanted to marry and she was so convincing that I did it anyways.

Now what? She's 9 months deep into an affair.

Always be ready for shit.

Love is nothing but dopamine and oxytocin.

Wish everyone got this.

[–]UnleavenedDread1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I really dont want to be Red Pill. But ive definitely learned some of its lessons.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I really dont want to be Red Pill.

I think you don't want to be the lower caste crowd who cries about AWALT and all women are bitches.

[–]UnleavenedDread1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I've never had any real trouble getting women honestly (even now I have 3 or 4 I could go have sex with if I was already out of the marriage), I think the difficult part for me is that it would be accepting a major disappointment in what a woman can offer me in terms of what I'd call true partnership in a way that allows for me to make mistakes and be weak and vulnerable at times. To swallow the red pill would be to admit that this is just a socially conditioned illusion. I don't think I'm there right now, but if anything gets me there, it will be this divorce/affair.

I suppose it's the bleakness of the outlook, but then again, maybe that has been decided for me by circumstance already. Not sure I'll be able to drink the kool-aid in the future with relationships anyways. I don't think I'll ever end up in the women-hating crowd though. That seems like it's just the bitter losers. Women are whole people and just as capable of being interesting and useful regardless of their sexual tendencies. Perhaps the end result for me is to just expect less and act accordingly.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That seems like it's just the bitter losers.

That's why I called them the lower caste.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I am so sorry that happened to you. Be well.

[–]Pikachu___2000 1 points [recovered]  (7 children) | Copy Link

What are the benefits for a man to get married? As I see it I can do everything in without being married that I can being married.

I can have sex. I can have kids. I can have a woman who is not going to slowly take sex off the table because she knows I can go get it elsewhere so she has to stay on her "A" game sex wise to keep me around. I don't have to go $15,000 in debt over wedding theatrics and a worthless piece of carbon inside a gold band. I don't have to take on partial responsibility for the $40,000 of student loan debts she comes with.

I don't get bent over and wrecked by Uncle Sam when after 15 years of marriage she decides she doesn't feel how she once did all those years ago.

"Playing house" as you call it is a no brainer. The only reason men get married is because it's the next step on the cookie cutter social ladder.. school --> college --> lover --> career --> marriage --> kids --> retirement. To not follow this process results in social shaming.

Marriage is the end of a man's freedom.

[–]DemonConsulting4" Dragon2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

A woman who has kids with you under these circumstances would have to be an idiot. Like you said, you could leave her for a new model on a whim after she gave up her body, her best years, as well as career opportunities, to birth and raise your children. Then she's homeless with a bunch of kids and an underdeveloped career at 40 while you play house with the next perma-gf.

[–]Pikachu___2000 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

How is that any different than now? There are a lot of single mothers who got knocked up and left by a man they thought they could lock down. At least in my scenario she's guaranteed child support "if" the guy decides to leave and most men would only do so if they were unhappy with the relationship.

Either way someone is going to get screwed. Get married guy gets screwed if at any point the woman decides I'm done or if he decides himself that he's done. Then he's left homeless, under the threat of not seeing his kids, slaving away for a paycheck that's to be garnished by a woman that's not even using all of the money for the kids.

Don't get married and the woman is left having to constantly be on her "A" game or else her man starts getting eyes for a younger women she can't compete with. No consequences for him other than he has to pay child support.

We know which way men are swaying though as the marriage rate has been consistently dropping for years.

[–]DemonConsulting4" Dragon1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Single moms are idiots in most cases that's the point. Women get old and unattractive no matter how great their game is so the only way to not get traded in for a younger model with 0 financial security is marriage.

We know which way men are swaying though as the marriage rate has been consistently dropping for years

We also know which way birthrates are developing. The western middle class is dying out while idiots and conservative foreigners breed in high numbers. So either society will degenerate from stupidity or be taken over by more traditional cultures

[–]BewareTheOldMan0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

@ u/Pikachu___2000 has a lot of good talking points.

His setup actively encourages women, almost forcing them really, to do what's expected of wives and mothers that for many reasons is lost on modern-day women who are always pushing for marriage.

In short - lots of women seek marriage benefits and financial security, but at any point can dismiss their required roles and duties during the marriage and still receive benefits in divorce.

It seems women want men to assume major risk while assuming very little to zero risk. Contracted partners work better when both assume relatively equitable levels of risk.

I posit that most people agree with that sentiment - "under these circumstances [a woman] would have to be an idiot," but marriage in the current paradigm is a huge one-sided and open risk for men due to women initiating all these divorces at an almost 70 percent rate.

What to do? What to do? Any suggestions on how women intend to mitigate and at best eliminate that 70 percent divorce initiation-rate?

[–]GroundPole-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

How do you have kids without being married? Doesn't it become an issue when raising them? Or do you pay the alimony and roll on?

Also why have kids if you don't have a stable partner to raise them with?

Finally wont it be an issue when you are old, friends will be married with families and you would be lonely.

[–]Pikachu___2000 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

How do you have kids without being married?

Orgasm deep inside the woman I'm cohabitating with. You don't have to be married to have kids and just because you're not married doesn't mean you don't have a stable relationship.

Finally wont it be an issue when you are old, friends will be married with families and you would be lonely.

This is conjecture. For all we know those friend could end up bitter, hating their spouse or lonely from a divorce. Why would I be lonely? The mother of my kids would still be there if the relationship worked out. I think you're confused on what I'm saying when I mention not being married. Think of it like this, imagine a married couple you know and just remove the rings. So they live together, they have kids they raise together, they listen to each others problems, go out and have enjoy new life experiences.

It's just that if the relationship goes sour the man can leave and not get bent over by big daddy government. He doesn't have to fear being taken for half of his life's work.

[–]GroundPole1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Ahh I see. So in my country/ province the way I understand it is, I would be common law partners after 2 years living together. After which the women already gets potential to fleece me. So theres no such potential here.

[–]reluctantly_red0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Save the wedding money and go on vacation.

[–]DaphneDK42King of LBFMs0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Marriage adds nothing to the deal. Not juridical, not for stability, not for love. Marriage is a religious institution, and should be approached as such.

[–]Jaeger__850 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why answer his question with another question?

[–]welcometothejlRed Pill Man7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I can be totally committed to someone without being married to them, but what I refuse to do is extend that commitment beyond the relationship. Marriage sometimes forces you to be responsible for someone after the relationship has ended. You're an adult, it's not my fault you're accustomed to a certain lifestyle, it's time to start paying your own bills.

[–]TheBookOfSeilAn ounce of Snu Snu is worth a pound of cure8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Sorry to burst your bubbles, but “a wife” is just another name for “a forever girlfriend.” If the “wife” is seen as a different title for you, then that really isn’t anyone else’s fault. Tying in law with the relationship doesn’t change much at all. You’re just a girlfriend/boyfriend with legal relevancy.

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Marriage is a forever girlfriend with state-enforced leverage over your assets.

[–]couldbemage31 points32 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Been with my partner for ten years. One of my marriages lasted a meer six months. Marriage is just a piece of paper, and it does fuck all to make people stay together. No fault divorce is less paperwork than taxes, and you do those every year.

[–]abqkat7 points8 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

And if you and your BF/GF are mutually content forgoing the benefits that that piece of paper grants (just like cash and my American birth certificate, also paper), then okay. But pieces of paper and institutions definitely have power and clout and benefits

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

There are not actual benefits unless you're poor. You want them to be your PoA, make them your PoA. You don't need to get married for that.

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.7 points8 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Military. There's SOOO many benefits to being married if you're in the US military; it's why people usually rush into it and screw it up.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You got that right. So many guys screw up their lives by marrying a woman they don’t really know because the military stupidly encourages it.

Though I don’t have a high opinion of the military to begin with so my opinion is probably biased.

[–]hitchensamis-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

slavery was also a very important institution

[–]abqkat1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Ah, someone ITT had to go there. In any case, a consenual institution I entered into, and benefit from, is hardly comparable, IMO

[–]RoninCDN8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Youre the same chick that said men losing cash in divorce is a myth. Im not surprised your hypothesis is so deeply flawed.

[–]CainPrice37 points38 points  (67 children) | Copy Link

It's more about power and trust than about using a woman. Marriage is about power and money.

If you're unmarried, the man can walk away at any time, for free. It doesn't matter what he tells you or how committed he allegedly is. He can leave tomorrow and what he said today doesn't matter. And if you don't keep your game up and become a shitty girlfriend, that's exactly what he'll do. Hell, he might leave tomorrow just because he's bored and he wants to. No consequences for him other than some minor social fallout. If you live with him, he can even kick you out.

Once he marries you, he can't walk away without lawyers, courts, and buying you out of the marriage. At that point, the power shifts, and it's him that needs to keep you happy under the implicit threat of you divorcing him and taking a bunch of his money, the house if you own one, plus the kids if you have kids.

Marrying you is changing roles so that you're the one with power over him instead of him being the one with power over you. While most men aren't Red Pill guys and will eventually get married, it takes a really exceptional woman for a decent man to take that kind of risk with her. You don't trust just any old woman you happen to be dating with that kind of power.

Make no mistake. Women who are uppity about marriage are concerned about money and power. A committed relationship is exactly the same as marriage in every way, except there's no transfer of money when you break up.

[–]Nevidimka-9 points10 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

At this point being unmarried gives the men too much power and being married gives the women too much power. I'm happy my country (netherlands) is reforming alimony laws to the point where it becomes a more civilized deal - just enough for the man to not up and leave as soon as he can get a new piece of meat, but not to the point where he's ruined forever.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

At this point being unmarried gives the men too much power and being married gives the women too much power.

You are assuming men want to walk away and women don't.

[–]BewareTheOldMan-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm happy my country (netherlands) is reforming alimony laws to the point where it becomes a more civilized deal - just enough for the man to not up and leave as soon as he can get a new piece of meat, but not to the point where he's ruined forever.

If these reforms work out and in the best interest of both parties, it would be a great template to use in other countries because marriage laws are in deep need of reform in many western countries - especially the United States.

When men would rather opt out than enter into marraige due to unfair and one-sided laws, that's a sign the system is in dreadful need of reform.

When the birth-replacemnt rate drops to damn-near zero, maybe the powers that be will "suddenly" realize the need for marriage laws where both parties assume relatively equitable risk.

[–]nemma8831/F/UK INFP -t. Engaged1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It won't help overall in the great debate though.

People use things like Alimony to make a point, its measurable, tangible and easy for other people to understand.

But Alimony doesn't hurt half as much as the simple fact she/he left you. In the UK Spousal Maintenance (Alimony) is highly circumstantial, there are a whole host of factors which are considered in order to try and make it as fair as possible, it's not automatic and in shorter marriages (Under 7 years) you are more likely to get a 'bridge the gap' which is like a short term alimony which gives the other partner time to get back on their feet, both partners getting a job is high priority for the courts, that's essentially what they are always working to with maintenance in mind.

People will still complain about it though.

[–]says_harsh_thingsRed Pill - Chad19 points20 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

Make no mistake. Women who are uppity about marriage are concerned about money and power.

Isn't it funny how women that earn more than their boyfriends suddenly aren't interested in marriage anymore?

[–]abqkat5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That was not true for me. I outearned my now-husband for much of our dating relationship, am more educated, have more family connections, and yet... I wanted marriage. We don't even combine money, but our financial priorities and goals align so that we are working towards the same future

[–]Million-SunsMarriage is obsolete2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Or the ones who married are suddenly opposed to alimony.

[–]BewareTheOldMan1 point2 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

So far I count at least three exceptions [@ u/abqkat, @ u/CreightonWAbrams, @ u/PennnyLame ] to the rule where women are the higher-earners in the marriage and are fine with that setup.

All the research I've seen reflects the overwhelming majority of women not only hate, hate, hate that dynamic...they despise being the person who is required to carry (or might be required to carry) the financial burden for the entire family.

Most women seek to marry higher-earning to much higher-earning spouses because...hypergamy floats.

Don't take my word for it, I'll leave you to do your own research.

[–]abqkat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I actually agree with you. My husband now earns a lot more than me now, and even though we don't combine finances, I will definitely say that it's kind of changed our dynamic - in subtle ways and overt ones, and certainly for the people who know us.

For me, I have little problem admitting that gender roles matter to me, and that I am traditional in that I don't think 'gender is a social construct.' I think there are realities within each gender, and now that we're not cavemen, they can be seen in things like income and earning potential

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

My wife is pissed off and hypergamously turned off towards me because even though my pay is higher than hers she feels like i could still be earning more.

Money is no defense against hypergamy. Its like trying to feed a starving animal with celery stalks. They eat and eat and eat and theyre still hungry. Frame and dominance, or just walking the fuck away from a bad woman, are the real solution.

[–]BewareTheOldMan0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

even though my pay is higher than hers she feels like i could still be earning more.

That's just fucked and incredibly selfish. Hypergamy is a real monster.

I don't know the length of your marriage or if you're subject to lifetime alimony, but I'd be taking my higher pay, future earning potential, and getting the hell away from such an ungrateful woman.

Walking away - that's frame.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Sticking it out for the kids bro.

[–]LordDunderheadyeehaw femoid 🤠0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

You're a spineless pathetic cuck bro

[–]BewareTheOldMan-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I've seen guys do this and while these men suffer tremendously, I have serious respect for men who endure suffering in a bad marriage for the benefit of their kids...albeit not the recommended course of action.

I get it though - men want direct influence and access to their kids and despite joint custody, weekends, long summers, holidays, Christmas and Spring Breaks...it's just not the same for some men.

Despite your kids seeing the marriage in turmoil, your presence will help ensure your kids don't become the next generation of society's degenerates.

There's enough of that going on already - I wish you the best.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks pal. Between your comment and this bottle of Jameson i may just make it through.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I have always earned more than Mr. Abrams. And I have done a whole lot of shit for him as his wife that I never in a million years would have done for him as a girlfriend.

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I have always and continue to earn more than my husband.

[–]maljo24-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not true.

[–]87AudreyHorne8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Isnt this true both ways? Your girlfriend can also turn around and leave if you're not what she wants. In no way does a boyfriend have any power a gf doesnt have

[–]CainPrice17 points18 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yup. A relationship is equal. Either one of you can leave at any time, for any reason or no reason. Typically, whichever one of you is more invested in the relationship and cares more has less power, and will do more to try to keep the other person from leaving. If the guy is hot, successful, social, fun, accomplished, etc. - the kind of guy women want to lock down in marriage who has options with lots of different women - then usually the guy is the one with more power. If the guy is a dumpy average joe who's lucky to have a girlfriend at all, then he's usually the one who's needy and eager to please and makes his girlfriend feel bored and trapped.

A marriage is unequal. Marriage is designed to unnaturally try to equalize things for the woman so that the hot guy who can get other girls doesn't have the power to leave her any more.

Marriage is about money. Back in ye olden times, marriage was to prevent men from saddling a woman with kids then disappearing and letting the wife and kids starve. In more modern times, it exists as a wealth transfer mechanism so that in the event of divorce, the ex-husband gives a lot of money to the ex-wife and pays alimony and child support. That way, the woman and children don't end up on government assistance and cost the government money.

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.4 points5 points  (29 children) | Copy Link

By this logic, you're proving OP's point...prior to marriage he has the power. Sure either partner can leave, but due to the accelerated drop in SMV for women, she's "lost" a lot more.

Add kids into the mix? She might have lost her figure, probably some income from being the more career-compromising parent, and now he decides to drop them. At that point she gets every cent of child support and more, IMO.

[–]CainPrice5 points6 points  (25 children) | Copy Link

Partially true. Child support is necessary. They're his kids, too. And a woman can get child support with or without marriage. The guy should definitely pay child support. I might have a different opinion than the current system about how much child support should actually cost (e.g., 50% of what it actually costs to feed, clothe, and house the child instead of 25% of dad's gross salary regardless of the actual expenses). But I'm still in favor of child support.

But compensating the woman for her time is what you do with prostitutes. Not girlfriends. If she's not getting value out of the relationship and the only thing she's clinging to is the hope that it's "going somewhere" and she'll end up with that sweet, sweet marriage license so she knows he can never leave, it's her fault for wasting her juicy years like that.

I'd also note that the man doesn't always have more power prior to marriage.

If the man is hot, successful, accomplished, social, fun, interesting, and so on, and is the kind of guy lots of women would want to date and fuck and lots of women would want to lock down with marriage, then yes, he's got the power. But if the man is a dumpy average joe who's lucky to have a girlfriend at all, he's typically the needy, clingy one who's making his woman feel bored and trapped, while she dreams of marrying someone better.

Marriage is a social attempt to equalize power when a hot, successful guy with options is with a woman. To prevent that hot guy from having the ability to leave.

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.12 points13 points  (24 children) | Copy Link

I just don't think you guys really get much of a perspective on what it's like to date as a woman. That hasn't been my case, nor the case of many of my GFs.

Often the average guy has no motivation or incentive to marry. A lot of the dumpy average guys whose girlfriends I was friends with in my early and mid twenties, including my own ex, were perfectly happy to play house and perpetuate life half in adulthood and half in adolescence.

I dated him for six YEARS from 18-24 before I got tired of the lack of direction in our relationship. He's balding, fat, introverted, and kind of selfish, but I loved the guy. Every time we went to a wedding or his family or mine asked him about marriage (which inevitably happens after you've been together a year or two), he'd turn red and get anxious and dodge the topic. He explained several times he loved me but he was scared of such a big commitment. We spoke happily of being married and having kids, and as long as it was a distant dream he was fine with it-i have no doubt he believed he wanted those things with me, but when it came to it, he was happy enough with the status quo he didn't want it to change. When I finally realized that according to his timeline we'd be 35 before marriage and 40 for kids, I gave up and left. (That's not an exaggeration; I asked him roughly how long he wanted to live together before we got engaged, how long we'd be engaged before a wedding, then how long until we planned on kids, etc. )

My story is sadly typical. It's SOOO common for the young women I know who find an ok guy they're happy with, and believe he's happy with them, but it just... Never goes anywhere. The GUY gets "complacent," I think might have been the word you used. He's getting laid more consistently than he ever has, he has a level of female comfort, chances are she cleans and cooks. There's no more motivation for things to change, and even for the average or slightly below average dude, he's not going to go out of his way to give her anything more because she's content enough with him that she isn't going anywhere until she gives up.

I don't understand why guys deny this when it's so common it's a trope. Seriously, I've known SO MANY women who eventually get out of a stalled relationship one way or the other, and then he proposes to his next GF. The first girl was nothing more than a security blanket, but I have no doubt the men believe they actually love the woman.

They don't, of course, otherwise they'd take the chance. They just believe they love their women; the feeling is there but no more action.

[–]CainPrice3 points4 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

The story of your pudgy, balding, selfish, introvert is pretty unique. Most dumpy average guys are pretty quick to lock down the first woman who sleeps with them before she gets away. And if they hesitate, the threat of dumping him or withholding sex does the trick 99% of the time.

Guys who consider themselves lucky to have a girlfriend at all want to marry you before you get away and bend over backward to keep you happy.

Assuming you're not pudgy, balding, and selfish yourself, anyway.

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Nope, I'm no dime but I was definitely more attractive and way more sociable than him. Also got better grades in the overlapping STEM classes we took together.

And it's not unique. Men just don't see it because it doesn't fit the Chad/Incel AF/BB dichotomy. Practice GFs are stupidly common and it's pretty shitty for women.

[–]Dash_of_islamBidet 4 Life>Toilet paper unwashed proles-2 points-1 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

These guys sounds like idiots.

I can understand practice girlfriend if the guys is going after low women.

But to not be serious with a girl who is better than you is downright retarded.

What I don't understand, is why these girls who are better are settling with a commitment phobe? Do the girls have low self esteem or something? Can't they find another guy they are better than who is NOT scared of commitment

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

We were committed enough to make him happy. And I think he really believed he loved me and wanted that future with me, and I'm sure our story is not uncommon. He just couldn't get over his fear of greater commitment, like a lot of men (and women) who behave with one foot out the door.

And yeah, they often can find other guys, as long as they don't wait too long. I hit my limit at 6y. For some it's half that, for some it's twice that, but eventually it happens in most of those cases, and the girl is a little bruised and a little wiser for it.

[–]Dash_of_islamBidet 4 Life>Toilet paper unwashed proles-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

FOMO?

My only fear of total commitment is investing everything and then getting used for my utility and then thrown away.

I don't understand why people do the one foot in one foot out thing since I like simplicity in my life and that just seems like a PITA. I'd rather make a decision and be done with it

[–]meomeowmeoww 1 points [recovered]  (11 children) | Copy Link

No, practice women are quite common.

[–]CainPrice1 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Guys who can get laid have practice girls. Dumpy average guys don't, generally.

Unless they're with even dumpier women. If you're a chunky 4 with bad skin and face, then yes, the dumpy average guy who's a 6 and always brushes off the marriage question is using you as a practice girl.

I'll bet a few chunky 4s end up doing the casual thing with a guy who's a 7 that can't get other 7s because they're having casual sex with 8s, then end up in a relationship with a guy who's a 5-6 and think it's a done deal and get a little surprised.

[–]meomeowmeoww 1 points [recovered]  (9 children) | Copy Link

All men do it.

[–]CainPrice1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Women definitely seem to think so.

Help me understand: Let's say you're dating some dumpy average guy. He's kinda short-ish, older than you, kinda out of shape, his hairline is starting to recede, only so-so in bed. When you first started dating, he was thoughtful and fun, but now he's just kind of boring and doesn't do much that excites you. He's still decent to you and has a good job and stuff, but he's kind of meh. And now it's been 4 or 5 years and you guys live together.

Do you even want to marry that guy? Why?

And when he dodges the marriage question, why aren't you out the door 3 seconds later? It would only take you 2.5 seconds to find a better guy.

[–]meomeowmeoww 1 points [recovered]  (5 children) | Copy Link

I havent ever not been attracted to somone its them who getbunattracted to me.

I am not in a situation to find a """better""" guy. I have dated men I thought were in my league but they get egos and leave or chase other women.

[–]NockerJoeKing Hater0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm gonna go ahead and say the two scenarios are in no way exclusive.

A lot of guys who make real offers and have intent have trouble within their perceived league. A lot of girls who think they're below their league are also having trouble. A lot of people in what's probably their actual league also have trouble.

[–]Popeman79Red Pill Man0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Them marriage is not the solution either. If the guy you dates goes nowhere, and all you think of is marriage, then you care more about finding security than finding the right partner.

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Nah, I wanted to build a life with someone, and I believe he genuinely thought he wanted to build one with me-he was just anxious about actually having agency and making it happen.

I've made it clear to the guys I've dated since, and to my current SO, that I want a family, and I've no intention on having kids without marriage. Thankfully my SO tells me he wants this as well, and seems to be much more keen on making it happen.

If that's just wanting "security" then you're more nihilistic than I care to interact with.

[–]clindh0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Unfortunately he just wasnt that into you. If you were that great he would have jumped on the marriage bandwagon asap. He was just wanting to string things out and see if something better came along

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Sure. He had all the power, as you referenced in your last comment on my thread.

So apparently guys have power too sometimes. And sometimes they're assholes about it. Shocked. Go troll someone else.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

This can all be explained by the simple fact that women have what I term inverted, clown-world sexuality.

If women made sense, then the better you treat them, ie, investing more time energy and commitment, then the more DTF they would feel and the more they would have sex with you.

Instead, women are at peak DTF at the start of a relationship and it just goes down and down and down. Move in together = less sex. Married = stability, feel unsexy = less sex. Kids = way fuckin less sex. End result being a man who is laboring harder than ever to please a woman who he has given everything to, and who wont fuck him... but will eventually cuck him with the pool boy or divorce and hop on the next cock with an enthusiasm her husband hasnt seen in decades.

HONK. Welcome to clown world.

So unless a man really wants kids (and few do anymore in this world of dominating mom energy and helicopter parenting and facebook mom groups judging and “emotional labor”)... why would he voluntarily do something that will sabotage his own sex life?

[–]clindh0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

So you want her to have the power both when she is young and attractive and after the divorce as well...? 10/10 logic

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

This sort of universal blind application is exactly what I've no interest in discussing.

She doesn't always have the power. If you can't even start to imagine that, we've nothing to talk about and no further to go because you're so convinced women suck.

Thanks bye.

[–]clindh0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

"I have no interest in debating my opinions". ok lol

When does she not have the power? When's she ugly? Men who are ugly don't have any power either.... If she's relatively attractive she can at least use those looks to get a good job/promotions and even find a sugar daddy if she wanted to. Say she is an 8, her looksmatch wouldnt be able to get any of that

[–]azngirl7689[S] 1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Marriage offers legal protections that living together doesn’t.

And most divorces aren’t cash and prizes FYI if you’re equally yoked.

[–]couldbemage16 points17 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Either you buy the rp/mgtow cash and prises narrative, or marriage doesn't actually have any real power. Pick one.

Absent losing all your money, the barrier to ending a marriage is very low.

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Who is claiming that "marriage doesn't actually have any real power"?

[–]abqkat6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

"If" you're equally yoked, is a big if. Mostly, the burden is on the man, if you're not. And yet, far too many people marry for love, and not enough for logistical considerations.

But, for men and women, marriage offers so many benefits that dating does not. Cultural, legal, professional, childrearing, social... Most people view marriage different than dating, and imo, it is, even if the couple "feels just as committed."

[–]bd311 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thinking about divorce when considering marriage suggests less commitment and trust, not more.

[–]StopTheIncelsOutside Yellow | Inside Red0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Let's get yoked!

pumps iron profusely

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

And most divorces aren’t cash and prizes FYI if you’re equally yoked.

Source?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Marrying you is changing roles so that you're the one with power over him instead of him being the one with power over you.

Except in traditional or religious couples where the husband has all the power or authority. Man head over wife, spiritual leader, basically a Godling over the wife.

[–]CainPrice0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's become a bit of a rarity nowadays. And OP's post was about the perpetual girlfriend. A woman who is living with and fucking her live-in boyfriend a few times a week out of wedlock, probably on birth control. Not exactly a paragon of traditional Godly religious adherence.

But in modern times, among the general public and outside of secluded religious communities, with a government-licensed marriage with government laws controlling what happens in divorce, even religious marriages go south sometimes. That's why the last remaining vestiges of people who actually care about God congregate in isolated communities.

[–]clindh0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Even the assertion that men have the power before marriage drives me insane. Women can walk away from a relationship just as easily as men if the man doesnt 'keep his game up'

[–]CainPrice0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, definitely. A relationship is fairly equal. Either one of you can leave at any time for any reason.

During a relationship, typically, the one of you that's more invested or cares more is the one who has less power.

For example, a hot, successful, amazing guy with lots of options that a lot of women would love to date and fuck and marry typically is the one with the power over his girlfriend. He could leave at any time. She wants him to marry her so that he can't do that so easily.

But a dumpy average guy who's lucky to have a girlfriend at all is likely to drive her crazy with his neediness and clinginess. He wants to marry her, fast, before she finds a better option, while she's likely to be the one who doesn't want to rush into things.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Women who are uppity about marriage are concerned about money and power

Or religion. Everyone leaves that out in these discussions.

[–]CainPrice1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

If a woman is your permanent girlfriend and is fucking your brains out a few times a week while on birth control, she's probably not that religious.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Fair point.

[–]RoninCDN0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Most people leave it out of their lives. People are only religious when they down on their luck

[–]smokecheck19765 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Hmmm....nope. Marriage is a three party contract. As a rule, I no longer enter third party contracts for any reason at all. Getting dragged over the coals in one divorce was all the "learning" I need for this life. The others, since then, all know my rule early on. I have no desire or need to ever be married again.

[–]moroots5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

a lot of people here need to watch the documentary Divorce Inc

if you still want to expose yourself to the family court system, which becomes a stakeholder in your marriage automatically and irrevocably, you have serious decision making problems, or you are a party that benefits from the $50b (yes billion with a b) family court industry

[–]ITooHaveThumbsMulticolored Pill Alchemist7 points8 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah.. no. Marriage is a scam where women leverage the government monopoly on violence and forced confinement in order to extort access to a man's provisioning indefinitely, regardless of whether or not she lives up to or honors her own marriage vows and commitments. In modern society men have literally nothing to gain and everything to lose from wifing up a woman, and no sane man with even an ounce of sense would consider it.. no matter how magical the pussy was before he put a ring on it ( we all know what happens after she gets that legal gun pointed at her man's head).

[–]genethedog1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This. So much this. Are women really really so selfish and solipsistic that they can't ask themselves "hummmm, what's in it for him?"

Do you know which women do ask themselves that? The rare ones that actually bring more to the table than he does. And one of the reasons that's so rare is because women date across and up status hierarchys, not down. So the moment she has the edge on him, she's already looking for what's next/better.

If he is above her, she wants a guarantee that she will have access to his resources and utility because she's in an insecure place and needs to lock it down.

[–]Eastuss༼ つ ▀̿_▀̿ ༽つ10 points11 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

What if they have a kid together? This is a bigger commitment than marriage.

[–]abqkat3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

And trying to navigate childrearing without marriage, ime, can be a logistical hurdle.

[–]alby3330 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not here in the UK I've been doing it for 16 years

[–]Eastuss༼ つ ▀̿_▀̿ ༽つ-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

How? I'm having this model, there's 0 issue. Maybe depends each country's laws.

[–]chaddad90002 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

This. Marriage for the children.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Definitely like this phrase.

[–]ImmortalMartial13 points14 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Men have exactly 0 incentive to marry. There's no carrot and stick, just the stick.

[–]firewatchersdaughter9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I would be wary of any girl that demands marriage. That sounds like divorce rape waiting to happen.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

I think this must've been much more true at some point than it is today, because now there is a lot more information out there about other people's private lives, both:

-horrific divorces

and

-couples who do in fact have stable non-marital partnerships, some of which last for even decades

Bottom line is if marriage itself is a strong priority for a woman, a man who thinks "everything but marriage" is an adequate substitute is not a good fit, and vice versa.

Look at how many women were with their exes for years sans marriage

Even if you milk a few good years out of a relationship, is that so bad, considering that the average marriage ending in divorce lasts seven years?

Either way, having to start over is always within the realm of possibility.

Now if the relationship isn't good, or marriage itself is a top priority, then what difference does it make how the guy justifies it?

[–]GroundPole2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

You have to keep in mind all those divorce stats are skewed by people that marry and divorce multiple times.

Your first marriage is the most likely to be successful.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Excellent point...hadn't considered that

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

marriage itself is a top priority

How many married women you know make their marriage their top priority? How many make their non-married relationship their top priority?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well "getting married" as a top priority is maybe a more accurate way to put it. Wanting the label for social purposes.

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Right, but I'm asking about "staying married" and having a successful marriage. What woman that's already married puts their marriage as their top priority?

[–]87AudreyHorne0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Like about equal number?

[–]says_harsh_thingsRed Pill - Chad4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Negative. I have seen a huge uptick in the number of couples where neither side wants to be married and both for the same reason - marriage breeds complacency. Complacency kills couples.

Relationships flourish when both sides are challenged to go outside of their comfort zone. When a partner cant leave, the incentive to challenge yourself is reduced. That's not good for either one.

[–]clindh1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

very good point

[–]saphirekey5 points6 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

I've met men, in my family and friend group, who have gotten divorced and don't want to get married again because they have been so disgruntled from it. That I understand. The one I don't understand is a man who has never been married who keeps his partner around without even thinking of getting married. Like, one couple I know, who have been together for more than 10 years. She wanted to get married before she became a doctor and he kept waiting, saying he wasn't sure it was the right time. Another student was flirting with her, so he finally stood his ground and put a ring on her finger. She finishes her med degree next year and from what I have heard, he is dragging his feet on marriage.

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

My good friend dated a girl for 5 years, was married to her for 3 years, now they are getting divorced because she "found out she is a lesbian". Is that something that can happen to anyone?

[–]saphirekey0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

I don't think you meant to reply directly to my message, but I would say yes. Suppressing one's sexuality is common and it does happen.

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Then most people dont have valid wedding vows. They are not each promising to "love you until one of dies" they are promising to "love you until one of us dies or finds out we are gay"

[–]saphirekey-1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Well, that's just rude. Marriage is a hardship, yes. There will be hard feelings when a divorce happens. But being gay and in a relationship is a fairly new concept that people have a hard time swallowing. My aunt divorced her husband almost 40 years ago during their first year together because she came out as gay. It took my family 20 some years to accept that. My sister came out as gay in high school. She wasn't living with us for almost the rest of the school year. Saying "oh, well, it's only okay to get divorced if we have a real issue, your sexuality isn't one of them." Is honestly a gut punch. It takes some people longer than others to come out or realize what their sexuality is. Hell, I would say ace people have it the worst.

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, that's just rude.

Choosing to divorce a loving spouse is more rude. Getting divorced also hurts people's feelings. Why should they be allowed to do such damning emotional harm to their spouse? It's honestly devastating. For me, I'd rather be criticized for choosing to break my marriage vows then have my wife divorce me.
Also, you should still tell the truth, especially when you get married. If you're getting married with an exit clause, then say you have an exit clause. You are entitled to an exit clause when you get married, but you still shouldn't lie about your wedding vows.

[–]saphirekey-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Wait, hold up, back it up a bit. The original question is about people not wanting to get married and how the other person might feel about. I talked about a couple where one person was dragging their feet to get married. You're just slandering your friends ex because she realized later than usual that she was gay. No one who is married just wakes up one day and says, "ya know what, I'm going to ruin my husband's life by telling him I'm gay and divorcing him!" It was probably something that nagged at her, but she kept telling herself that she was in love with your friend.

I think what you are doing is projecting your feelings of marriage on to your friend's experience. No one who gets married expects to get divorced. There are many different reasons why divorce happens, but saying that he should have had an exit clause because she manipulated him into a five year marriage while knowing she was gay is just bitter. He might have loved her 100% and that makes everything hurt so much more, but if he cared for her more as a friend than as a wife, then he would be happy for her because she is more honest with herself and others than before.

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

You're just slandering

Slander? What are you talking about? What did I lie about?

ya know what, I'm going to ruin my husband's life by telling him I'm gay and divorcing him!

That was exactly her behavior.

he should have had an exit clause

People should tell the truth, especially in their wedding vows. That's where we disagree the most.

if he cared for her more as a friend than as a wife

Why would that be the case?

[–]rebeccatwosocks5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's just like my ex who use to refuse to buy me flowers or presents, even on my birthday, because it was a "corporate ploy to spend more money." I think that was his lame excuse for not wanting to spend any money on our relationship as I paid for everything; food, travel, entertainment, even helped him with some of his debt - AND drove him to and from work everyday because he lied about his car breaking down. It was a sorry excuse for a, well, excuse.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

My wife is very down with the whole “commitment to marriage” shit insofar as she doesnt want to get a divorce.. too much financial trouble prolly.. but yet she isnt committed enough to sleep with me or even give me a handy.

Why the hell would any man commit knowing he might end up in my situation? Commitment on a piece of paper IS meaningless because women can just up and decide to stop fucking you, effectively destroying the relationship for you while preserving all the parts she likes. Thats when that piece of paper becomes leverage keeping YOU committed to HER needs but not vice versa.

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Oddly enough, your marriage is exactly just a piece of paper. Just switch the roles and you're the girl never getting what she wants and at the whim of her SO.

Its just not called forever girlfriend. Forever beta orbiter perhaps.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yup. Dont get married. Refer to my username for more details

[–]Hambone_Malone1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

This guy... doesn't fuck?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

And how.

[–]BewareTheOldMan0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

My wife is very down with the whole “commitment to marriage” shit insofar as she doesnt want to get a divorce.. too much financial trouble prolly.. but yet she isnt committed enough to sleep with me or even give me a handy.

Why the hell would any man commit knowing he might end up in my situation?

Fuck that - do you intend to exit that sham of a marraige?

Do you reside in one of those lifetime alimony states? If so, I understand the hesitation.

Better question - if not sex from the wife, sex somewhere else? Sans a serious medical complication, wives need to be fucking their husbands.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

"Marriage is just a piece of paper. Nothing will change for you with it" is just a line said by women who want to control their boyfriends and to accept being on a leash forever.

In fact, both you and I are right. But there is nothing bad to be a forever girlfriend with a man you are in love. Better than being an alpha widow.

But let’s be real they’re treated as subordinate to married couples.

By whom? By your girlfriends? Change social circles.

No one takes girlfriends or boyfriends seriously after a certain age.

False.

should be

Should be? "Should" should be continued by "in order to". Or analogical construction. Otherwise it's meaningless.

someone he actually feels strongly enough about to marry comes around

Meh. Not even love goddess. I am against marriage in principle.

then the ex marries the next woman within 2-3 years

Happens. But there were other red flags, for sure.

until I find someone I truly love.

No need to. Even if I could marry myself, I wouldn't. And do you think I don't love myself?

[–]reluctantly_red11 points12 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Its not just a piece of paper. In its current form marriage is a significant economic benefit to the party with fewer economic resources (most often the woman). This of course is why guys should only marry women of roughly equal economic standing. If she doesn't have an education and career she's not marriage material.

[–]3vilg0dAbsolution3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Spending Habits also matter.

[–]abqkat2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I agree. Seeing as finances are in the top 3 reasons cited for divorce, always, I think there should be far more logistical and financial considerations to marriage. Am I using my husband for his money? No, because we earn the same (roughly). But there are also emotional, logistical, cultural things that I offer in marriage that I wouldn't if we stayed dating

[–]RoninCDN1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Also creating legal agreements that xyz cant be taken from the male party upon divorce is a must. Why would a marry a girl that will take xyz if you divorce? If she loves you she'll legally sign an agreement to let you keep xyz

[–]clindh0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

What emotional, logistical, and cultural things do you offer in marriage that you wouldnt/didnt offer while dating?

[–]frankcastlesteinEgalitarian4 points5 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Honestly if you need a piece of paper to tell you if you're "in love" or "serious" then your relationship is probably not where it should be. Being married is no guarantee they won't cheat or leave, it still happens.

The only benefit of marriage is the tax break and even that isn't all that great.

I was with my wife for 5 years before marriage and its been 13 years since marriage and the only change was her last name, we literally only got married to shut people up that hold the same attitude as OP.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope-1 points0 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

the only change was her last name

At least not yours. Imagine being that beta.

[–]frankcastlesteinEgalitarian1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Imagine your masculinity is so fragile you feel threatened by changing your last name.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

No, the point is, a man changes his last name because the woman asks him to.

[–]frankcastlesteinEgalitarian0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

My point stands.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not really. It's not about fragile masculinity at all. It's about making shitty compromises that are not compromises at all.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

My dad did this to my mom. He then continued to leech off of her money cause she earned more than him, cuz he was rlly bad with money and would spend all of it on stupid bullshit, so he constantly begged her to give him some more money promising he'll pay her back next month, which he never did. He then withdrew and ignored her existence majority of the time other than in the mornings cuz he had no drivers license and no ambition to get one either, so she drove him to work each day for years, ofc he'd critize her driving style each morning, think the funniest thing that ever happened was that when I was in like sixth or seventh grade we drove past one of my friends in the morning, he was with his bike & his mom going to school, my dad suddenly went "Really his mom is accompanying him to school like this? Hes a boy, goddamn hes old enough to do that on his own." yes says the guy with no drivers license that is dependant on my mom driving him to work every morning, selfawareness 0. Eitherway he also didnt help in the household, he expected my mom to do everything. My mom eventually stopped to have sex with him & withdrew from him herself. I grew up with my parents having some sort of cold war & I was massively neglected by both of them. Then my father started to seek everything my mom didnt give him in me. From holding him when he cries, through talks about adult topics, to him sexually molesting me frequently and grooming me with lolicon animes & him slowly going further each time. My mom meanwhile had checked out on reality and fled into TV & she even hit me once when I begged her to help me. She liked me to be a comfort cushion though. She liked to cuddle me but only if I didnt speak or demanded her actual attention during it. Icky. Both my parents very icky. So my dad used my mom for her resources, whilst doing nothing in the household, and adding nothing positive emotionally either cuz he switched between being withdrawn & being aggressive. He was really bad. And childish. I think im biased here, but men who are fine being in a relationship with u for 20 + years without ever marrying are a huge fucking red flag. Men who from the get to go say theyd never marry are a red flag. The only good thing is that leaving him is a lot easier without a marriage. So what im saying men dont just do it to use u as a placeholder, some just do it out of entitlement & selfishness and it shows a lot of their personality.

[–]happycheese86No Pill3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Your theory ignores all the women that say that to their bf/commonlaw husbands/life partners. Marriage IS just a peice of paper. Sorry you think no one wanting to buy into Christian/government bullshit is a male thing.

[–]muddynipsRed Pill Man4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression. Unmarried is a more equal state, and I honestly believe it creates better relationships. There is no level of commitment or intimacy I am unwilling to share in without marriage, literally the only difference is whether or not I end up losing my shirt if we separate.

The assumption that marriage is the endgame of a successful relationship is gross. It's normalized prostitution.

[–]Despite_the_Gravitas3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Or, you know, they mean it and don't want to sign a contract to prove their love and quench your insecurities.

Divorces exist, and in some countries it can even be effected when only one person wants to get divorced.

Cheating exists, and it is not a crime, nor does it have any legal consequence in most countries.

Children have their filliation rights ensured regardless if the parents are married or not.

So how come marriage is so essential? Why do you need a contract to feel loved and secure?

[–]carrawayjames4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This statement is so untrue. Marriage is legitimately a piece of paper. Back then people didn't need to get the government evolved back then because their was no need.

If you actually read old history books women refer to marriage as handcuffs because they were pretty much knew their freedom of partnership so at one point women where the ones getting cold feet from marriage.

Now marriage is at a point where it's beneficial to women rather than a man because a man has to pay an arm and a leg to a women he decides to divorce even if she was the reason the divorce happens.

At one point people are going to realize marriage isn't going to make you wake up a different person. You wake up the same person you was before. Marriage is just a title to please people.

[–]toysjoeMGTOW18 points19 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

CMV Women who insist on getting married is just them wanting to take the guy's money.

[–]abqkat2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't combine money with my spouse, earn the same, save the same, have an ironclad prenuptial agreement. Yes, his money is a security, and yes, he supported me through unemployment, but... That's also because we both acknowledge that money is a big big deal. And I work in finance, so have a particularly clinical view on finances. Marriage is a contract and a legal document that, imo, solved the prisoner's dilemma in a way that dating did not by merging our interests

[–]MILFBucket2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women, especially young women, are obsessed with social status. She probably dreads having all of her eventually married girlfriends look down on her as any good friends would.

[–]Pikachu___2000 1 points [recovered]  (3 children) | Copy Link

No, I want to get married because I "Love U" Don't you love me? I want to get married because I want to be your family! It's definitely not because I'm getting embarrassed that all my friends get to update their status on (insert all social media) to married and I'm still stuck in girlfriend limbo.

Don't you love me? Don't you love me?

I'm here aren't I? I listen to you. Pick you up, take you out. Support you, uplift you when you're feeling down. Sit through impossibly boring dinners with your parents.

Why is it a piece of paper that you need for me to prove that I'm here for more than just your body?

[–]rus9384Misanthrope2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I want to get married because I want to be your family!

A nice manipulative trick. Or a plain hamstering.

It's definitely not because I'm getting embarrassed that all my friends get to update their status on (insert all social media) to married and I'm still stuck in girlfriend limbo.

That's the thing. Women want to be all alike. They are afraid of being unique.

[–]Pikachu___2000 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

How many relationships have been ruined because a woman became jealous of what her friends have. Then she goes to her guy and gives him an ultimatum.

"Sarah & Tim" have a house why don't we have one?

"Kelly & Chris" Just had a baby, I want a baby.

"Jessica & Daniel" just took another trip, I want to go on a vacation.

All of my friends are getting married, how come you haven't married me yet?

Woman have a bad case of keeping up with the joneses, but what can you expect their lives revolve around social status.

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, that's why I think sluts are cooler. They are shamed. They don't give a fuck what society thinks of them, they live for themselves. It's better than living for strangers. Or acquitances.

[–]azngirl7689[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Post this in a real post

[–]wtffellificationWe all love women4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

i think it’s just a line said by those men whose experience (1st or 2nd hand) had shown them that forever girlfriend is still more likely than forever wife

when these men say “i am committed to you” i’d say they truly mean it, in most cases. but what they mean is “ i am committed to who you are RIGHT NOW”

its a trust issue on both sides

[–]Transmigratory6 points7 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Marriage can fuck men over with all these divorces and what not. Though, I'm beginning to think you've either been triggered by some TRP posts or something IRL... since you're an active redditor, I'm going to assume the former.

[–]Dash_of_islam 1 points [recovered]  (5 children) | Copy Link

She is salty that her old boyfriend who promised to marry her after they live together was dragging his heels

The guy turned out to be a dick or something and now she seems to hate men until they prove they are not dickheads

[–]Transmigratory0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

So basically we're trying to change the view of someone who is going to be a brick wall until she stops being salty?

[–]Dash_of_islamBidet 4 Life>Toilet paper unwashed proles0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Man haters, woman haters, and abused animals are all the same.

They've been hurt and think the whole world is like this. They just need some reality and evidence on the contrary to come back down to sanity

[–]Transmigratory0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, either way it looks like they're not going to get that here. This is where they're going to vent all the hurt they feel.

[–]Dash_of_islamBidet 4 Life>Toilet paper unwashed proles0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Better vent their feels than become a supreme gentleman and go all Elliot Rogers lol

[–]Transmigratory0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

  1. The original poster is a girl.
  2. Elliot Rogers did a lot of venting online... didn't help.

[–]ScootsScoots 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy Link

If it's about love then why do you need to be legally binded to my income?

[–]maljo24-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Keeps you committed.

[–]figyg1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's such nonsense. Because it doesn't keep the woman committed. Its obviously not a 2 way street. And women can (and do) leave arbitrarily, but with half the guys stuff

[–]sadomasochrist 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy Link

Would you marry a man if there was a 50% chance that he would be legally entitled to half and maybe alimony and you made significantly more money than him?

What about a prenup that ensured these things should he decide he was more attracted to someone else?

But let’s be real they’re treated as subordinate to married couples.

RPM don't care about the FSM.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

You understand that you are on a subreddit packed with breadwinning wives, yes?

[–]sadomasochristnAWALT = Not red pilled1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

And this is a point, how? AZ is young radfem.

[–]azngirl7689[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Aww I’m flattered! You think I’m a radfem!!

[–]sadomasochristnAWALT = Not red pilled0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Just because you have traditional aspirations doesn't mean you aren't 🤷🏼‍♂️

[–]bd312 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I've been unmarried, committed and coupled for over 20 years. We don't need validation from the wider society or our families to our commitment. It is just a piece of paper. We give zero fucks how others perceive us, the strength of our union lies in our love, understanding and agreements.

Edit: Doug Stanhope on Marriage

[–]decoy88Black Male in London2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Marriage/No marriage. A bad relationship will end badly regardless. Using “this guy will marry me” as some sort of assurance is just silly

[–]amendment642 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Jesus christ, where to begin. I've been in a commited relationship with my partner for just under 8 years, and she is in now way shape or form a "placeholder" for some better future prospect. The both of us do not see any benefit to marriage aside from the unjust favor that the government gives to married couples over singles. The governments promotion of marriage through marriage benefits is frankly immoral imo. No one should recieve preferential treatment just because they decided to sign some piece of paper claiming they'll be together forever.

I realize this is anecdotal, but both of us agreed, at the very beginning of our relationship, that marriage was simply a piece of paper. What is important in a relationship is communication and love. What is not important is some stupid title.

For me, not being married forces me to hold myself to a higher standard. There is no person I have to go seek approval from if my relationship is going poorly. No priest, no state official, no one. If my partner is treating me poorly, I can just up and leave. The same is true the other way around; if I am treating her poorly, she is free to leave. But, this means neither of us can slack off in the relationship. I'm keeping myself in shape, and I make sure to make time for her every day, because that is my responsibility as a partner. I take care of my household duties, which we split evenly. I maintain a job, and so does she, so we can both contribute finacially and won't be left hung out to dry if we were forced to live on our own. We maintain some joint financial accounts, and some seperate accounts, most importantly seperate retirement accounts. We plan for both a future together and a future alone, because no one knows what the future may hold. We don't have or want kids, so the kids thing isn't an issue, but even with kids it wouldn't be a problem because the kid would still have 2 loving parents. It doesn't matter if they have different last names. They are mom and dad, not mr amendment64 and mrs. otherperson.

All in all, marriage is not for everyone, and we shouldn't all be forced into some socially constructed box. What matter most is love and communication.

[–]PrehistoricPrincessNothing is sexier than mutual empathy and respect2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

First off, I don't find fault with your main premise, because for a lot of people it's true. What I take issue with is this:

So number one, I know successful unmarried couples exist. But let’s be real they’re treated as subordinate to married couples. It’s just how it is. No one takes girlfriends or boyfriends seriously after a certain age.

I think what you fail to realize here is that there are plenty of reasons a couple may choose not to get a marriage license despite both being fully committed to each other. Especially in the good old USA. For example...

  • One person has massive debt and doesn't want the other to have to take it on.
  • One person is chronically sick/elderly/disabled and would lose their healthcare if they got married (this is a very common issue, actually).
  • Neither person wants kids and they genuinely don't care about a piece of paper.
  • Religious reasons.

Just saying, not all boyfriend/girlfriend scenarios are created equal. Sometimes people remain unmarried because it is genuinely the best, only, and/or most pragmatic option for them.

[–]HumanSockPuppetEqual-Opportunity Oppressor2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

If a woman wamts a man to become her legal bitch, she has to persuade him it's a good idea. It's her problem.

Marriage is a fucking bad deal for men, and that fact is becoming increasingly apparent to more and more men as time goes on.

[–]Nevidimka-5 points6 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

I think men have perfectly logical reasons not to want to be married, despite seeing themselves together with their gf forever.

That said, I've seen the scenario you describe - men dates women for fifteen years, says marriage is just a piece of paper, dumps her at 40, proposes to the next one instantly - play out so many times it's ridiculous.

I don't think that these men suddenly want to marry their second gf, I think it's more of a "I don't love you to the point where I'm scared of you walking away" and then they réally fall in love and they don't want to run that risk anymore.

[–]azngirl7689[S] 0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

But that's it isn't it? They're not in love with Marriage is a Piece of Paper girl- she's just a temporary bangmaid place holder. If she had self respect she'd walk when she heard that line.

[–]abqkat5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Agreed. I know far too many women who stick around dating a guy through their 20's, play house, etc, all the while the guy doesn't want to solidly commit. If a couple is happy to keep dating without marriage, and are aligned, that's one thing, but for women who want marriage dating a guy that's lukewarm on the institution (or her), I think it's really unwise to keep dating, or live with him

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GroundPole1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, it's pretty unethical on the part of the guy. You can even say it's pretty unethical to keep a relationship like that going more than a year or two. If you know as a guy you don't want to be with this girl forever, but the girl is looking for that, it's just deception.

[–]NockerJoeKing Hater1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

To be fair they were together longer than most actual marriages. If she had self respect sure I wouldn't fault her for it but I have to wonder about the actual mechanical reality of it.

[–]rpsheepdogSuprisingly Reasonable2 points3 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Stick around until I find someone I truly love

I'm not particularly sold on this explanation. This scenario presented seems to be a bit situational for me.

I think the end of the day it's guys just pussyfooting around and not being clear with their intentions. If you want to be married, then make it clear (doesn't have to be on the first day, but it needs to be clear at some point) if they don't want to be married then make that clear also.

Look at how many women were with their exes for years sans marriage and then the ex marries the next woman within 2-3

There is an argument to be made that this is better than marrying and then divorcing though, for both parties. Especially if children are involved.

End of the day, I still place the burden on the guy to figure out which direction the relationship is going and make it clear, but I can see the justifications for delaying it

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie9 points10 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

End of the day, I still place the burden on the guy to figure out which direction the relationship is going

And I'd tell men this is for women to solve because it's their problem. Women should take ownership over this. Men should not be in the business of solving shit for women because it CLEARLY doesn't work out too well when men take on women's roles.

I think that view point can change depending on the mindset of the woman, but from a man's starting position it should be men pussyfooting around.

[–]rpsheepdogSuprisingly Reasonable3 points4 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

I suppose both are equally important in figuring out the direction of the relationship. I felt OP's post was geared toward women who were "all in" and the guys were just lollygagging.

Burden is on both to jettiison the relationship if it's not worth it for them.

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Absolutely. I've been married about 10 years now and it's clear under relationship, women just don't get logic. They communicate in power plays. Not like some evil sort of way, but women don't get what men are saying.

RPW's had a example about a husband who said "duck" and his wife asked twenty questions as to why. She didn't trust her spouse and threatens to get smacked upside the head.

Women are looking for the angle, the manipulation from their men. They see "its just a piece of paper" not as logic, but as a power play to syphon more from her than she gives to him. Which is also why she stops fucking him in a lot of marriages.

He should lollygag. She'll understand that, because if she stops putting in an effort its says he'll gtfo.

I suppose both are equally important in figuring out the direction of the relationship.

So a dude shouldn't even go this route until he can say duck and she will. Men will take care of women like that. Women will not take care of men that will duck when told.

[–]rpsheepdogSuprisingly Reasonable2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

He should lollygag. She'll understand that, because if she stops putting in an effort its says he'll gtfo

Him lollygagging is essentially putting the onus on her to dictate the relationship. If he employs dread properly it will let her know she would need to put the effort in or he will gtfo because he is capable to do so.

If the woman knows that the guy is not capable of getting a different woman then she will not do anything to make the relationship better

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Him lollygagging is essentially putting the onus on her to dictate the relationship.

You don't think this is passive dread? Really? You're missing some of the realities of marriage and women in marriage. I don't agree with MRP's dread within a marriage. "Active" dread is ONLY for short term relationships.

As MRP says, Marriage is RP Hard mode, half of the difficulty is because men don't know women well enough to figure this all out.

[–]rpsheepdogSuprisingly Reasonable1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I would say passive dread is staying physically fit, her knowing the husband is socially normal, other women find him attractive, etc. not advocating active dread for a relationship.

I will say MRP definitely skews towards guys who find themselves 5, 10, 15 years deep into a marriage and realize they've been fucking up for a while. because they don't know their woman well enough

[–]Aaren_AugustineWants a Cookie1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Completely agree. Hell, they don't know women well enough so how are they to get their women.

[–]azngirl7689[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, pretty much. That's the scenario I'm thinking of.

And yeah, burden is on both to leave if it's not working.

[–]abqkat3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Totally, and this is one major risk of cohabitation without commitment for women. Far too many couples sleepwalk into marriage after living together because the expectations were not discussed in full

[–]PrideInIndividualityLiberal Red Piller5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

But let’s be real they’re treated as subordinate to married couples.

LOL, wut? As far as I know, it's the married couples who are made fun of and are treated as subordinate.

Marriage is a conservative (and socialist) institution that does not make sense in the society that was founded upon liberal principles. Wanna get married? Go to Saudi Arabia. Marriage does not make sense whatsoever in liberal America where there's no punishment for breaking vows of marriage.

Marriage in America in fact is "just a piece of paper". Men who decide to get married are nothing but stupid.

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat4 points5 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

You know, while this is often true, there ARE men who truly believe marriage is "just a piece of paper". My ex was one. The way to spot these men?

They're generally willing to get married.

Think about it: if you really, truly believe that legal marriage is a largely meaningless gesture, then surely you'd be willing to do this silly, trivial, unimportant thing that's an enormous deal to your partner. If it meant the world to my partner that, say, I did a sage cleansing of our new flat, I'd do it, even though I'm not one for sage cleansings--because it mattered so much to him. My ex didn't care about marriage, only commitment felt in one's heart, but he was willing to marry me, in part because it meant something to me, and in part because it would have been good insurance for us as a mixed-nationality couple. (the reason we didn't, and why we broke up, was that he didn't want kids, fwiw) If it matters any, I care about marriage, not weddings--I'd have been content to go down to the courthouse, or elope and make a holiday of it.

A man who says marriage is a silly, meaningless gesture...that he refuses to do even if it means everything to someone he supposedly loves? That's just shady.

[–]I-adore-your-vagina0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

And thats why I say talking about kids should be done as early as possible, unless you wanna waste years of your life with someone only to find out they wont go with you.

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah...we were both pretty young, and neither of us expected to fall as hard for each other as we did.

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

A man who says marriage is a silly, meaningless gesture...that he refuses to do even if it means everything to someone he supposedly loves?

He could still say no because she isn't ready. Maybe she believes in a bunch of silly nonsense right now.

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

She isn't ready....for what exactly?

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

The marriage vow

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Then he should say that. Not that he doesn't believe in marriage at all.

[–]MattcwuJust sticking up for the oppressed and voiceless women0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, you should tell the truth in your marriage vows. We agree on that.

[–]genethedog0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Holy rationalization hamster. All you're doing is trying to build another shame case. Perhaps he should word it better than "it's a meaningless piece of paper". Maybe that's what OP also hears instead of "I don't want to get married because of the power imbalance it will create"

Maybe he hasn't thought on it hard enough to truly build a case but at the end of the day he's still says no, no matter how he says it.

Women expect us to read between the lines. How come when the situation is reversed she holds him to every single word and then tries to argue against it and they usually do this with guilt/shame tactics that sound like a dare....

"Well ya big pussy, if it's just a meaningless piece of paper, what are you so scared of?" Is what you're saying.

[–]flamingoinghomeIs three lizards in trench coat1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

"I don't want to get married because of the power imbalance it will create"

If that's what you mean, you should say it. That is not AT ALL obvious--especially not among educated people who gets prenups as standard, so this "power imbalance" talk is questionable. And a woman who's sticking around in the hopes that she can get a guy to shrug and go along with something he's indifferent to is in a VERY DIFFERENT mindset than a woman hanging around hoping for something a guy has explicit and specific reasons not to want to do.

You want to hold your girlfriend/wife to her word, go ahead, I think you should. But don't act like "marriage doesn't mean anything, it's just a piece of paper" translates easily into "I'm afraid of creating a power imbalance in our relationship" the way "Eh, I had Chinese for lunch yesterday" translates easily into "I do not want to have dinner at Szechuan Garden tonight."

And yes, if you say a thing is unimportant and meaningless but are also absolutely unwilling to do it to please the person you claim to love, then expect to get called out on that. I believe people should humor their loved ones whenever possible.

[–]squiddy_s550gtwhy so butthurt?9 points10 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

If a woman wants to be married then perhaps she should be marriage material.

If he won’t commit, then she’s not good enough

[–]azngirl7689[S] -4 points-3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Can you clarify your last sentence? I agree with the first part- can't figure out what you're saying in the second part.

[–]squiddy_s550gtwhy so butthurt?2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Edited for spelling.

[–]azngirl7689[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks. I agree with second part too.

[–]andrew_rdt1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Its just a piece of paper until you need to get divorced. The reasons for guys saying this may vary but the beginning of the statement is just false.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I have used this line myself, and I am a woman. What it meant was "I do not want to marry you and may bail" and I meant it that way.

[–]abaxeron✴️Indian Programmer1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

But I was told that marriage is a form of domestic slavery for women!!!

(Yes, this is my CMV)

[–]azngirl7689[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

post it for real

[–]abaxeron✴️Indian Programmer2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No, I'm not asking you to challenge this view (that I don't legitimately hold and don't want challenged); I'm pointing out that after almost a century of telling men that marriage is basically institutionalized abuse of women, MEN BELIEVED, and now you aren't satisfied. I.e. maybe, just maybe, those men don't want marriage because women told them that marriage is bad for women. Or at least some of those men.

[–]Shadow_Of_Chad-Lite1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Just get church married but not government married and have a prenup.

[–]Bestprofilename1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm not for marriage because if we drift apart or whatever and want a divorce I will more likely than not lose way, way more than her, to her, even though she probably won't be deserving. In general, it's rigged against men so why would I enter such a horrible agreement? If it wasn't a potential life ruiner I'd be fine with it.

[–]Bntt891 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Tbh I dont see the difference, in fact I think that it adds more of a demand in the man unnecessarily. I think if you look at marriage in general it's just a failure, ppl get married to quick and regret it. So no you just think this because marriage is pretty much great for the women but not great for the man. Can you give me reasons as to what benefits a man gets from marriage that he doesn't get from a girlfriend boyfriend relationship?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Idk...I’m a woman and think that way. Marriage comes with some nice tax breaks and benefits. I think if kids are involved, I’d probably think of marriage differently, but since I don’t plan on having kids, I’m not interested in marriage. Personally, I make a lot of money so I’m not in a position where a tax break makes an important difference, and I don’t value the tradition behind the institution of marriage.

I’ve mentioned this before to men I’ve been seeing and they don’t take it well.

[–]Beach_Poodle1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I've found quite the opposite. It's always the men in my life that want to get married and I'm the one pushing back on it. In fact, most of my female friends have had the same experience. I will say that I never thought it was a good deal for me and I still don't, so I'm sorry but I can't relate.

[–]clindh1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Ok, I'll give you your marriage but first we sign a pre-nup

[–]celincelinNeeds to be taught not to rape1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

forever girlfriend

So, a life long commitment without the paperwork, win/win.

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

But let’s be real they’re treated as subordinate to married couples. It’s just how it is. No one takes girlfriends or boyfriends seriously after a certain age.

no, the older people get, the less they care about whether or not some other couple is officially married. i mean all the bored post-wall UMC married women (and their whipped beta husbands) will act like it matters, but that's just gay FSM bullshit.

since you're a chick in your early/mid 20s, you think that marriage is like the ultimate end goal in life that shows that you have officially made it as s successful adult or whatever. but as you get older like half those married couples yoi know will end up going through terrible divorces, while most of those long-term unmarried couples somehow seem to be permanently in the honeymoon phase and still fucking like rabbits.

marriage artificially forces couples to stay together even when things get bad. that's good for social stability, but not good for the long-term happiness of the couple. i mean look at how all these married older PPD women describe marriage: they act like it's some kind of job or partnership that you just have to keep grinding at and that love isn't even a factor.

[–]chaddad90000 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

no, the older people get, the less they care about whether or not some other couple is officially married.

right, people even start to refer to them as husband/wife, because that's how they behave even without the official piece of paper. (Also with the whole modern language around "partners" and "SOs" and etc its often not obvious a couple is married or not.)

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

obviously true. and then when they break up at 32 and he turns around and maries a 26 year old a year later shes flabbergasted

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Post this under automod so it doesn’t get deleted!

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

oh shit

[–]Barely-moralMostly red though2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That is not the complete phrase.

The "I am totally committed to you without it" is true. I don't play around with relationship. The only way a LTR I am in ends is with a death or with a decision made by my SO.

But marriage is definitely not "just a piece of paper". That piece of paper changes the incentive structure of the relationship. Before marriage the only way any of us gets anything is by making the relationship last and keeping it healthy.

After we are married she can get cash and prices for leaving.

In a fair an equal partnership no one gets nothing unless they are doing their part. Marriage is not an equal partnership, it is a bad deal for men. It is a bad deal for me. And that is the reason I will never marry anyone.

I have yet to hear a reason why I would be more committed to someone if I am married.

[–]mtflyer052 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Marraige seems like a terrible idea to me. Why would you ever want the government involved in your personal life?

"Hey, I bet you half my shit we won't break up.

[–]87AudreyHorne1 point2 points  (26 children) | Copy Link

Why should a woman want marriage?

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

It's a honest signal of commitment. The fact that it's potentially costly to the guy is the whole point.

I would not have kids with a guy unless he was willing to marry me. Having kids is a huge commitment and basically eliminates the possibility of me having a relationship with anyone else of high quality (your SMV goes to practically 0 if you're a single mom.) I want some guarantee I'm not going to be a single mom, and a guy doing something that indicates he's not contemplating high tailing it out of there the moment things get tough is a requirement.

Women who have kids with a guy who doesn't give them any sort of commitment are suckers. Sometimes it works out but it's a fact that it's just less likely. Why take the risk?

[–]rus9384Misanthrope1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The fact that it's potentially costly to the guy is the whole point.

And lack of marriage is costly to the woman. RP at 11.

I want some guarantee I'm not going to be a single mom

Guarantee does not exist today.

[–]87AudreyHorne1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I get that if you want kids you might have some different considerations, but you are not guaranteed you will have your husband not leave you just because you're married. also, would you want to be in a bad marriage just because you don't want to be alone and it's legally more difficult to split?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

but you are not guaranteed you will have your husband not leave you just because you're married

Of course not. The point is, it demonstrates where his head is at. If a guy is thinking leaving is a real possibility, he's unlikely to commit to marriage. If he's willing to commit to marriage, it's less likely he's thinking he'd be likely to leave.

It's not about forcing a guy to stay because the cost is too high, it's more about predicting how likely he is to leave based on his own internal decision making process. Does that make sense?

[–]87AudreyHorne0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I guess there is a difference between someone who really doesn't want to marry you when you want to get married, then I would maybe see your point. But I can see two people who both don't really care to get married and know very well how strongly they feel for each other, and then I really don't think there's anything "lesser" about their commitment. So I guess it depends on the context, and yeah if you're coming from the pov where you want it then even if a guy is indifferent but loves you, he would probably do it for you.

[–]nevomintoarcePurple Pill Woman0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

There must always be a reason people go against social norms. It's not just "it's a piece of paper lol".

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼2 points3 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

Personally- I wanted to legally be a family with my husband. I wanted him to be my next of kin in case of medical emergency. I wanted my life insurance to go to him. I wanted him to be recognized in my parents’ will. I wanted him to have shared ownership of family property.

[–]87AudreyHorne1 point2 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

That makes sense and i think when people habe strong practical reasons like that that is fine (esp medical emergency for instance - imagine if you have good reasons not to trust your family?) There's nothing wrong with marriage and anyway there is always divorce. I just dont like the idea that its something you should automatically want (if you dont have these reasons), or that it means anything but a legality. A relationship is what it is with or without that paper. Its not going to make it better or different

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼4 points5 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

I mean, like anything else, it has the power you give it. It did change things for me. He’s my family. That is fundamentally different than a man I am not legally bound to.

[–]87AudreyHorne1 point2 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

I don't really get the deeper meaning personally. My family is my family, someone can be like my family (friend, boyfriend etc), my family can not be like my family.. in the end it's all about the actual relationship you have with the person, nothing else. Or maybe I don't get it.

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼6 points7 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

This is just something I have found as I age: I love my friends, my life would be infinitely less fulfilling without them. But friends are not family. Boyfriends are not family. It’s about time and investment and how things weather storms. Being tied to someone makes a difference in how they behave in a storm, how I behave.

[–]87AudreyHorne0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Why would the same person, who is in love with the same person, react differently in the same situation depending on whether they signed some papers and exchanged rings or not?

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Marriage isn’t “some papers.” I am legally becoming family with him. I am also standing in front of our families and community and stating that we are now family. I don’t know how that wouldn’t impact our relationship.

[–]87AudreyHorne0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Ok, I don't get it.

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Sorry- I can’t be of more help. I don’t know how to express that legally binding yourself to someone, in front of everyone you care about does change things. I don’t get people who say it doesn’t.

[–]J_Milton_JrDon't open 'til doomsday...♥3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

i dont get it either 🤷🏽‍♀️ i think some people just feel different about it...my BF is the most important person to me...on the other hand i know many young married couples who seem either unhappy or seem like the hate each other (constant fighting, cheating and all that)...beside the legal benifits (which are imo a good reason to get married i.e. when one person dies) idk how a marriage would change my feelings torwards my BF

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

You can do any of those things without being married though. Aren't you a lawyer?

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

I am not a lawyer and why would I do a bunch of other bullshit when there is already a way to do these things: MARRIAGE.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Because those other things are no more work than getting married, and you have the added benefit of not actually getting married.

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

“Not actually getting married” is not a benefit to me or my husband.

[–]Orange_PaisleyOrange pill is best pill0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

I’m happily engaged but even so, I concur.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Lol don't leave us hanging! How can you agree if you're happily engaged

[–]Orange_PaisleyOrange pill is best pill2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I didn’t want to be in a relationship. Neither did he. So for 2 years we kept it casual. He started pressing to live together and I resisted for 2 years. Eventually I conceded. He proposed this year and I accepted, but it was not something I ever desired or pressed for because I’ve been married and divorce is a nightmare (no, not all women look at divorce as a paycheck - especially if we make most of the money). I am going to marry this man, and happily, but I was fine living on my own and had no expectations of marriage. I have some reservations about it even. But after 6 years he’s shown himself to be a good man. And don’t start with the “if he were Chad you’d marry him.” My fiancé is hawt. My friends think so. My own mother has said so. I just don’t know that I am marriage material - not that I am unworthy, but more that the risk/benefit assessment is unknown.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, here's hoping it works out! Healthy skepticism may very well be a good thing.

[–]Orange_PaisleyOrange pill is best pill0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thank you!

[–]farts-on-girls1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

This is complete nonsense, marriage the institution is a bureaucracy, there is no reason to allow the government into your life

Marriage is a raw deal for men, get divorced and get royally fucked. Why take the risk? If a woman is willing to commit to a man why need the paper that incentivizes her to divorce?

[–]RoninCDN0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Because if he cant commit she wants a way to exploit his needs

[–]AutoModeratorMarried to Littleknownfacts[M] 0 points1 point  (16 children) | Copy Link

Attention!

  • You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.

  • For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.

  • If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.

  • OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]AntwanAntoon3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I would attempt to change your view but you did not mention anything about alimony..you need to acknowledge the family court bias against men before you can have a serious discussion.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew6 points7 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

obviously true. and then when they break up at 32 and he turns around and maries a 26 year old a year later shes flabbergasted

[–]chaddad90001 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Honestly this goes both ways, when the woman hits 30 and realizes that the musician/bartender boyfriend is never going to be mr. providerman. Some people are fine relationship material, but you don't want to be financially entangled with them.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

'struth

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼3 points4 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

This is one of many things PPD men don’t get about the timelines of marriage. Women who get married at 28 are pairing off in their early 20’s with men who express interest in marriage in general and in a few years or so he proposes after making it clear he wants to marry her. Women who end up married, aren’t sitting happily as a forever gf staring out the window hoping he’ll change his “marriage is a piece paper” stance. Of course, some men lie and that sucks but I think there’s a general disconnect on the way couples discuss marriage and plan for it.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, ive always found that interesting, they seem to think women who are marrying at 27-28 are marrying men they like JUST met a minute ago, not the men theyve been with for 4-5 years. when i was 23 all my friends and myself basically paired off to the peopel they were going to marry or be with for at least 5-8 years. my ex fiance and i broke up at the marriage point rather than marry, but we were JUST about to, it happened on the perfectly normal time line

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼4 points5 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

That I see a lot too. Overall they don’t get the timeline or benchmarks. Lewis was once FLABBERGASTED that I started dating my husband at 21 and we didn’t marry until I was 27. His claim was the timeline was evidence marriage wasn’t a requirement? He said something like “YOU ARE TELLING ME THAT YOU WOULD WAIT SIX YEARS FOR SOMETHING YOU WANT?!” While ignoring the fact that I knew from like week 3 husband was into marriage in general, a year in he was saying he wanted to marry me “someday” and then starting regularly bringing it up until we actually got engaged.

I think some men here think the path of the relationships that end like they did for Sally & Joe (love that clip btw!) are the same as the path that lead to marriage in late 20’s-30’s.

[–]Texastentialismshe's got a tattoo and two pet snakes3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Lol I remember Lewis saying 10-12 months was plenty of time to know if you want to marry someone and if a woman stays past that point without a proposal she must not want to get married that bad.

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Good grief 🙈

[–]rus9384Misanthrope0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

10-12 months is wrong. Should be 20 times greater.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

well i think theres two paths

one in which marriage is never really a stated goal, but the couple reaches a shit or get off the pot moment around year 5-7 when all their friends are getting married. some choose to marry out of inertia and probably divorce (I think my ex and I were on that path and i short circuited by breaking up before the wedding) and others are always on the path to marriage but STILL stay on that path for 4-7 years before the actual wedding hits

[–]PennnyLameMY VAGINA IS A SOVEREIGN NATION!! ✊🏼1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

That’s fair. I don’t think women get to be shocked about not getting married if it’s not been discussed though.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

for sure. my h and i discussed marriage at 2 years, we were on a path. he said we had to be together 5 yrs to get married, and we did

[–]Million-SunsMarriage is obsolete0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Marriage is a terrible deal for the modern man. I have 0 respect, even contempt for the men who still sign in on it. I however applaud women who managed to con them.

[–]yaseedog will hunt[🍰] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't think that's always true. like it might very well be true for some people but others just genuinely do not view marriage as meaningful

[–]blackkindergods0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Devoid of religious significance and commitment locking for having children what the fuck is the point of marriage? Does it do anything when no kids are desired?

Why the fuck would I ever get married?

I wouldn’t till like 55, people change

[–]ionforge0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Just a piece of paper? https://youtu.be/R6pApK7Kyks

[–]v3r10 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, it literaly is just a piece of paper, what you should worry about is the fact that you value that more than actually being with someone.

[–]hitchensamis0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

if you love each other you both know it and it doesn't matter at all, the thing is that people often can't find someone to love so they are with least worst option, marriage is a deeply conservative thing and therefore many women and men shouldn't be into it , especially women

so ofc that then both genders actually want something to feel more secure they won't be left alone, but especially guys, they are those that want to trap gfs into marriages and kids so that they could be secure not to be alone

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

they're treated as subordinate to married couples.

Who cares?

No one takes girlfriends or boyfriends seriously after a certain age.

Again, who cares?

The men saying this know damn well that marriage isn't a piece of paper

I guess I don't. Please enlighten me, what is a marriage? Seems to me like a way to fuck people over when they decide they want to break up. Doesn't mean you're NOT going to break up, it just introduces stupid consequences.

They're not as committed as they could be/should be

If you need a piece of paper that stipulates "if this contract is broken, I am entitled to half your shit" to feel like I'm committed, I get the feeling you aren't committed to me, you're committed to my money.

The woman is usually a place holder until someone he actually feels strongly enough about to marry comes around.

Sure this happens sometimes, but it's not the rule.

Look at how many women were with their exes for years sans marriage and then the ex marries the next woman within 2-3 years.

I actually don't know any. Do you have a list of notable ones?

It's a nice way of telling women "I don't wanna marry you but don't want to be alone.

Or, it could simply mean "I don't wanna enter into a contract where I lose half my shit if either one of us decides to break up. I love you and want to be together, but realistically the majority of marriages end in divorce. If that were to happen, I'd be fucked and you'd be okay. Without a marriage we just ensure that we end things on equal footing. If you need a marriage to feel secure, I can only assume your reasoning is sinister, because I don't see the inherent good of a contract like that."

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

No I think it's even worse than that, what they're effectively saying is they don't want to be held accountable. Of course there's a whole other discussion around the absurdity of western state marriage but that's a slightly different subject.

[–]TheseNthose0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I reject your hypothesis.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter