Page 1 of 13 12345611 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 123

Thread: Lack of Belief in the Idea of Marriage

  1. #1
    Spenglerian
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Caledonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 26th, 2011 @ 05:30 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Scottish
    Ancestry
    Scotland,England, Germany,Austria,Switzerland
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Sverige snart nog
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    RecyclingPlant / College Student
    Politics
    Socially Progressive Nationalism
    Religion
    Atheist, Nihilist, And Mystic
    Posts
    2,432
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    20
    Thanked in
    20 Posts

    Question Lack of Belief in the Idea of Marriage

    If I'm am the first to say this let me just be blunt and say that I don't like traditional marriage especially given the current climate of the United States and other western nations where 75% of all marriages end in divorce where 75% of most of these divorces are initiated by women alone.

    For me those statistics are staggering for me to swallow to even consider marriage if I ever even found a suitable partner.

    Let's just say I don't really support the traditional institution of marriage in today's environment.

    I'm all for monogamy and a relationship with a woman in eventually having a family but I'm no fan of marriage at all especially considering how men don't really benefit from marrying in today's decaying culture where they are more than likely to undoubtedly suffer in alimony provisions under divorce court than women do after all is said and done.

    Maybe if I was in a relationship with a woman for ten years would I consider marriage but given today's climate it's not somthing I would rush into like I have observed so many others who later regretted it down the road.

    [Then of course if I ever did get married which is highly unlikely I would keep a special foreign bank account just in case of divorce so that they wouldn't be able to crucify me afterwards in the whole shameful process where my foreign bank account would be outside of local jurisdiction.]

    Let's face it traditional meaningful marriage of our grandparents no longer exist in this modern world where the culture is no longer the same as it was for a meaningful no strings attached traditional marriage to exist in years past.

    I know I'm probally going to piss some people off here with this but as a male speaking from expirience who has already been in two failed engagements that luckily didn't get too far then what they did this is how I feel.
    National Socialism is the only salvation for Germanics and Europids everywhere. Capitalism, libertarianism, and communism is the enemy.

    National socialized collectivism must prevail over radical individualism.

  2. #2
    Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Last Online
    4 Weeks Ago @ 05:08 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Dutch, English, French, Welsh
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Michigan Michigan
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Single parent
    Occupation
    Logistics
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Orthodox Christian
    Posts
    21
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    You don't have to be so worried. For starters, 75% of marriages do not end in divorce. The current accepted statistic is 50%, and that's on the high end. Alimony isn't even considered in the vast majority of divorce cases, thanks to feminists who have helped women get equal footing in the workplace. Back when jobs were few and far between for women, men were expected to support a former wife. Now that a woman can earn a living for herself, it's simply not an issue. The only times a judge might award alimony is if a divorce will financially ruin a spouse, then they might get temporary alimony for a set number of months to help them get back on their feet. Or if you become fabulously wealthy, you might be expected to provide your former spouse with the lifestyle she had become accustomed to. Altogether, this accounts for about 15% of all divorce cases.

    On the other hand, if you are already planning on keeping a separate overseas bank account to avoid the inevitable screwover by a woman you have yet to even meet, I would say you're not ready for the level of trust and honesty a marriage requires. No one is forcing you to get married, after all.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    The Aesthete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Online
    Saturday, August 14th, 2021 @ 05:54 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Australian
    Country
    Australia Australia
    Gender
    Politics
    Nordish Preservationist
    Posts
    2,226
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    379
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    208
    Thanked in
    141 Posts
    We need to get the traditional meaningful marriage back; they are a beautiful thing. I truly admire my grandparents marriage and they are still deeply in love.

    Marriage only deepens the bonds between the two.

    I think people toady don’t have enough respect and to an extent become so individualistic, but these are their faults not the institution of marriage.

    I once had a friend whose parents never married and he was extremely self conscious about this. I am all for doing the honorable thing.

    It is worth keeping something so good around even if only 25% make it.

  4. #4
    Spenglerian
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Caledonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    Tuesday, July 26th, 2011 @ 05:30 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Scottish
    Ancestry
    Scotland,England, Germany,Austria,Switzerland
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Sverige snart nog
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    RecyclingPlant / College Student
    Politics
    Socially Progressive Nationalism
    Religion
    Atheist, Nihilist, And Mystic
    Posts
    2,432
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    20
    Thanked in
    20 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nixe View Post
    You don't have to be so worried. For starters, 75% of marriages do not end in divorce. The current accepted statistic is 50%, and that's on the high end. Alimony isn't even considered in the vast majority of divorce cases, thanks to feminists who have helped women get equal footing in the workplace. Back when jobs were few and far between for women, men were expected to support a former wife. Now that a woman can earn a living for herself, it's simply not an issue. The only times a judge might award alimony is if a divorce will financially ruin a spouse, then they might get temporary alimony for a set number of months to help them get back on their feet. Or if you become fabulously wealthy, you might be expected to provide your former spouse with the lifestyle she had become accustomed to. Altogether, this accounts for about 15% of all divorce cases.

    On the other hand, if you are already planning on keeping a separate overseas bank account to avoid the inevitable screwover by a woman you have yet to even meet, I would say you're not ready for the level of trust and honesty a marriage requires. No one is forcing you to get married, after all.
    You don't have to be so worried. For starters, 75% of marriages do not end in divorce. The current accepted statistic is 50%, and that's on the high end.
    Yes 75% might of been a over exaggeration on my part however 50% is still high enough.

    Although...........
    In Southern California the divorce rate is believed to be even higher, somewhere in the neighborhood of 60-75%.
    So it must be different from state to state.

    I would like to see the divorce rates of other countries.

    I'm sure they are staggering too.

    In full:

    In Southern California the divorce rate is believed to be even higher, somewhere in the neighborhood of 60-75%.

    The number of US divorces in 2000 was 957,200, compared to 944,317 in 1999, and 947,384 in 1998.

    The number of divorced people in the population more than quadrupled from 4.3 million in 1970 to 18.3 million in 1996.

    The number of US marriages in 2000 was 2,355,005, compared to 2,366,623 in 1999, and 2,267,854 in 1998.

    The marriage rate has fallen nearly 30% since 1970 and the divorce rate has increased about 40%.

    43% of first marriages end within 15 years.

    The median duration of a marriage is 7.2 years.

    Red states have a divorce rate 27% higher than blue states.

    75% of all divorced people re-marry, half of them within three years.

    65% of all second marriages fail.

    80% of divorced men and 75% of women remarry whether or not they have children, most within 3 years.

    ONE in TWELVE couples will be heading for a divorce court after 24 months - more than double the figure for 7 years.

    Percentage of divorces due to irreconcilable differences in 1997: 80%

    There are an estimated 1,075,000 children involved in divorce or 16.8 children per one thousand under the age of eighteen who are involved in their parents' divorce.

    65% of divorces are initiated by women.

    The median age at divorce is 35.6 for Males and 33.2 for females.

    Women are generally more satisfied with their divorce settlements than men.

    Five years after divorce when most men and women have remarried, women's household incomes increased slightly more above pre-divorce levels than those of their ex-husbands.




    DIVORCE STATISTICS: The Numbers

    Percentage of all householders who are unmarried in 2000: 48%

    Number of married couples (2000): 56,497,000

    Number of married people whose spouses are absent (2000):
    Males: 1,365,000 (1.3%)
    Females: 1,345,000 (1.2%)

    People who have been widowed (2000):
    Males: 2,604,000 (2.5%)
    Females:11,061,000 (10%)

    People who are divorced (2000):
    Males: 8,572,000 (8.3%)
    Females: 11,309,000 (10.2%)

    People who are separated (2000):
    Males: 1,818,000 (1.8%)
    Females: 2,661,000 (2.4%)

    Interracial married couples in 2000: 1,047,000

    Children under 18 living in the household of their grandparents in 1998: 4 million (6%)

    Families in which the child lived with two parents in 1997: 25.6 million

    Single fathers maintaining their own household: 1.786 million
    Single mothers maintaining their own household: 7.571 million

    Single fathers living in the home of a relative: 240,000
    Single mothers living in the home of a relative: 1.633 million

    Single fathers who are divorced: 913,000
    Single mothers who are divorced: 3.392 million

    Single fathers never married: 693,000
    Single mothers never married: 4.181 million

    Single fathers raising one child: 1,300,000
    Single mothers raising one child: 5.239 million

    Single fathers raising four or more children: 55,000
    Single mothers raising four or more children: 475,000

    Percentage of children (by race) living in two-parent households in 1998:
    White: 74%
    Black: 36%
    Hispanic: 64%

    Percentage of children with single parents (by gender) earning under $12,500 in 1998:
    Living with fathers: 17%
    Living with mothers: 41%




    DIVORCE STATISTICS: Marriage X Cohabitations

    In terms of both divorce and marital happiness, marriages that were preceded by cohabitation are less successful than those that were not.

    Probability of a first marriage ending in separation or divorce within 5 years: 20%.

    Probability of a premarital cohabitation breaking up within 5 years: 49%.

    After 10 years, the probability of a first marriage ending is 33 percent, compared with 62 percent for cohabitations.

    The majority of couples marrying today have lived together first (53% of women's first marriages are preceded by cohabitation).

    55% of different-sex cohabitors get married within 5 years of moving in together. 40% break up within that same time period. About 10% remain in an unmarried relationship five years or longer.

    There are 9.7 million Americans living with an unmarried different-sex partner and 1.2 million American living with a same-sex partner. 11% of unmarried partners are same-sex couples.

    More than 1/4 of Americans work for an employer that offers domestic partner benefits.

    About 9,390 employers in the U.S. offer domestic partner health benefits for their employees.

    The more successful the company, the greater the chance that it will offer DP benefits. Fifty-one percent of Fortune 500 companies offer DP health benefits, as do 80% of the Fortune 50.

    90% of employers that offer domestic partner benefits make them available to both same-sex and different-sex couples.

    The number of unmarried couples living together increased 72% between 1990 and 2000.

    The number of unmarried couples living together has increased tenfold between 1960 and 2000.

    44% of American adults are currently unmarried (Census Bureau 2000 data).

    43% of people in their twenties believe that cohabiting couples should receive the same benefits as married couples.

    There are 100 million single and unmarried adults in the U.S. (some living alone, some living with partners, families, roommates, etc.)




    DIVORCE STATISTICS: Living Alone

    As of 2000, the most common household type in the U.S. is people living alone. 27 million American households consist of a person living alone, compared to 25 million households with a husband, wife, and child.

    http://www.usattorneylegalservices.c...tatistics.html


    Alimony isn't even considered in the vast majority of divorce cases, thanks to feminists who have helped women get equal footing in the workplace.
    15% of cases it is stated publically.

    According to Gayle Rosenwald Smith a Philadelphia Lawyer, alimony is awarded in only 15 percent of divorce cases.
    http://www.equalityinmarriage.org/wdali.html

    I'd like a more official exact count but that quotation will do until I can find a better source of reference.

    Still men being on the paying end side of that 15% sucks nonetheless.

    Even if women do work that hasn't changed the culture any where women center themselves around female entitlement especially centered around feminism which has placed itself virtually in every public institution.

    Sure women are working however that still doesn't negate the fact that they still reign over men to be the traditional providers via male socio economical cultural roles of sex which oddly enough while they make men conform to such cultural roles of sex they themselves as females refuse to do so when it concerns female cultural roles of sex because it is deemed sexist or inequal.

    [Insert your favorite feminist author here.]

    [ Let's do a recap, shall we? Women via the feminist movement say that the traditional cultural roles of sex is inequal,sexist, and bigoted yet when it concerns pressuring men into the traditional cultural male roles of sex as being the providers it's accepted along with being completely unquestioned.]

    [Do you see the contradiction?]

    [Do not think for a moment that men do not suffer being resigned under those cultural male sex roles either when it concerns being judged or scrutinized in being able to provide as providers.]

    [.....Oh that's right men are suppose to contend with their cultural male role of sex within society without resentment and without question otherwise if they don't they are considered as being negative unworthy males or not living up to the cultural expectations of their own sex.......nevermind.]


    So in a way women have their own money but like also having the money of their male spouses too.

    [Almost like a double income.]

    It's no wonder why women have more spending money than men and are deemed cash cows of consumer society in comparison where they are more targeted by commercial advertisement.

    Back when jobs were few and far between for women, men were expected to support a former wife. Now that a woman can earn a living for herself, it's simply not an issue.
    Although women with their new found economical independence still pressure men to be the traditional provider judging them on whether they can or cannot live up to such a cultural role of sex.

    It's like women get to have their cake and eat it too as they wine and dine themselves on men's behalf not to mention expense despite having their own economical independence where they don't have to. [Doesn't stop them from doing so anyways.]

    A woman is allowed her own financial independence and expects to bask in a shared financial security with a male utilizing his financial resources as well besides her own but at the same time a woman is not held accountable to fulfilling any female cultural role of sex in comparison as it is deemed to be a quality that is both bigoted, inequal, and oppressive by feminists.


    It must be nice being a woman in modern society where everything is so easily accessibile in comparison to the male sex where everything has to be fought for when it concerns men in that men have no shield net protecting them daily that protects their sex as a whole.

    Feminists must be so pleased with this new world they have created.


    [If I was a woman I'd be laughing myself everyday tripping over mindless male drones that serve me hand and foot where most don't know any better because they have been so entirely brain washed to even question their emasculated servitude.]

    [Males always the expendable lot.]

    Let's not forget the political correctness of fear that every male must abide when it concerns dealing or interacting with women otherwise they become singled out.


    Also that wonderful newly found economical and financial independence for women is from a little known thing called affirmative action which protects women besides non white non European ethnics.

    Sorry Bill we are going to have to refuse your resume because the law states our diversity percentage of our company is not meeting federally mandated status quo where instead at the moment we are looking for a Shelly and quite frankly Bill your too damn white in that we need to hire some more non white non European ethnics. Sorry fellow. Better luck next time.


    The only times a judge might award alimony is if a divorce will financially ruin a spouse, then they might get temporary alimony for a set number of months to help them get back on their feet.
    Alimony is a carryover from an obsolete type of limited divorce, a mensa et thoro, wherein the husband was still liable for the wife’s support; an early form of separate maintenance. It wasn’t applicable to absolute divorce, a vinculo matrimonii, but it is so in modern times. Its purpose before emancipation was to support destitute, incapacitated ex-wives. Now it has become corrupted into the notion that an ex-wife “has a right (in the words of one judge) to continue to live in the manner to which she has become accustomed” (by her husband)… It is considered to be “in the nature of a pension.” This post facto service charge is, as the saying goes, “the screwing you get for the screwing you got.”

    The claim that women give men the best years of their lives is nonsense. It’s a horse apiece; men give the same and don’t ask for stud fees when it’s over. An argument for alimony is that husbands owe money to wives for ‘services rendered.’

    Eulogies have been prepared purporting to list the monetary value of a wife to a husband. According to Reuters Limited. an informal study conducted by Web site Salary.com shows that stay-at-home moms would earn an average of $131,471 annually, including overtime, if they received a paycheck. Ridiculous, considering her husband may earn only $35,000 a year. Such preposterous claims assume that all the alleged benefits somehow accrue to the husband alone, an insult to the greatest recipients, women and children. Nowhere are there listings of her cost. Including reserve for alimony, it should come out about even. A great many are liabilities, not worth their salt. Husbands’ services, including on the job, usually exceed in value those of wives. Looked at realistically, an average father raises his wife’s and children’s standard of living by 73 percent. His marriage motivates him to do so.

    Automatic alimony/support awards are nails in the coffin of marriage. They ‘bribe’ women into initiating the vast majority of divorces. An open invitation to divorce and prosper, alimony often discourages women from the formality of legalizing new unions and, believe it or not, in some states does not necessarily terminate if they do. According to an Oklahoma appellate court, it isn’t necessarily terminable by death. It has even been awarded in voided marriages.

    Divorce courts operate on the assumption that men’s sole function is to be a financial base upon which families can live and amuse themselves. But responsibility is not reciprocally applied. In the apparent opinion of the legal community, women’s only function is to exist and consume. Not having such immunity from responsibility, men are judiciously enjoined, under penalty of jail, to perform functions only implied in the marriage contract. Upon dissolution of marriage, men’s obligations continue to be enforced; yet no judge has ever ordered a woman to cook, clean and sew (OK, that last is an anachronism) for her ex-husband, not to mention an existing one.

    Alimony has been awarded even to women with considerably greater assets than the ‘marks’ ordered to pay it. Even pension funds are subject to garnishment in domestic relations cases, despite local ordinances to the contrary. One New York judge, incensed about a man’s pre-marital promiscuity, ordered alimony payments in the amount of 105 percent of his income despite alimony’s non-punitive intent. A Stillwater, Minnesota judge told a member of the Men’s Defense Association to file bankruptcy in order to free up other obligations in order to support a lazy ex-wife who wouldn’t work.

    As a famous judge said, “Alimony drones neither toil nor spin.” Liquor lounge operators and most judges are probably the only segments of society which don’t despise alimony junkies. My previous book, The Rape of The Male was replete with citations of, inter alia, inordinate, mind-boggling citations of over-generous alimony/support awards to women.

    While not altogether extraordinary, the following situation has received some welcome attention. Colonel Bob Stirm was a POW long imprisoned in North Viet Nam. People magazine featured a Pulitzer prize winning picture of Bob meeting his family after his release. Unbeknownst to Bob, his wife had dissipated all of his salary while he was a POW and was planning divorce, having agreed to marry at least three different men while Stirm was a POW — including attorneys in Texas and California and a Naval officer in California. Now divorced, she still draws 42% of his retirement pay. Mat Eytan the famous San Francisco attorney has agreed to use the Stirm case in arguing, in the U.S. Supreme Court, to overturn the practice of awarding large portions of military pensions to divorced wives.

    The irony of this situation was stated most poignantly by Colonel Stirm during an address to the American Retirees Association national convention, “During my six years as a prisoner of war, I was able to survive for one reason... by strong faith in God, my country and my family.”

    Hear the good Professor Amneus on alimony: Imagine an employee quitting her job and demanding to be paid for doing so... Why is the woman entitled to a pension? For bearing the man’s children and giving him a family? … She would have been entitled to a lifetime pension for maintaining rather than undermining his connection with his children and for preserving his family. This is the idea of marriage — why it is a lifetime contract. So she is not giving him children and a family, she is taking them away from him — depriving him of most of what gives his life meaning. And for this she imagines herself entitled to a lifelong pension from the man she victimizes.

    http://www.mensdefense.org/STM_Book/Alimony.htm


    Or if you become fabulously wealthy, you might be expected to provide your former spouse with the lifestyle she had become accustomed to.
    If she was so accustomed to a lifestyle maybe shouldn't of divorced the male.

    Her being accustomed to that specific lifestyle stopped at divorce and she should take full responsibility for her decisions instead of footing the bill towards the male.

    If she wishes to retain that specific same lifestyle perhaps she should think more clearly about divorce.

    As far as I'm concerned when a woman leaves a man that same very man isn't obligated to take care of her afterwards.

    When she leaves a man she becomes in full defacto by seperation responsible for herself and her own material needs.

    On the other hand, if you are already planning on keeping a separate overseas bank account to avoid the inevitable screwover by a woman you have yet to even meet, I would say you're not ready for the level of trust and honesty a marriage requires. No one is forcing you to get married, after all.
    [Laughs.]

    Well I tell you what when I find a honest nice woman I will tell you because I haven't met a single one yet.

    As for me being ready when it concerns life I feel that is a judgement call that you have no reason to be making.

    No one is forcing you to get married, after all.
    Except for those women who refuse to be in relationship with a man who refuses the concept of marriage.

    I guess for the time being I'll just have to resign myself to fake and feign interest in marriage when it is brought up by women in that deception has become the usual approach to relationships these days not to mention their establishment.

    Hmmmm......
    National Socialism is the only salvation for Germanics and Europids everywhere. Capitalism, libertarianism, and communism is the enemy.

    National socialized collectivism must prevail over radical individualism.

  5. #5
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Online
    Saturday, November 13th, 2010 @ 05:37 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Family
    Married parent
    Politics
    Independent
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    41
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    I think the weakening of marriage is one thing that is weakening our culture as a whole. It makes weaker families and weaker economic units. Women who do have children without the benefit of marriage have weaker children and more struggles.

    Look at communities and demographics where marriage is more rare, such as in Blacks. It's one reason for all the social problems. Marriage is the foundation for a strong society.

    Even pre-Christian people had marriage. It made men accountable and protected women and children. It's not always easy, but then, life is a struggle in many ways and always has been.

  6. #6
    Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Last Online
    4 Weeks Ago @ 05:08 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Dutch, English, French, Welsh
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Michigan Michigan
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Single parent
    Occupation
    Logistics
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Orthodox Christian
    Posts
    21
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Women via the feminist movement say that the traditional cultural roles of sex is inequal,sexist, and bigoted yet when it concerns pressuring men into the traditional cultural male role of sex as being the providers it's accepted along with being completely unquestioned.
    I don't have any favorite feminist authors, so I'll have to rely on you to tell me which one believes this. It doesn't sound very feminist to me. It actually sounds like the complete opposite of feminism, which has, by the way, given us concepts such as Paternity leave and the stay-at-home-dad.

    The whole point is that statistics don't mean a thing to your personal situation. I don't care how high the divorce rate is; if you and your partner are committed to build a family together and confront problems with openness and honesty, your divorce risk is right around nil. On the other hand, if you go into a marriage already formulating a strategy to take care of Number One when things go to Hell, you might as well not even bother.

    Marriage itself is not harmful, but rather the disregard for what marriage is intended to be is harming our society.

    BTW, I forgot to mention that I got your PM, but I can't respond since I don't have 15 posts yet. Don't think I am ignoring you.

  7. #7
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Æmeric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Britain, Ulster, Germany, America
    Subrace
    Dalofaelid+Baltid/Borreby
    Y-DNA
    R-Z19
    mtDNA
    U5a2c
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Indiana Indiana
    Gender
    Age
    59
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Anti-Obama
    Religion
    Conservative Protestantism
    Posts
    6,354
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    646
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    901
    Thanked in
    488 Posts
    There is nothing wrong with traditional marriage. The problem is that people are to quick to embrace divorce. It is no-fault divorce that has radically changed the marriage landscape. It use to be you needed a good reason to divorce - adultery, felony conviction, desertion. Now people (usually women) get divorced out of boredom. If there are kids the mother usually gets custody & the father gets screqed on child support.

  8. #8
    Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Online
    Thursday, August 16th, 2012 @ 08:33 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    Brandenburg Brandenburg
    Location
    B-Town
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Family
    Widowed
    Occupation
    lion tamer
    Religion
    agnostic
    Posts
    15
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    I pretty much agree with your view Alaric, but seriously, the argument of most women iniating the divorces is getting old and lame.

    Maybe the women iniate the divorces cos they don't wanna stay with cheating or beating scumbags? Means, just because women iniate it doesn't mean that men are the victims. Many women probably had very good reasons to end the marriage.

    Aside from that, I'm not sure about ever getting married either. I'd like to, but at the same time I'm so terrified of being cheated on or getting divorced that I'd rather not take the risk. Marriage is no guarantee for happiness and most certainly it is not a guarantee for "eternity".

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    SaxonPagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Online
    Wednesday, March 31st, 2021 @ 12:02 AM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    English, Anglo-Saxon
    Country
    England England
    Location
    South Coast
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Aries
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Self Employed
    Politics
    Free Speech / Anti-EU
    Religion
    Pagan
    Posts
    5,039
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,590
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,711
    Thanked in
    1,455 Posts
    CMG, if you really are a "lion tamer" as you've put in your profile, I don't think you'd have too much trouble keeping your future hubby in check

  10. #10
    Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Online
    Thursday, August 16th, 2012 @ 08:33 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    Brandenburg Brandenburg
    Location
    B-Town
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Family
    Widowed
    Occupation
    lion tamer
    Religion
    agnostic
    Posts
    15
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Northman View Post
    I think the weakening of marriage is one thing that is weakening our culture as a whole. It makes weaker families and weaker economic units. Women who do have children without the benefit of marriage have weaker children and more struggles.

    Look at communities and demographics where marriage is more rare, such as in Blacks. It's one reason for all the social problems. Marriage is the foundation for a strong society.

    Even pre-Christian people had marriage. It made men accountable and protected women and children. It's not always easy, but then, life is a struggle in many ways and always has been.
    Not only that, but feminism was pushed forward in order to weaken society and cause instability. It's also used as a means to create tension and hostility between men and women, force women into the workforce (either because they were made to believe cos "they can do it all" or because they can't survive as a single mother), thus make them give the children into dayscare centres where they can easily be influenced and formed as needed. As a result, it weakens the family unit and subsequently society as a whole.

    I read on article on that once and the argumentation chain was very stringent and convincing. Can't find it anymore, though.

Page 1 of 13 12345611 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Do You Practice Your Belief?
    By NormanBlood in forum Customs & Rituals
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: Saturday, May 26th, 2018, 04:07 AM
  2. A personal belief of mine
    By Noddy in forum Men, Women, & Relationships
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Tuesday, December 31st, 2002, 05:06 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •