ardour said:
amale... next you’ll be demanding women get abortions so that men aren’t forced to pay child support.
When I actually do, then feel free to accuse me of that. For now, feel even more free to keep that to yourself.
ardour said:
This isn't about varying concepts of commitment but a desire for an easy way out without any financial obligations.
Instead of judging people who do actually trust one another (married or not), you could just go to a lawyer and get a pre-nuptial/relationship agreement drawn up.
Perhaps I misunderstood, but what is it, "a desire for an easy way out" or "actually trusting one another"?
VanillaCreme said:
amale said:
VanillaCreme said:
amale, you get your warning now to stop the obvious hating on women. I tried to reason that it was just you sharing your thoughts, but if you're going to constantly generalize women because of your "self evident" opinions, then you're going to take a vacation.
There's a difference between discussing something, and then putting something down because you don't like it. Enough of it.
Obvious hating on women is a pretty serious thoughtcrime, I agree. But can you at least show me where did I do it, exactly? It has to be one of my posts which convinced you?
And I gave objective reasons why I was putting marriage down, it's not just because I don't like it.
It's your general attitude about it. You even tried to argue in PM with me about how men
definitely have it worse than women, and they don't. That's all something
you want to believe in to justify your opinion.
So, my warning still stands. Enough with the negative generalizations. That's not allowed here. If you didn't know that, I'm telling you now.
If anything, that PM is a generalization about men, then. Also, I explained why I was saying that. Not to mention that your very "and they (meaning, men in general) don't ..." is a generalization itself, believe me or not.
Attitude about what? What exactly opinion am I trying to justify? If it's "men have it worse", then it has nothing to do both with women and hate.
If I accuse anyone of anything, I always can show exactly what it is. I expect the same.
TheRealCallie said:
No, a divorce is not always bad just because there are kids. Sometimes they are, but not always and definitely not most.
No way, I think in the most cases it's definitely bad.
TheRealCallie said:
I never said the other parent wasn't important, just that the kids are MORE important because they can't go out and find a new place to live, they rely on their parents for that, so yeah, the person with the kids gets the house. Often times, when one gets the house, the other gets something else, such as money or a car or whatever they might have accumulated together.
"The person with the kids gets the house" - often, it would be more reasonable the other way around, "the person with the house gets the kids". It's still a single parent, but at least he already has a job.
TheRealCallie said:
A lot of times, the kids go with the mother because of things like breastfeeding and whatnot. That is, of course for younger children. A lot of times, the men don't fight the kids staying with their mother, but if you think that a lot of men don't get custody over the mother, you'd be wrong.
I can't say about the whatnot, but breastfeeding happens in a rather limited period of time. A lot of divorces happen when there are kids who can eat on their own, with the same outcome.
If a man fights for his kids, he has a very little chance against a woman, no matter age of kids or almost anything else.
TheRealCallie said:
I don't know where you're getting your information, but it sounds to me like it's your opinion based on your own bias, not rooted in fact. Correct me if I'm wrong, by all means.
I won't surprise you, it's personal experience and the internet. You have more divorced relatives than I do though.