I have said it before and I will say it again: There is no reason to ever marry an American woman. When she divorces you after getting bored she will take more than half of your money and goods. She will keep the children. She will receive child support from you until each kid is 18. Your children will be raised by a step-dad or series of step-dads.
An American Woman has no consequences for her actions. When she gets bored of you, when she is too "independent" to be "kept down" in a marriage she knows she can leave and that she can depend (oh, the irony) on your child support. She can do anything she wants and the state is always on her side.
Child support is little more than a neutering of the dad. Child support should be abolished except in certain circumstances (The husband cheats and leaves for example). A woman has no reason to stay married anymore, she doesn't have to depend on keeping her husband to survive. If she doesn't receive child support from a "deadbeat dad" she knows she can depend on the state for support. You only have to look at the black community to see where the white community is headed. Black women are "independent" and "don't need a man" because they can depend on the state for support. The black community is in chaos and there isn't really such a thing as a black family. A mom and kids are a family or a mom and a series of boyfriends. Eliminate state support and child support for unmarried woman and you will see women staying in marriages.
The government and media propoganda have successfully replaced fathers, and Men in general, with the state. American women do not depend on Men. They depend on the state. She knows that when she dials 911 the cops are on her side no matter what happened. She knows that during the divorce she will be well taken care of.
If you're wondering [I]why[/I] child support is always awarded to the woman here you go: Woman consume far more than men. Woman rarely save. They spend. When you transfer the wealth from men (who may spend, say, $150 on grooming products) to women (Who may spend, say, $700 per year on grooming products) the money goes right back into the pockets of the people feeding you steaming bowls of shit.
Which leads me to my second point: There is no benefit for an American Man to marry an American Woman. Not a single benefit. Because he "loves" her is an absurdly stupid reason to willingly sign his life away. A marriage is a legal contract, you wouldn't sign any other legal contract in an emotional state...unless you're stupid. The flipside here is that a Man needs a good woman for love and support. Without a good woman with him and man will never see his full potential. Probably why you see such a state of arrested development in young men. Playing video games into the 30's, more and more gay's...men unfit to lead.
Whether she identifies with the feminist moniker or not doesn't mean anything, every American Woman has been indoctrinated with feminist ideology since the day she was born. And because of this they are completely unworthy of marriage. The only American Women that make good wives are devoutly religious women who grew up working (on a farm etc..). Those women are impossible to marry unless you yourself are from the same devoutly religious sect.
If you want to get married to a good woman and stay married you should go shopping for one in SE Asia, Eastern Europe, or South of the Border and pick a woman from a small town and has a good relationship with her father and make her sign a prenup.
If you marry an American Woman you can look forward to fucking a fat cow (it will happen), constant nagging and negativity, poor mothering, statistical eventual divorce where you forfeit half your earnings, and you will be dickless while married. American women don't want to BE married, they want to GET married. Don't make that mistake. She will always think that her perfect man is still out there somewhere (thank you "true love" movies) and she is willing to walk away from you as soon as you give up your alphaness. You have 2 options while married: constantly game your wife or be a dickless pile of shit.
Dallas PUA
The Pickup Artist Playground
The Law and Divorce
by Guest » Wed Jan 19, 2011 11:38 pm
[QUOTE=Lion;39585]I have said it before and I will say it again: There is no reason to ever marry an American woman. When she divorces you after getting bored she will take more than half of your money and goods. She will keep the children. She will receive child support from you until each kid is 18. Your children will be raised by a step-dad or series of step-dads.
An American Woman has no consequences for her actions. When she gets bored of you, when she is too "independent" to be "kept down" in a marriage she knows she can leave and that she can depend (oh, the irony) on your child support. She can do anything she wants and the state is always on her side.
Child support is little more than a neutering of the dad. Child support should be abolished except in certain circumstances (The husband cheats and leaves for example). A woman has no reason to stay married anymore, she doesn't have to depend on keeping her husband to survive. If she doesn't receive child support from a "deadbeat dad" she knows she can depend on the state for support. You only have to look at the black community to see where the white community is headed. Black women are "independent" and "don't need a man" because they can depend on the state for support. The black community is in chaos and there isn't really such a thing as a black family. A mom and kids are a family or a mom and a series of boyfriends. Eliminate state support and child support for unmarried woman and you will see women staying in marriages.
The government and media propoganda have successfully replaced fathers, and Men in general, with the state. American women do not depend on Men. They depend on the state. She knows that when she dials 911 the cops are on her side no matter what happened. She knows that during the divorce she will be well taken care of.
If you're wondering [I]why[/I] child support is always awarded to the woman here you go: Woman consume far more than men. Woman rarely save. They spend. When you transfer the wealth from men (who may spend, say, $150 on grooming products) to women (Who may spend, say, $700 per year on grooming products) the money goes right back into the pockets of the people feeding you steaming bowls of shit.
Which leads me to my second point: There is no benefit for an American Man to marry an American Woman. Not a single benefit. Because he "loves" her is an absurdly stupid reason to willingly sign his life away. A marriage is a legal contract, you wouldn't sign any other legal contract in an emotional state...unless you're stupid. The flipside here is that a Man needs a good woman for love and support. Without a good woman with him and man will never see his full potential. Probably why you see such a state of arrested development in young men. Playing video games into the 30's, more and more gay's...men unfit to lead.
Whether she identifies with the feminist moniker or not doesn't mean anything, every American Woman has been indoctrinated with feminist ideology since the day she was born. And because of this they are completely unworthy of marriage. The only American Women that make good wives are devoutly religious women who grew up working (on a farm etc..). Those women are impossible to marry unless you yourself are from the same devoutly religious sect.
If you want to get married to a good woman and stay married you should go shopping for one in SE Asia, Eastern Europe, or South of the Border and pick a woman from a small town and has a good relationship with her father and make her sign a prenup.
If you marry an American Woman you can look forward to fucking a fat cow (it will happen), constant nagging and negativity, poor mothering, statistical eventual divorce where you forfeit half your earnings, and you will be dickless while married. American women don't want to BE married, they want to GET married. Don't make that mistake. She will always think that her perfect man is still out there somewhere (thank you "true love" movies) and she is willing to walk away from you as soon as you give up your alphaness. You have 2 options while married: constantly game your wife or be a dickless pile of shit.[/QUOTE]
epic post!
An American Woman has no consequences for her actions. When she gets bored of you, when she is too "independent" to be "kept down" in a marriage she knows she can leave and that she can depend (oh, the irony) on your child support. She can do anything she wants and the state is always on her side.
Child support is little more than a neutering of the dad. Child support should be abolished except in certain circumstances (The husband cheats and leaves for example). A woman has no reason to stay married anymore, she doesn't have to depend on keeping her husband to survive. If she doesn't receive child support from a "deadbeat dad" she knows she can depend on the state for support. You only have to look at the black community to see where the white community is headed. Black women are "independent" and "don't need a man" because they can depend on the state for support. The black community is in chaos and there isn't really such a thing as a black family. A mom and kids are a family or a mom and a series of boyfriends. Eliminate state support and child support for unmarried woman and you will see women staying in marriages.
The government and media propoganda have successfully replaced fathers, and Men in general, with the state. American women do not depend on Men. They depend on the state. She knows that when she dials 911 the cops are on her side no matter what happened. She knows that during the divorce she will be well taken care of.
If you're wondering [I]why[/I] child support is always awarded to the woman here you go: Woman consume far more than men. Woman rarely save. They spend. When you transfer the wealth from men (who may spend, say, $150 on grooming products) to women (Who may spend, say, $700 per year on grooming products) the money goes right back into the pockets of the people feeding you steaming bowls of shit.
Which leads me to my second point: There is no benefit for an American Man to marry an American Woman. Not a single benefit. Because he "loves" her is an absurdly stupid reason to willingly sign his life away. A marriage is a legal contract, you wouldn't sign any other legal contract in an emotional state...unless you're stupid. The flipside here is that a Man needs a good woman for love and support. Without a good woman with him and man will never see his full potential. Probably why you see such a state of arrested development in young men. Playing video games into the 30's, more and more gay's...men unfit to lead.
Whether she identifies with the feminist moniker or not doesn't mean anything, every American Woman has been indoctrinated with feminist ideology since the day she was born. And because of this they are completely unworthy of marriage. The only American Women that make good wives are devoutly religious women who grew up working (on a farm etc..). Those women are impossible to marry unless you yourself are from the same devoutly religious sect.
If you want to get married to a good woman and stay married you should go shopping for one in SE Asia, Eastern Europe, or South of the Border and pick a woman from a small town and has a good relationship with her father and make her sign a prenup.
If you marry an American Woman you can look forward to fucking a fat cow (it will happen), constant nagging and negativity, poor mothering, statistical eventual divorce where you forfeit half your earnings, and you will be dickless while married. American women don't want to BE married, they want to GET married. Don't make that mistake. She will always think that her perfect man is still out there somewhere (thank you "true love" movies) and she is willing to walk away from you as soon as you give up your alphaness. You have 2 options while married: constantly game your wife or be a dickless pile of shit.[/QUOTE]
epic post!
- Guest
by Guest » Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:33 am
[QUOTE=Prodigy;39587]epic post![/QUOTE]
Seconded.
I was over at my parents house a couple weeks ago. It was getting late, about time for me to depart. My dad throws on this video of My Great Great Uncle. He was getting on in years and this was an interview of his life. This is a man who was a farmer his entire life. He probably died 20-30 years ago if I had to guess. So he was probably born around 1900 or maybe a tad earlier. I don't know anything about this guy other than what I am seeing on the video and from the questions I pose to my father.
As it turns out this guy was married 4 times. I found that very hard to believe as in those parts divorce is HIGHLY frowned upon. I find out he never divorced, he was just a widower many times over. I found this odd that he would continue to get married so many times. My father explained that it was out of necessity more so than love back in those days. He was a farmer and as such he was out with the fields from sun up to sun down. This yields little time for a man to raise children. He had children from his first marriage, who definitely needed what a woman could provide. He went on to explain that not only did he need help raising the children, the women he married also needed help to survive. They needed a man who could provide the shelter, food, and money in order to get by.
I never thought about marriage in terms of necessity before I viewed this video. I always thought of it in many other regards. Who would think of it in regards to a necessity in these times. Women no longer need a guy to take care of the money, they are getting that covered on their own now.
Times have surely changed. Lion is correct if you want a women that looks to you for her survival, you pretty much have to go out of this country to find that sort of girl.
Seconded.
I was over at my parents house a couple weeks ago. It was getting late, about time for me to depart. My dad throws on this video of My Great Great Uncle. He was getting on in years and this was an interview of his life. This is a man who was a farmer his entire life. He probably died 20-30 years ago if I had to guess. So he was probably born around 1900 or maybe a tad earlier. I don't know anything about this guy other than what I am seeing on the video and from the questions I pose to my father.
As it turns out this guy was married 4 times. I found that very hard to believe as in those parts divorce is HIGHLY frowned upon. I find out he never divorced, he was just a widower many times over. I found this odd that he would continue to get married so many times. My father explained that it was out of necessity more so than love back in those days. He was a farmer and as such he was out with the fields from sun up to sun down. This yields little time for a man to raise children. He had children from his first marriage, who definitely needed what a woman could provide. He went on to explain that not only did he need help raising the children, the women he married also needed help to survive. They needed a man who could provide the shelter, food, and money in order to get by.
I never thought about marriage in terms of necessity before I viewed this video. I always thought of it in many other regards. Who would think of it in regards to a necessity in these times. Women no longer need a guy to take care of the money, they are getting that covered on their own now.
Times have surely changed. Lion is correct if you want a women that looks to you for her survival, you pretty much have to go out of this country to find that sort of girl.
- Guest
by Guest » Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:37 am
[QUOTE=playercool;39588]
Times have surely changed. Lion is correct if you want a women that looks to you for her survival, you pretty much have to go out of this country to find that sort of girl.[/QUOTE]
Or find a girl that wants to be property and told what to do.
Welcome to the club! Finally... :)
Times have surely changed. Lion is correct if you want a women that looks to you for her survival, you pretty much have to go out of this country to find that sort of girl.[/QUOTE]
Or find a girl that wants to be property and told what to do.
Welcome to the club! Finally... :)
- Guest
by Guest » Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:00 am
[QUOTE=Finesse;39589]Or find a girl that wants to be property and told what to do.
Welcome to the club! Finally... :)[/QUOTE]
An American Woman you find that willingly wants to be property and told what to do likely has extreme daddy issues. A woman with daddy issues (from any country) is un-marryable. You're talking about marrying a slut and you can't turn a ho into a housewife.
A marryable woman is one who defers to her husband not one who wishes to become chattel.
Welcome to the club! Finally... :)[/QUOTE]
An American Woman you find that willingly wants to be property and told what to do likely has extreme daddy issues. A woman with daddy issues (from any country) is un-marryable. You're talking about marrying a slut and you can't turn a ho into a housewife.
A marryable woman is one who defers to her husband not one who wishes to become chattel.
- Guest
by Guest » Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:50 am
[QUOTE=Gunslinger;39583]I still don't see why he should pay his ex wifes legal fees after she divorced him....
So you are saying if you are married, then your sweet little angel divorces you, that you should pay her divorce lawyers for her?[/QUOTE]
It's not that black-and-white. Think about it. They spent a lot of time and court resources arguing about a $10,000 ring. The guy is a former NFL player. Why didn't he just write a check for $5,000? It seems to me that he wanted to hide his assets, lie about their value, and drag the court battle out unnecessarily. I don't know if that's the case, but if it might be. I don't know what the relationship was like. I don't know what kind of husband and father he was. I don't know what kind of wife and mother she was.
And neither do you.
I'm just playing devil's advocate so this forum isn't just a bunch of men whining about how unfairly men are treated. Wah! Wah! Wah!
So you are saying if you are married, then your sweet little angel divorces you, that you should pay her divorce lawyers for her?[/QUOTE]
It's not that black-and-white. Think about it. They spent a lot of time and court resources arguing about a $10,000 ring. The guy is a former NFL player. Why didn't he just write a check for $5,000? It seems to me that he wanted to hide his assets, lie about their value, and drag the court battle out unnecessarily. I don't know if that's the case, but if it might be. I don't know what the relationship was like. I don't know what kind of husband and father he was. I don't know what kind of wife and mother she was.
And neither do you.
I'm just playing devil's advocate so this forum isn't just a bunch of men whining about how unfairly men are treated. Wah! Wah! Wah!
- Guest
by Guest » Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:15 am
[QUOTE=Finesse;39584]Dude if he wants to be a cheerleader for these broads, let him. This isn't the first time he's spouted these views. Just so long as you don't fall for the whole marriage facade.[/QUOTE]
Spouted what views? That this particular guy lied in court about his once-in-a-lifetime 2nd place ring? My view that the story doesn't tell all the facts? This is the first time I've heard of this.
For every story about a guy who gets screwed, there are 100 stories about men who get divorced, work out an agreement, pay what they owe, and go on with their lives without crying about it.
Forgive me if I don't join your bitch session about how men are so unfairly treated. You do it a lot. I mean A LOT. I don't want to engage in that. Hey, I'm divorced, and it cost me a lot of money, but I'm not going to cry about it. I agree with the old joke. You know why divorce is so expensive? Because it's worth it.
But that doesn't make me a cheerleader for broads.
Spouted what views? That this particular guy lied in court about his once-in-a-lifetime 2nd place ring? My view that the story doesn't tell all the facts? This is the first time I've heard of this.
For every story about a guy who gets screwed, there are 100 stories about men who get divorced, work out an agreement, pay what they owe, and go on with their lives without crying about it.
Forgive me if I don't join your bitch session about how men are so unfairly treated. You do it a lot. I mean A LOT. I don't want to engage in that. Hey, I'm divorced, and it cost me a lot of money, but I'm not going to cry about it. I agree with the old joke. You know why divorce is so expensive? Because it's worth it.
But that doesn't make me a cheerleader for broads.
- Guest
by Guest » Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:14 am
[QUOTE=Rhody;39597]It's not that black-and-white. Think about it. They spent a lot of time and court resources arguing about a $10,000 ring. The guy is a former NFL player. Why didn't he just write a check for $5,000? It seems to me that he wanted to hide his assets, lie about their value, and drag the court battle out unnecessarily. I don't know if that's the case, but if it might be. I don't know what the relationship was like. I don't know what kind of husband and father he was. I don't know what kind of wife and mother she was.
And neither do you.
I'm just playing devil's advocate so this forum isn't just a bunch of men whining about how unfairly men are treated. Wah! Wah! Wah![/QUOTE]
The issue isn't about him being stupid or trying to hide assets the article is about the entire idea that he is forced to pay for his ex-wife's legal fees at all.
I didn't see her out on the field, in the weight room training, or sweating her ass off in the middle of the summer in the humid Tampa weather. What claim does she have to anything that he's earned? Especially a ring for HIS achievements. Now his ring is going to pay the bill for her attempts to take as much of his shit as possible.
THAT is the issue, not him being stupid for trying to hide something that clearly has a lot of sentimental value to him (even if he did make a replicia with white gold, shit I'd probably do the same...only old men wear yellow gold).
I'm not whining and crying about this. The system sucks and is clearly rigged for women. I understand this to be factual, as such the only way to ensure that I am treated fairly (at least somewhat) is to not participate in the system that is rigged for women. Clearly, there is a price to pay for opting out of the system...but the cost to pay for doing so is much, much lower than the cost to play the marriage game.
Ah, Roissy, you're timing is perfect:
[URL]http://roissy.wordpress.com/2011/01/19/losing-a-few-good-ones/[/URL]
Well said sir, well said.
And neither do you.
I'm just playing devil's advocate so this forum isn't just a bunch of men whining about how unfairly men are treated. Wah! Wah! Wah![/QUOTE]
The issue isn't about him being stupid or trying to hide assets the article is about the entire idea that he is forced to pay for his ex-wife's legal fees at all.
I didn't see her out on the field, in the weight room training, or sweating her ass off in the middle of the summer in the humid Tampa weather. What claim does she have to anything that he's earned? Especially a ring for HIS achievements. Now his ring is going to pay the bill for her attempts to take as much of his shit as possible.
THAT is the issue, not him being stupid for trying to hide something that clearly has a lot of sentimental value to him (even if he did make a replicia with white gold, shit I'd probably do the same...only old men wear yellow gold).
I'm not whining and crying about this. The system sucks and is clearly rigged for women. I understand this to be factual, as such the only way to ensure that I am treated fairly (at least somewhat) is to not participate in the system that is rigged for women. Clearly, there is a price to pay for opting out of the system...but the cost to pay for doing so is much, much lower than the cost to play the marriage game.
Ah, Roissy, you're timing is perfect:
[URL]http://roissy.wordpress.com/2011/01/19/losing-a-few-good-ones/[/URL]
Well said sir, well said.
- Guest
by Guest » Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:42 am
[QUOTE=Bull Run;39602]The issue isn't about him being stupid or trying to hide assets the article is about the entire idea that he is forced to pay for his ex-wife's legal fees at all.[/QUOTE]
If he was up-front about owning the ring and the replica and what they were worth, then they would have been included in the assets at the beginning. If that were the case, then perhaps the attorney fees wouldn't have reached six figures. Also, he could have been honest about the value of the ring and just pay an extra $5,000 (half the real value).
[quote]I didn't see her out on the field, in the weight room training, or sweating her ass off in the middle of the summer in the humid Tampa weather. What claim does she have to anything that he's earned? Especially a ring for HIS achievements. Now his ring is going to pay the bill for her attempts to take as much of his shit as possible.[/quote]
It might be true that she was a horrible mother and a lazy wife. Maybe she insisted on housekeepers and ordered out every meal. Then again, maybe she took great care of him and his children. I don't know. I can't speak to how much she deserves, and I know the courts don't always do a good job of matching what she deserves and what she's entitled to legally. He should be able to afford a good lawyer.
All I can say is if it got to the point where he had to surrender his NFC Championship ring, then he either had a horrible attorney or he's a complete shithead financially.
[quote]THAT is the issue, not him being stupid for trying to hide something that clearly has a lot of sentimental value to him (even if he did make a replicia with white gold, shit I'd probably do the same...only old men wear yellow gold).[/quote]
I must not have read the same article you did, because him trying to hide possession of the ring was certainly an issue addressed in the article I read.
[quote]I'm not whining and crying about this. The system sucks and is clearly rigged for women. I understand this to be factual, as such the only way to ensure that I am treated fairly (at least somewhat) is to not participate in the system that is rigged for women. Clearly, there is a price to pay for opting out of the system...but the cost to pay for doing so is much, much lower than the cost to play the marriage game.[/quote]
I know you're not whining or crying.
The institution of marriage was initially created by men to control property. With the divorce rate what it is, that purpose is no longer practical. There is only one reason to get married these days: to enter into a partnership for raising children.
If he was up-front about owning the ring and the replica and what they were worth, then they would have been included in the assets at the beginning. If that were the case, then perhaps the attorney fees wouldn't have reached six figures. Also, he could have been honest about the value of the ring and just pay an extra $5,000 (half the real value).
[quote]I didn't see her out on the field, in the weight room training, or sweating her ass off in the middle of the summer in the humid Tampa weather. What claim does she have to anything that he's earned? Especially a ring for HIS achievements. Now his ring is going to pay the bill for her attempts to take as much of his shit as possible.[/quote]
It might be true that she was a horrible mother and a lazy wife. Maybe she insisted on housekeepers and ordered out every meal. Then again, maybe she took great care of him and his children. I don't know. I can't speak to how much she deserves, and I know the courts don't always do a good job of matching what she deserves and what she's entitled to legally. He should be able to afford a good lawyer.
All I can say is if it got to the point where he had to surrender his NFC Championship ring, then he either had a horrible attorney or he's a complete shithead financially.
[quote]THAT is the issue, not him being stupid for trying to hide something that clearly has a lot of sentimental value to him (even if he did make a replicia with white gold, shit I'd probably do the same...only old men wear yellow gold).[/quote]
I must not have read the same article you did, because him trying to hide possession of the ring was certainly an issue addressed in the article I read.
[quote]I'm not whining and crying about this. The system sucks and is clearly rigged for women. I understand this to be factual, as such the only way to ensure that I am treated fairly (at least somewhat) is to not participate in the system that is rigged for women. Clearly, there is a price to pay for opting out of the system...but the cost to pay for doing so is much, much lower than the cost to play the marriage game.[/quote]
I know you're not whining or crying.
The institution of marriage was initially created by men to control property. With the divorce rate what it is, that purpose is no longer practical. There is only one reason to get married these days: to enter into a partnership for raising children.
- Guest
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests