Should Women get Married?
My "Ask Dr. Helen" column is up:
Go take a look and add a comment here or at PJM on whether or not women should get married and if they do, what can they do to improve their relationship with their husband?
Dr. Helen Smith’s column, Should Men Get Married? caused quite a stir. Now she looks at the other side of the coin - and offers some tips for women on improving the odds of happiness if they do step up to the altar.
Go take a look and add a comment here or at PJM on whether or not women should get married and if they do, what can they do to improve their relationship with their husband?
Labels: PJM column
posted by Helen at 6:36 AM
42 Comments:
I notice in your column for men you suggested they consider a prenup to protect their assets during a marriage, yet you do not ask women to consider the same. Why is this so?
Cham,
I certainly think that a pre-nup is a good idea for women too. However, the courts typically give women a fairer deal in court in terms of money, children etc. so at this stage of the game, it is more important for men (84% of alimony and child support are paid by men) as generally, they stand to lose more. Certainly, if a woman has assets or expects to have assets, she would want a pre-nup.
Cham,
I don't have any studies or any other important-sounding things to back this up, but my impression is that the vast majority of women "marry up", try to marry up or think they're marrying up.
And yes, a female nurse who makes much more than her husband, an MD doing a surgery residency, is "marrying up" even though she makes more than her husband.
That's how it seems to work. So it seems that the protection of financial assets would more likely be the man's concern, although that's not always true. In marriage and in divorce, the money flows from the higher earner to the lower earner. It's just a question of how much and how fast.
As with your previous article, 2 things apply for me:
1. I loved it. Insightful, informed, and wise.
2. I cringe when I think of the asshattery that will doubtless be displayed in the comments.
Er... let me amend that. The comments generally are reasoned and interesting, but as you well know, these sorts of topics bring out the weirdos like little else does. I think you've a lot more patience for them than I do.
jg:
A prenup protects preexisting assets. Someone that cannot manage money may drain their spouses existing assets regardless of how much more they earn or how little their spouse earns.
Here's what I wrote in the comments:
"I'm meaning no offense here.. but aren't these things obvious?"
Heather, yes, it is bizarre isn't it?" The article has to teach women: "Finally, just try to treat the guy the way you would like to be treated and treat him like a human being with some compassion and kindness."
Our culture, thanks to Feminism (Femarroidism) has poisoned women beyond repair to the point that they no longer seem to be able to treat men with any respect at all. Women have been constantly propagandized to this false sense of superiority. Every commercial, every cultural cue, degrades men as if they are subhuman and oafs, who deserve zero respect, when ironically, it doesn't say anything for the average woman's intelligence if she can be so easily influenced by popular culture to treat the most important man in her life like garbage with no conscious or accountability, not to mention the fact it doesn't say much for a woman when in essence she is saying she chose an idiot and a POS (in her own words). It's like some weirdo right of passage for women today to crap on their first husband just so she can say she was a 'hero' for having been 'abused' (barf) when it is women that have become nightmarish abusive, not men.
You can say this is not true, but then you are not a man- you have no idea what it is like. It must have felt like this for Jews under Hitler- treated like idiots and demeaned as sub-human. Then you go into a marriage with this basic attitude already and then your surprized there's a 60% divorce rate and women initiate 70% of the divorces?!?
"Someone that cannot manage money may drain their spouses existing assets regardless of how much more they earn or how little their spouse earns."
-------------
But a prenuptial agreement isn't going to do anything in that situation. You can't bind third parties (i.e. the people who the spendthrift gave the money to in the spending frenzy).
Helen,
You ask the question: should women marry? Well, looking at the data, the answer is a resounding yes, for them and especially for their children.
One of the effects of the feminist assault on marriage that I find dramatically ironic is that it has resulted in women, children, and men being treated worse and facing more hardship and exposed to more social pathologies than ever before.
Another irony of the feminist assualt on marriage is that it has tended to disinvest men in family and, by extension, in society. This tends to breed men who have higher rates of crime, higher risk of acquiring a social pathology of one kind or another, and lower overall academic achievement, making them less attractive as marriage partners for women who, even today, still marry up to a "success object". And you have seen for yourself on your site the reluctance of many men to wed as a result of the feminist-legal combine.
The final characteristic of the decline in marriage is that it is self-perpetuating. Children raised in single-parent homes are apt to repeat that pattern. Also, many more women than men see a man's involvement in the upbringing of children as optional (sorry can't find the source right now).
The real question, from my perspective, is not that "should women marry?". It is "why are women shunning marriage at least as much as the men are?"
That women greatly benefit financially from the breakup of a marriage is undisputed, but you generally need to be married first to do that. Perhaps governmental influence is part of the problem, as generous "child support"--in reality, hidden alimony--is extracted from a father and awarded to a mother regardless of her marital status, or whether she kicked him out of his home and out of his children's lives involuntarily. In addition, government programs using monies paid by mostly male taxpayers have steadily been supplanting men's direct financial contribution in the home for generations. Many of these programs are targeted only for women, and single mothers are by far the recipients of this largesse.
I think another factor that leads women to shun marriage is that women as a group still have a tendency to marry up, in either income or class. However, given that many women make more than men these days, and graduate from college at substantially higher rates, it is becoming more and more difficult for women to find men who fit the "superior to me" criteria.
"I cringe when I think of the asshattery that will doubtless be displayed in the comments."
Yes, and that is SUCH a larger issue than the decline of marriage, the desintergration of the family, children being raised in god-awful dysfuntional homes with single moms by choice with move-in boyfriends, the social cancer of feminism, and the bizarre attitudes women have towards marriage that are supreme examples of 'asshattery.'
NOW, who's the 'weirdo?'
Maybe next you could examine "Should women STAY married?"
I'm guessing, especially for the children, the answer should be YES.
I think there's an awful lot (professional men and women) who sign up for the ceremony and babies and happy ever after... who then get in a snit and get divorced as the easy way out.
Sadly, it's too pc to criticize these women (and men, who often go on to sire multiple married families.)
I just wish divorced women would start identifying this way, instead of reverting back to "single". Sorry -- you took all the benefits and social rewards of marriage, and for whatever reason, failed. That's not the same as "single"; that's properly called "divorced" no matter how long ago it was.
Maybe having Romney or Huckabee for president won't be such a bad thing, if we can wash some of the hypocrisy out of the culture.
Divorces and multiple marriages costs society. Especially in terms of the children, whose family needs are now expected to be met in the schools.
A woman could demand to keep the finances separate if her husband is a spendaholic and she's a saver. Although better advice is not to marry someone who does not agree with you about money.
Mary, if you're the usual Mary, are you feeling OK? Assuming you're serious, I agree.
I know two women who recently divorced. Why? Simply put, they wanted to party more. One has a daughter, the other 5 daughters (one from her first marriage, 4 from her second). Her husband got custody of the 4 girls.
I don't understand. The second woman is in her mid-forties at least. Why do they need to party like it's 1965? Why is partying more important than providing an intact family for their children?
There are good reasons to divorce but the one I hear most often is "I'm just not happy," or "He/She doesn't make me happy anymore." I don't buy those excuses. To begin with each person is responsible for their own happiness.
Should women marry? It's a better proposition for women than men but you still should be very, very careful. And stay away from guys named Peterson.
I read mary's post and my socks rolled down and then back up, all by themselves.
I agree whole heartedly that once married, there is no going back to "single". It is called divorce. Your both still the kids' mom and dad.
In all honesty, I am ashamed of being divorced. I sure didn't marry with that in mind.
"Why is partying more important than providing an intact family for their children?"
Because they didn't get enough partying in before the kids came along, and the culture says they should be having fun, doing exciting things, being happy! The kids and the hubby aren't fulfilling and exciting anymore, and the partying might just be the ticket back to happiness, y'know?
And, you know, it's better for the kids if mom is happy, right? So what if she's mostly absent, she's happy, so the kids will be happier. Isn't that the latest excuse for such self-indulgence?
marbel - in my book you hit the nail on the head. I just don't see how adults buy into this shallowness.
dadvocate - I can get in to your blog to read, but I can't post. What's up with that?
br549 - the comments should be OK now. I think I had screwed up the template a little.
With regard to one spouse spending the other spouse's money: If a man withholds money (for whatever reason) from his wife, that is now considered to be a form of domestic violence, "economic violence", in some feminist and therapy circles. It only seems to apply when men withhold money.
I thought that was a joke at first, but it's not. You can google "economic violence" to read up on it.
I'm in my early 40's and never "got to party" since I married at 20 and had my first child at 24. My husband left 11 months ago because he was "unhappy and unfulfilled." I stayed home to raise the kids and supported his career as a military officer through 17 moves, including 8 years overseas in countries where I was not allowed a work permit and did not have a military base. Why should I be ashamed to be divorced since I was the one willing to do whatever was necessary to stay together? He's the one out there reliving his youth.
I also strongly disagree with the comment that women get the better end of a divorce financially. I'm now a single mom with a degree in a romance language and a background in teaching English to internationals. To be near extended family, I am living in the middle of the country where there are very few immigrants, most of whom can't afford English lessons anyway. I've had a drastic drop in income and learned that, without further education, I can make at most about $16,000/yr. Meanwhile, my stbx husband is a full colonel with a PhD and flight pay in a one-person household.
I'm surprised things are so one-sided in the comments section; the truth is the whole family gets hurt--destroyed, actually-- in a divorce (well--maybe not the leaver) and it's bad all around.
Back to the main question: yes, a woman should get married if she wants to, but she should know what it's really about and be absolutely sure her future husband *and his family* share her views on divorce and other moral/religious issues or she may be in for a nasty surprise 20 years down the road.
"I'm now a single mom with a degree in a romance language.."
Whaa..? You are clearly living in the Twilight Zone.
"the truth is the whole family gets hurt--destroyed, actually-- in a divorce (well--maybe not the leaver) and it's bad all around."
Huh, then why do women initate 70% of divorces for nothing? Reading this made me realize more than ever that maybe women just aren't sane enough to even know what's good for them- maybe this is why they need to be heavily controlled and always have been throughout history and still are in half of the world.
notice how some of the commentors say having children is the purpose of marriage. does that mean couples who cant or wont have children arent really married.
i am recently married october 31st, and i give her room and she gives me room, so we dont kill each other, i know how bad i am.
but as we have decided that medically having a child is a danger to her and me, plus other reasons, does that mean our marriage is somehow less.
a lot of marriages dont spend time with each other its all about having a baby NOW, we need one, rather than a few years later or at all to get to know each other.
most western women are dangerous to marry, because it isnt fair the divorces procedures, luckily i found my one.
Congrats, mercurior. All the best!
Life goes on, regardless. My oldest daughter and her hubster (a really fine young man) are in the labor and delivery room as I type. I may well become a grand pa tonight! Jesus, it was only yesterday I cut my daughter's cord. It's a boy, we already know that. However, I just couldn't convince them to name the baby br549 II. Go figure.
I'm sitting by the phone.
madeline, I afraid, yes, you have stepped into the Twilight Zone of evil scheming women who only live to get their hands on mens money. All women are evil and all men are perfect and never do anything wrong.
That's the way things are on Dr. Helen's blog comments.
madeline - I would apologize for some of the guys here but that's there job. Unfortunately, college degrees don't help much unless the degrees are in the right area.
I have two rather worthless degrees but went back and took a year or more worth of classes in computer programming. My income is still not great but it's more than double the best it had ever been before. You might try a different direction career wise.
madeline...
A friend is bi-lingual. She teaches english and spanish to new employees of a large multi-national corporation HQ'd in the US with factories and sales organizations all over the world. There are quite a few multi-nationals from all over the world with plants and offices in the US, also.
The US Gov't. (and the military as well) seem to always need bi-linguals. The Gov't may even teach you how to teach others. If your romance language is Spanish, there are many companies looking for you. Call in favors, call friends. Google for info. Network.
Hell, there are people who come in here that probably have ideas as well. If you have one, shout it out!
br549--Thanks for the advice. My language is French, so unless we are invaded by French Canadians I'm sort of out of luck. I did get into an MBA program today, though, so that should help in a couple of years. Hope you are enjoying your new grandson by now!
dadvocate--I appreciate your comments, too. You always have some good insights.
americanwoman--It's always a risk to comment on Dr. Helen's blog if you happen to disagree that all women are insane and all men are perfect, but it sure is fun to watch what happens when you do.
It sounds like your big complaint, Madeleine, is that you have to work now. Not just "play work" by reading a little bit of French, but real work. You no longer get the free ride of having a husband do the heavy lifting for you.
Either that, or it bugs you that the next sap who will pay for you to sit at home is not appearing on the horizon very quickly. Not like back when you were 20.
And I'd be willing to bet that money is still flowing from your husband to you in some shape or form.
Welcome to the work world. I've been in it for the past 25 years.
It's a boy! Yikes! I'm a grand pa!
9 pounds, nine ounces, 21&1/2" long. Full head of black, curly hair.
My daughter came through it A-OK also. Relief!
br549,
Congrats! That is such exciting news.
jg,
I did you read Madeleine's post. Gee, She couldn't work because of her husbands job. She didn't leave her husband, he left her. I understand some of the men's anger here, but a few of you guys are too blinded by it.
What do you want in a wife anyway?
Many women think that catering to a man's ego is demeaning, but find that a man catering to a woman's ego (with flowers, anniversaries, etc.) is a privilege and a duty.
We all want to feel important, both men and women. It's not demeaning to care for your partner's ego and self-esteem, to show them why you care for them in the first place.
As usual, remember the caveat: all things in moderation. Even good things can be taken too far.
But many women seem to think that any assistance to a man's ego is too far.
I think the answer to the question is no. Women should not get married, at least not to any of the 'men' on this comment page.
That's a great question, heather.
One that should be asked in both directions, long before "I do" is promised.
From my own point of view (the only place from which I can speak) I fell for who she was, how she was, and how well we fit. I wanted to be with her more than anyone else. The rest of the world just turned invisible. Out of everyone else I'd ever known, she was "the one".
Perhaps we were both on our "best behavior" for the first few years of our married lives, when things were easy.
Time and situations change. People change. In our relationship, latent illness came into play as it slowly rose to the surface. Some manage change very well, others are rigidly locked into certain ways. Communication is so key to the health and well being of a long term relationship. Wives need to stop bad mouthing their husbands to each other over coffee. Men need to do the same. At the end of the day, a man's allegiance is to his partner in life. So is the woman's.
I learned a whole lot more about marriage, about interpersonal relationships (between male and female), about honesty, integrity, fairness, hate, hurt, vengeance, law, lawyers, judges, in-laws, friends, and just how much one can love his children - from sitting in the back of divorce court, than I ever did from many years of being married.
For everyone - too soon old, too late smart.
Madeleine - I think that a lot of what is discussed on this blog is important, and much does concern some of the often overlooked problems and discrimination that men face in modern society, especially in terms of divorce and family assets. I genuinely feel that the man is made to pay for things that are not his fault, but there is an assumption that he is the deep pockets and the mom gets the kids, whether or not she is best suited to raise them.
That doesn't mean that there aren't cases where the woman gets screwed over, and it sounds like your situation is one of them. I know that being married to a military member really does require some unique sacrifices on the part of the non-serving spouse. There are lots of jobs where people are occasionally transferred, or might be offered a transfer to get a promotion - there are very few that have mandatory moves every few years (though I understand that the US Army is trying to reduces this by having more consecutive postings to differed slots on the same base). Also, I know that there are a lot of barriers to a mil spouse maintaining their career - there may be no positions in their field availible in the often small town abutting the base, and employers are reluctant to hire folks who can be jerked away at a moment's notice. I'm glad that I don't have to subject my wife to that, as I got all the running around the bushes painted green stuff out of my system before I settled down. Clearly your situation has a pretty high suck factor right now - but if you can gut it out and get the MBA you'll be in a much better position. Good luck.
Having watched several of these slow motion train wrecks work their way through the system, it appears to me that the courts are rigged in favor of the ruthless psychotic liars, regardless of gender. Some of the tricks pulled by both the clients and attorneys are amazing, and leave you wondering if divorce is simply a contest to see who will go the lowest. If they replaced the family courts with a limbo bar it would get rid of most of the abuse accusations, you could set alimony by bar height, and it would likely end up fairer.
It sounds like your big complaint, Madeleine, is that you have to work now. Not just "play work" by reading a little bit of French, but real work. You no longer get the free ride of having a husband do the heavy lifting for you.
You apparently have no idea what it takes to rear children. Staying home with kids is work. Arranging moves (packing, finding a new house, getting the kids in a new school, getting the new license plates) is work.
You also have no idea what it is like to be the wife of a military officer. There are many obligations for the wife if she wants her husband to advance. Wives do not join the Officers' Wives Club for fun. They don't do all the volunteer stuff for fun. They don't go to the obligatory parties at the O club for fun. They do it because if they don't, the husband's career will suffer.
Madeleine has not been goofing off and letting her husband (ex) do the "heavy lifting." She's been pulling her weight, as do many of the women of successful men, who would not be able to devote so much time to their careers if they had to do their own laundry and cooking.
Hey, thanks for the support from the last three commenters. It's nice that someone out there gets it. I think puff65537 is right, though. I'm sure plenty of people of both sexes are screwed in the divorce courts---mainly because the judges can't be bothered to pay attention to the details since they are overworked and sick of it all.
I truly believe that women should get married --
to each other.
That way, men can be happy again and live fulfilling lives that don't involve domestic servitude, wage-slavery, and hormonally-induced abuse.
Equal ("same-sex") marriage will be a liberating experience for men, who will be free at last.
Of course, the whole sperm donor issue needs to be worked out, legally, so men are off the hook for 18 years of child support.
My observation is that our Western culture promotes unhealthy and demeaning attitudes and activities when it comes to having a meaningful life-long relationship that gives both partners an experience of long-term emotional intimacy and satisfaction. For example, think about the derogatory names we use for sexual organs, and the hurtful cartoons, jokes, and comments frequently made about the opposite sex. Instead of looking at conflict as a way to develop valuable conflict-resolution skills and looking for ways to love and accept our differences, we avoid conflict because we see it as a threat to our happiness, or we attack to get the upper hand to ensure that we 'win' the argument. Money frequently is seen as THE resource in a marriage with a claim by the person who brings (more of) this resource. Emotionally, we assign the job to our partner to 'MAKE ME HAPPY' instead of bringing happiness into the relationship. Sex is a cheap commodity instead of an expression of love and connectedness. We don't value our commitments and because we know we can easily file for divorce, we choose this option instead of working on growth and development as a couple when things get difficult. With all of this, it makes sense to guard our assets to protect them from our loved one who we believe (deep inside) wants to take our assets away from us. But look at the deeper cost... we begin marriages planning for the end. No small wonder that we attract what we put our focus on. And... the person most concerned with preserving assets is most likely the one who has attempted to gain advantage over others just as he/she is fearful of people taking advantage of theirs. It is a mirror we look into and we are looking at our own beliefs about money when we look into this particular mirror. What about other resources... non-tangible ones?
汽車旅館，台北汽車旅館，台中汽車旅館，高雄汽車旅館
環保袋 ,shopping bags, アダルト
TOEIC TOEFL 托福 英檢 IELTS 雅思 兒童美語
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
Post a Comment
<< Home