no not stop whining. JUSTICE is what I need. And you need to get better strategies to get pussy, being a simpy bottomfeeder wont get u far. Just because you would throw people from your own gender under the bus to get some residual pussy doesnt mean everyone condones this shit. Hope that like from Poptart was worth it. Its people like you that wont stand up for your own gender is why men are suffering rn. its women and simps vs the rest of us. youre human garbage
this sounds more fair. i still think the marriage laws favor women more than men. like why does the woman get compensated when they didnt live together and had no children? also why do women/or the person who chooses to raise the kids at home have to be compensated after divorce? cant they just find another partner to take care of them? or accept that thats just part of the risk? or just not give up their career and hire a nanny with the extra income?
perhaps being a stay at home parent is outdated now.
Clearly, you shouldn't have to pay money to another woman if you weren't even married, and if you didn't agree to it during marriage.
Marriage should only be done for religious and/or possible law reasons, and not financial reasons. Don't become a housewife if you don't have a backup plan or a valid education, and if you don't have any kids, then there is no reason for being a housewife at all. Both parents should just work jobs if possible. If they have kids then enough money should be given to the kids to let them survive.
Please, for the love of God, evaluate your reasons for marrying carefully and plan for any possible emergencies and pitfalls and accept the risks before putting a ring on it.
Honestly, I am 17 and therefore I have no clue about finances and don't in general think about hypergamy. Still so innocent and pure as to believe in soulmates and things like true love before I morph into cynical adult, which I will fight against the onset of cynicism with my every breath until I die.
Personally I don't understand yet why someone would want to marry a super wealthy man or someone who is smarter than you so that they think you are stupid and dumb all the time.
All I really need is:
An apartment with heating so I don't die from the cold, a bed, toilet, sink, bathtub, stove, countertop, fridge, wifi, computer, and enough food and water and hygiene products so that I don't smell like death. Desk with a chair is nice, but optional. And obviously I need a plate, but I can just eat the food with my hands if necessary.
If I get bored of this, honestly I will just go to the library and read a new book, go outside, maybe just explore town.
All of this costs money of course, but I will just get a job.
My guess of why hypergamy is a thing, people are hardwired to like the feeling of security and comfort and will obviously forgo moral standards of love just to have these things. To not have to work for hours, to have nice things, to just relax, etc. Women are more likely to be hypergamous as originally men were the ones to go out and provide for most of history. A guy with a good job is a successful one and therefore better for breeding with than one who did nothing. Greed and excess have always been problems, but they present differently in the two sexes.
But, but, I still want to believe in true love and no one will stop me! I will not fall to such cynical thoughts!
The funny thing is, my ex boyfriend used to steal from me all the time. He would literally take any money I had in my purse. Eventually I stopped carrying cash altogether. Then he started sneaking off to the atm (with my car of course) when I was asleep and pulling money out of my bank account. After I discovered that and changed my pin, he started stealing my credit card and buying gift cards online, which he traded for drugs lol. It got so bad that I had to hide my keys and wallet before going to bed.
He had quit his job after I moved in with him and refused to get a new one. I was working full time and commuting to work 3 hours a day. The worst part was between me supporting the both of us financially and him stealing from me all of the time, I had very little money left over, and it took me two years to save enough to move out. I’ll never forget the feeling of signing the lease to my apartment. It was literally one of the happiest days of my life. For that reason I’ll never get into or stay in a relationship with a man who doesn’t have money or a job. I made that mistake once, and I’ll never do it again.
I also prefer to date men who are smarter than me. I think intelligence is attractive, and I don’t see anything wrong with that.
You can call it hypergamy if you want, I don’t care.
@Poptart, what type was your BF? I’m taking a survey.
Being a drug addicted loser and parasite isn't type related.
Because the judge had decided that economic dependency had been created. And it's not like she was leeching off him, she was making $5000 a month before they had gotten together. They also had children from previous marriages.
Justice Shore also found that economic dependency had been created almost from the beginning of the relationship. Within one month of meeting, the Applicant had quit her job to be with the Respondent who then started to cover the Applicant's expenses, support her children from a previous marriage and pay her a fixed monthly amount.https://www.purvisculbertlaw.ca/clim...ion-of-spouse/FACTS
Lisa Climans and Michael Latner were in a romantic relationship for almost 14 years, starting in 2001. When they met, Lisa was a retired model and marketing employee for a construction company earning about $5,000 per month. Michael Latner was a multi-millionaire businessman. Throughout their relationship, the pair maintained separate homes in Toronto and never moved in together. They kept their finances apart and never owned any property together. Neither self-reported on their income taxes that they were living in a common-law relationship. They had no children together. Both had children from previous marriages.
https://www.mondaq.com/canada/divorc...ca-554-canlii-
Uh bruh, the whole point of marriage is "till death do us part". We'd have to assume that a divorce is for legitimate reasons. What if there was abuse? What if the spouse was being cheated on? What if they couldn't or didn't want to find another partner? Is that even good for the children or the family? How would that promote monogamy and stable families?
Mgtow guys are so low value.
wisdom my father never gave me, but guys imo should know:
1. Romance is for teenagers. Enjoy it while it lasts. Have fun while young. You'll grow cyclical about it later anyway. Movies, shows and books lie about romance, a lot of wishful childish thinking.
2. Relationships are for companionship, so unless you are good friends with her and she is a fun partner you can talk with.. don't consider it serious, you'll get bored of just sex. It won't last.
3. Marriage is for having children. It won't make the 2 people in it happy and one should never marry someone for the reason of "being happy together". The only one who can make yourself happy is you alone.
4. Beware of high status spoiled & entitled "hot" women, they are high maintenance and only worth the effort if its about short term sex and adventure.
5. Don't chase women, ever. Chase your dreams instead. If one catches you and tries to change you, don't allow it. She likes you for who you are, not for who she wants to turn you into. She won't like it if she succeeds.
6. The gym is a temple of iron, worship there regularly well into old age.
/o\ also IF you ever marry be prepared to spend a lot of money and effort constantly remodeling the house and garden, women like that "nesting" shit and watch "fine living" shows... goddamn it. Ofc you won't have any space for your tools and equipment.. and you can't put up posters of naked women in your garage anymore .
Because it was the couple's decision for the woman to become a housewife and the man to provide for the family or whatever. That was fine as long as the couple was working as a "union". But now that they're divorced, he was essentially getting free labor, and that has to be compensated.
Anyway, don't be unreasonable. You're dealing with real human beings, not a sex bot that you can just discard when you're done with them. Fortunately the laws are more reasonable than that.
Why is it fine if it's a house-husband, but not a house-wife?
Lol if you don't like monogamy, then don't get married. Don't be unreasonable.
What im saying is if youre not in a relationship with someone, you dont get the benefit of being in a relationship with them. Imagine a world where youd have to pay every ex you ever dated till the day you died because they quit their job. As if that was your fault. As if they cant get another one. Why not put it in the law that i get to fuck my exes for the rest of my life also? Im paying for their living expenses anyway so i should get something in return right? Or are we gonna treat every woman like helpless little children and put 200% of the responsibility and consequences on the guy? And dont even get started on stay at home husbands cuz those are the exception not the rule.
This makes sense.
I could see an argument counter to this, based on women's shorter "peak value" years, or on lost opportunity costs that a woman has when she gives her reproductive years to a man, but these arguments made more sense when women weren't able to work as much as they are now.
My thoughts on this probably aren't very well-reasoned, though. An IEE female told me yesterday that I need to stop being a sexist pig.
I guess women will start to be treated equally to men in the courts when they are paid as much in the workplace.
My reasoning in this matter probably isn't very sophisticated, though. Yesterday a female IEE told me I need to stop being such a sexist pig.
Why should the man have to pay opportunity cost? He already paid for the womens living expenses/dates/whateverthefuckshewantedtohavehimpayfor in exchange to access to her vagina. Yes, that women peak earlier than men is a given since womens sexual market value predominantly comes from their looks and they fade earlier than your career does. Then again, looks come up earlier than your career does in about the same margin, so its equal. Also why would the man have to pay up for a biological given. Makes absolutely no sense.
And the pay gap exists cuz women arent as assertive as men in asking for raises. So thats not technically mens fault either. Bottom line: if ur not dating you dont get the benefits of dating them. Vagina or not.
^ I'm not disagreeing with you. I was actually struck by the idea of having to pay every woman I've slept with money for the rest of her life.
So if you hire a nanny, do you complain that they're treating you as a wallet?
Why would you think that it was a "benefit" to them? You were only being "nice" out of your own accord. Or supposedly you were, were you not?
The problem is that "being nice" can unwittingly turn out to be a negative in the end, such as creating dependencies. You're also not entitled to have anything in return, like sex, just because you were being "nice" to them. That's just "Nice Guy" logic. "Being nice" is also a subjective feeling. You might subjectively think that it was a benefit, but it may not actually turn out to be a benefit.
Are any losses justified by simply saying "I was just trying to be nice to them!"?
Only the judges will objectively decide what was "nice", what was a benefit and what was not. If not, then either complaints from either parties will only be biased and subjective judgments from their own perspectives.
Because the body is not a property.
Fewer people are getting married and are opting for life-long informal arrangements instead. Should governments start treating them like marriage?