What's new

Is Marriage Worth It For Women?The benefits go mostly to men.

I kind of partially agree with you both. But then, as you are saying, a lot depends upon her choices.

SMC says no alimony if quitting job was her choice. hinduguy says no child support if bringing offspring to the World was her choice. How do you exactly capture these choices ? In the end, these are all joint decisions. You start digging who chose what to do and that's an endless cycle.
So, my opinion is to keep it simple. Whoever needs it, gets it, a bare minimum amount to sustain life, with certain clauses that it does not look like a pension. Now that I am thinking about it, there is no proper way to resolve this!

The woman may choose to live off alimony and not get a job. Or, may be she actually needs that, because she has sacrificed her career. It goes both ways. One way or other, it's clumsy.

Let's get some other opinions.
@Rain Man @Joe Shearer
First of all alimony cant be automatic. If you were jobless before marriage and never bothered to get a job, well you cant use marriage to enrich you. But yes, if one partner did lose job/opportunity then that should be decided case by case basis.but it should be time bound. How much time is open to debate: how much time will you give to an able bodied man/woman to get a job if he/she was on govt tax support? 1 yr? 2 yr? 5 year?
Not 10 yrs surely because by that time he/she is a parasite.

About child support, it can be easily solved by asking both to sign a document any time during pregnancy or on birth certificate. Signing on any of these docs(which clearly mentions it amounts to consent of signatory) can be made routine thing, just like birth certificate.
 
.
I kind of partially agree with you both. But then, as you are saying, a lot depends upon her choices.

SMC says no alimony if quitting job was her choice. hinduguy says no child support if bringing offspring to the World was her choice. How do you exactly capture these choices ? In the end, these are all joint decisions. You start digging who chose what to do and that's an endless cycle.
So, my opinion is to keep it simple. Whoever needs it, gets it, a bare minimum amount to sustain life, with certain clauses that it does not look like a pension. Now that I am thinking about it, there is no proper way to resolve this!

The woman may choose to live off alimony and not get a job. Or, may be she actually needs that, because she has sacrificed her career. It goes both ways. One way or other, it's clumsy.

Let's get some other opinions.
@Rain Man @Joe Shearer

My main concern with alimony and child support is that these practices are a relic from the days where women didn't work and only stayed at home, they so-called "dark ages of female oppression". Ironically, feminists have kept the things from those days that favoured women (alimony, child support) even though they are discriminatory against men. That's the awesome thing about feminism. They want equality only when it benefits women. Let that sink in. They are not really supportive of equality if they only want it selectively when it benefits them.

IMO, there should be no alimony given when there is no child. When there is a child, alimony should not be based on the man's salary. Currently, the higher the man's salary, the higher the alimony. The argument proponents of alimony make is that this is necessary to maintain the lifestyle that the woman was living during marriage. But my counter argument is that by entering the marriage, the woman was given a privilege -- not a right -- to a certain kind of lifestyle, and by divorcing that privilege goes away. Therefore, the alimony should be something bare minimum, such as $500 a month. This entices them to at least try and find a job instead of living indefinitely off of the husband's salary.

The same is the problem with child support. It is based on your salary, and it should not be. The childs needs do not change with higher salary. They eat the same food, wear the same clothes, etc.

There's no silver bullet solution like you mention. Someone can find holes in every solution. But one thing is for sure -- alimony and child support should absolutely be not based on a man's salary.
 
Last edited:
.
feminist%204.png
 
.
My main concern with alimony and child support is that these practices are a relic from the days where women didn't work and only stayed at home, they so-called "dark ages of female oppression". Ironically, feminists have kept the things from those days that favoured women (alimony, child support) even though they are discriminatory against men. That's the awesome thing about feminism. They want equality only when it benefits women. Let that sink in. They are not really supportive of equality if they only want it selectively when it benefits them.

IMO, there should be no alimony given when there is no child. When there is a child, alimony should not be based on the man's salary. Currently, the higher the man's salary, the higher the alimony. The argument proponents of alimony make is that this is necessary to maintain the lifestyle that the woman was living during marriage. But my counter argument is that by entering the marriage, the woman was given a privilege -- not a right -- to a certain kind of lifestyle, and by divorcing that privilege goes away. Therefore, the alimony should be something bare minimum, such as $500 a month. This entices them to at least try and find a job instead of living indefinitely off of the husband's salary.

The same is the problem with child support. It is based on yourself, and it should not be. The childs needs do not change with higher salary. They eat the same food, wear the same clothes, etc.

There's no silver bullet solution like you mention. Someone can find holes in every solution. But one thing is for sure -- alimony and child support should absolutely be not based on a man's salary.

I couldn't agree more. Thanks.
 
.
Resource:Is Marriage Worth It For Women? | Psychology Today
:confused:

A casual look at how marriage is represented in popular culture may lead one to conclude that ending up at the altar is the ultimate female desire. Wedding magazines are aimed almost exclusively at brides, not grooms. Reality TV shows highlight Bridezillas, not Groomzillas, andThe Bachelor, in which multiple women vie for a ring, is a ratings juggernaut. The central attraction in the pageant of the average wedding is reserved for the bride’s dress, while the groom’s attire receives little billing. Pop culture queen Beyoncé herself has famously admonished men that if they like it, then they should put a ring on it.

Men, on the other hand, are often depicted as commitment phobic, having to be conned or whipped into marriage, or dragged to the altar against their deeply promiscuous nature, which abhors long-term monogamy. The notion of a "midlife crisis," during which men are bound to jettison their old wives for a new, younger trophy model is also a familiar cultural trope.

Marriage, we have been led to believe, is a natural habitat for women, but a stifling cage for men. Thus goes the popular fantasy. However, in the real world of data, things shake out quite a bit differently.


First, confounding the view of marriage as the female heaven and haven is the fact that marriage actually appears to benefit men more than it does women(link is external). Research has shown that the "marriage benefits"—the increases in health(link is external), wealth(link is external), and happiness(link is external) that are often associated with the status—go disproportionately to men. Married men are better off than single men. Married women, on the other hand, are not better off than unmarried women.

Second, in contrast to the myth that marriage is a woman’s ultimate and sacred fulfillment is the reality that roughly two-thirds of divorces are initiated by women(link is external). This is true not only for the young and hip: A recent AARP survey(link is external) of 1147 men and women ages 40-79 who experienced a divorce in their 40s, 50s, or 60s, found that 66% of women said they initiated the split.

New research suggests that there is something unique to marriage—other than the trials of getting along day-to-day with another person—that may make it less than hospitable to women.

A recent paper(link is external) by Stanford sociologist Michael J. Rosenfeld analyzed longitudinal data from the How Couples Meet and Stay Together survey—a survey of a nationally representative sample of 2,262 adults in heterosexual relations followed from 2009 to early 2015.

The results revealed an intriguing pattern: As expected, women initiated roughly two thirds (69%) of the breakups in heterosexual marriages. However, the gendered trend in relationship breakups held only for marriages and not for other non-marital unions. Moreover, women in marriages, but not in other relationships, reported lower levels of satisfaction.

According to Rosenfeld, these data suggest that the tendency for women to initiate breakups is not an inherent feature of male-female relationships. Rather, it is a feature of male-femalemarriage. This finding appears to provide support for the notion that women experience the institution of marriage as oppressive, in large part because it emerged from and still carries the imprint of a system of female subjugation.

Rosenfeld notes that marriage law was originally based on the common law assumption that the wife was the husband’s property. The last vestiges of this common law tradition legally subordinating wives to their husbands, such as allowing spousal rape, were eliminated in the United States only in the late 1970s. Most women in the U.S. still take the surnames of their husband when they marry, a practice required by law in many states until the 1970s.

Just as we cannot maintain grand ancient structures without contending with the limitations of ancient building materials, so it is difficult to sustain old traditions without keeping the old worldviews and habits from which they had emerged. The ghosts of female subjugation haunt the halls of contemporary marriage, to the detriment of married women.

This is an intriguing idea, but doubts remain.

First, causality is difficult to establish in the absence of true controlled experimentation. In other words, since we cannot assign people randomly to married and unmarried groups at the outset, any difference between the groups in outcome may be the result of selection, rather than treatment, effects. For example: If married women are more likely to be dissatisfied, it may be because the marriage made them so (treatment effect) or because dissatisfaction-prone women are more likely to choose marriage (selection effect).

People’s expectations—a variable not measured in Rosenfeld’s data—may also play a role in relationship satisfaction. If the culture sets women’s expectations for marriage high and men’s low, then the reality of marriage, in which men benefit more, may elicit increased satisfaction in men—“This is much better than I expected"—and decreased satisfaction in women.

Moreover, while Rosenfeld’s work may shed light on the "push" side of the decision to leave, the equation he outlines is probably incomplete as it neglects the "pull" side. In general, life decisions are multiply determined. Internal states such as marital satisfaction are likely to be weighed in the decision-making process against external variables such as societal attitudes about divorce, or the ability to maintain contact with children and financial security after divorce. Indeed, existing data attests to the importance of such external pull factors in shaping decisions of both men and women.

For example, the AARP survey pointed to the fact that men more often decided to stay in a bad marriage out of fear of losing touch with their children. These are not unjustified fears, asfathers often experience decreased levels of contact(link is external) with their children post-divorce.

Conversely, an unsatisfied woman’s decision to leave may depend in part on her employment status. For example, Ohio State University's Liana C. Sayer(link is external) and her colleagues have provided evidence to suggest that unsatisfied women are much more likely to leave if they are employed.

At the end of the day, the accumulating data paint a picture of marriage as complex commerce in which women may often play a paradoxical role: They work harder for a smaller share of the benefits, which may explain why, while they may often be more eager to get into a marriage, they are often also more eager to get out.

Marriage only suits women, because after Marriage their future secured financially, emotionally and most importantly in society as well.
Because we all knew that man treat women as a week entity, and when a woman get married, and got the status of married woman, society started respecting her, because they all knew that their is someone now who will protect the woman from all wrongs of society,otherwise we all knew that in developed countries as well, how they treat the single women, and the conditions of women very worst in developing countries.
But its not that mean, that women not need education, its the basic right of every men and women to get proper education, and play their role in society.
 
.
in every marriage wife makes the call, men are led to believe they are calling the shots
im has a feeling i know who wears the pants in your household and you've finally figured it out too.:lol:

my gf is alright i guess when it comes to asking her for things or wanting me todo somthing, but when it comes to me asking for thing she says "yeah ok gimme a second" 1 hour later shes still on the ps4! but shes a keeper.
 
. .
I love marriages. I myself would like to get married someday :smitten:The whole concept of marriage is fascinating.
In India, you just don't marry the guy but his family. After marriage, I would prefer living in a joint family with my husband's family, if possible his brothers, sisters, etc. I am so thrilled to think of my days as newly wed bride when all eyes would be upon me, I would be lavishly dressed like a princess everyday, would be treated with so much love and respect from my husband and his family, would be introduced to new relatives <3....I can go on and on...
^This poster is definitely a guy :D
 
.
[QUOTE="Blue Marlin, post: 7961989, member: 170203"]im has a feeling i know who wears the pants in your household and you've finally figured it out too.:lol:

my gf is alright i guess when it comes to asking her for things or wanting me todo somthing, but when it comes to me asking for thing she says "yeah ok gimme a second" 1 hour later shes still on the ps4! but shes a keeper.[/QUOTE]

remember those who say things are the biggest victim of it :)
and like you said you wont even know it
 
.
remember those who say things are the biggest victim of it :)
and like you said you wont even know it
thats just useless wisdom talk i pay no attention to it. if you think about it then it happens
 
.
Is Marriage Worth It For Women?

My Big Fat Greek Wedding. Lainie Kazan says to her daughter, “The man may be the head of the family but the woman is the neck and the neck can turn the head any way she wants.”
 
.
Is Marriage Worth It For Women?

My Big Fat Greek Wedding. Lainie Kazan says to her daughter, “The man may be the head of the family but the woman is the neck and the neck can turn the head any way she wants.”
Great movie.

I will post a reply as soon as my wife gets home and tells me what i think ;)
 
. .

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom