Dissolving My Marriage

[Money & Muscle]

Just a quick question. Is there any particular subject that your wife argues with you about?

No. She will argue about anything, and she now recognizes that this is a problem I am willing to walk away over.

I have had the following argument at least a dozen times:
Me: It's 11 o'clock
Her: No, it's 10:58
Me: ...

I used to actually argue this garbage, now I just treat her like she's invisible.

I also noticed you said this has been going on for a year or so. Was there anything that may have happened of possibly friends she started spending time with that are a bad influence?

No, at least none that I've seen or am aware of.

When you argue, do you kowtow to her like a whimp or do you stand up for yourself?

I don't back down to anyone - ever. This has caused many a school fights.
I disengage, nuke, or ignore arguments now. Bforehand, my go-to was Nuke, and it clearly didn't go well because this b*tch genuinely loves to argue (she has literally admitted this).

 

[Money & Muscle]

The OP should have gotten a divorce. That was the rational choice. Now his fate is determined by chance.

I feel like a woman trying to explain my emotional decision, but I'll try doing it in the manliest way I can.

I want my daughter to know that I did everything in my power to keep her family together and provide the best life possible for her. If that still ends in divorce (and divorce r*pe), then so be it.
It wouldn't be the first thing I've done for my daughter that goes against my own self-interest.

 

[Money & Muscle]

Catching up, I'd effectively bailed on this thread because y'all are going on about whether or not men should cheat and it's like a fvckin echo chamber in here.

The whole "should high value men cheat" topic seems juicy enough to split off into it's own thread though.

 

[Divorced w 3]

A vow is not a "deal". It's a type of oath. If you join the military and take an oath to defend your country, you can't later decide that it was a bad deal and go AWOL. If you do that, you will get charged with desertion and court marshalled. If you take an oath in court to tell the truth and it is later discovered that you lied, you could be charged with perjury. But apparently you can take an oath to stay with your husband or wife “till death do us part” and bail whenever things are no longer to your liking. This is why I have never been a fan of marriage. It is such a hypocritical custom.

Marriage first and foremost is a codified personal legal and financial partnership so that dating back to the old days, spouses could be there for the other when one was out doing something for a period of time. It shouldn’t have to be something you can’t define as a partner like anything else. If someone is self sufficient they shouldn’t be entitled to years of your income anyway after the partnership ends. Most young people don’t understand that, but those who have been down that road will never forget.

 

[Millard Fillmore]

Wow, this whole thread just reinforces for me that government-enforced monogamy is not a realistic plan - for EITHER gender.

It started because a guy wanted to "financially" divorce his wife to avoid fiscal ruin.

We have posters saying all kinds of things - about urges, morals, and vows. I see a lot of relativism and rationalizing and posturing.

@AmsterdamAssassin seems to be one of the few with his head on his shoulders, who is true to himself.

I do think taking a vow means keeping it.

But I don't think you're a terrible person if you want out or fukked up. Character is about a lot more than blind loyalty.

I don't necessarily think marriage should have to involve vows. Since it's legally enforced there's really no point other than as a show for the audience (or sometimes, for the participants).

Any way you slice it, it comes back to whether monogamy really works. It only seems to have worked when the penalty was worse - and even then, penalties didn't apply to elites. Neither did vows.

So the whole thing is a bit of a crock, unless you're using it to your advantage (passport, taxes, etc.). If you're inviting the government into your bedroom, might as well make it work for you.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

He's only 8 years younger. Its not new info. I've discussed the various men who have approached me on any number of threads.

What I hear, over and over from high status men is that they find it refreshing to meet a beautiful woman who is genuine, classy, well spoken and kind.

Apparently the over riding majority of women these guys meet are shallow and self absorbed and vacuous. And yes I get the irony that some here hold that opinion of me but anyone who knows me outside this forum (including some forum members) know who I am and understand why/how that is appealing to a high value man.

I'm here as one voice, as an attractive sought after woman, which I have been all my life. The retired hockey player is 60, so it's not as though 35 year old pro athletes are seeking me out....I was married and off the market at that time in my life, lol.

It is my hope to help men understand that sought after women have standards, have enough options to choose a man who meets those standards, and to advise men about who these women are, what their landscape is like, and how to relate. Good women are rare because they are rarely available. Men scoop up good women and they are not unattached for long.

So I'm a voice from the ladies' locker room offering a perspective. That's all. I'm in favor of great men in society. We have too few great men, and there needs to be more.

I can't help but picture you as Donna in Suits in my mind

 

[RickTheToad]

My best girlfriend will marry a multimillionnaire in two weeks. They are totally in love with each other; both have assets and grown children. They just hammered out a pre-nup. He wanted her to retire & travel & golf with him. He knows that means she is giving up her financial engine to support herself, and he knows this means he needs to support her. She had no issue signing. She wants her assets she had prior to marriage preserved for her kids, so does he, and they've worked out the rest.

The dude is a fool for wanting her to have no income of her own. They can force additional alimony due to her well being and not to be a ward of the state. This has been done in NY, CA and NJ.

 

[BeExcellent]

The dude is a fool for wanting her to have no income of her own. They can force additional alimony due to her well being and not to be a ward of the state. This has been done in NY, CA and NJ.

He can afford it. He'd rather have her available to travel and attend social things with him. He's a CFO so that means business dinners and events with CEOs, private equity people and so forth and that typically means the spouse joins.

 

[BackInTheGame78]

He can afford it. He'd rather have her available to travel and attend social things with him. He's a CFO so that means business dinners and events with CEOs, private equity people and so forth and that typically means the spouse joins.

Maybe his opinion will change in 5 years. Sometimes things that seem like great decisions when you make them turn out to be not so great.

Leading with wealth isn't the way I'd go if I was in his spot...if that is all he has to offer in his mind, what happens if it dries up?

Far richer people than him have gone from millions to broke within a few years.

 

[All_Kindz_Of_Gainz]

My best girlfriend will marry a multimillionnaire in two weeks

Damn you have a friends that will marry a multimillionaire? How old are they?

 

[Money & Muscle]

Update

It's been a little over a week with no arguments. Came close once, but we were both able to move on from it quickly.

I've basically been going through a midlife crisis and identity crisis at the same time, floundering pretty hard in it all.

Identity
I have a direction in who I want to be, and I understand why I've been struggling so much with it. The whole thing sounds dumb writing it out, but I was ego invested in the actualized version of myself that I wanted to be - without actually being that person yet.

What to do?
Mindfully fake the funk until my inner self and outer self align.

Midlife
I'm still not sure just yet. I'm not getting what I want out of life, and that's fine - I'm willing to work for it. My problem is that I'm not getting what I want out of my wife, and that is really not within my control. That being said, I need to be the leader I want to be (even if faking it), and give her the opportunity to fill the cup I want her to.

After some discussion, I've decided to get my wife a daytime training "collar". I had an actual D/s daytime collar I would like to get, but that one has to be earned. The training collar is symbolic of the relationship direction, ownership, and deference. The necklace is here
It's intended to be self-tightening to a small degree, so that it sits as a constant reminder of her willful commitment to me and to the changes she needs to make within herself.


I changed my signature as a reminder to act as I would want to act, even if I don't feel or believe it.

 

[Pandora]

But that's dumb, men should be able to control their urges, even if he's a quality guy, why would he risk losing a good woman over new puzzy?

Same as eating, biologically you need to eat, but you control yourself and not over eat cause you can become a fat fvck. Women act on their emotions, men are logical that's the difference.

Cheating has nothing to do with the original woman. Men are not naturally monogamous.

" All men cheat, but if he loves you then you will never find out". Amber Slut Rose

Very few men go 40 yrs in a marriage without cheating at all.

 

[Pandora]

John F Kennedy, Nelson Mandala, Franklin Roosevelt, etc... Society call these men "great". Guess what? These men have cheated on their wives.... and the woman that they cheated with. They weren't coerced or forced. It was consensual. Their lovers were active and willing participants.

In the real word, not some fairytale world, a lot of great men cheat. Ignore biology, and there will be grave consequences to women in general. Imagine a world where men will consider divorcing... "pre-divorcing" his wife causing emotional distress to his kids and his wife because he can imagine if things don't work out he will be massively, and financially hurt. This is a society that we live in now.


Whatever.. Less men are willing to commit. Perhaps that is for the better. Serial monogamy I guess is par for the course. Men who weren't married were looked down on in JFK's time... Now, it doesn't matter. So be it. There will always be great men.. and they will always have romantic partners. Will it be in the context of a husband cheating on his wife??? or just a great leader having serial relationships? I think the latter. Fun times. Marriage is slowly going away and people like BeExcellent are killing it. She just doesn't know she is

I agree. This is obsession with male sexual infidelity is a symptom of a gynocentric society. In patriarchal society women have their priorities in order.

In sane societies women know that male sexuality has very little value. Its a man's providership and protection that is valuable. It is only cheating when a man stops providing for and caring for the family.

What your husband does with his peniz when he is at a strip club in Thailand on vacation has very little impact on his wifes day to day life.

 

[Pandora]

My African grandma was watching Divorce Court with my mom. She turned around and asked my mom " what is this cheating thing?". My mom explained. Grandma was flabergasted and annoyed.

She said " this man took in your kids, pays the bills, does not beat you and you are worried about cheating?". My mom busted out laughing.

Mind you my grandma was married for about 50 yrs to one man. Many kids. Succesful marriage. The West is done.

 

[Manure Spherian]

Men are not naturally monogamous.

Neither are women.

I agree. This is obsession with male sexual infidelity is a symptom of a gynocentric society.

That would depend on the society and at what point in history. Germanic societies, pre-Christianity, were patriarchal and even the top brass had only one woman per man. They also had serious punishment for female adultery, public beatings, and in some cases worse, and allowed revenge for homewreckers. Not all patriarchies have been the same. Anyway, in any patriarchy, “game” would not exist and has not existed, as the young females would be and were under the thumb of fathers and other male family members.

You have used the word sane. So in androcentric society, contrary to your stated gynocentric example, men would have authority over their daughter and wives. You know that renders game obsolete right?

 

[Manure Spherian]

For those who think women are naturally monogamous, have a listen.

For the horrors of the family court, have a listen.

https://youtu.be/T0ROw7LGj0Y?si=DKK9kmyklNQ0FlfK

 

[Manure Spherian]

A quote from the aforementioned essay. (Of course not all women are unfaithful. I think most are not.)

“Let us consider the author’s male interviewees and their reactions to these patterns of female behavior. Langley lists three obstacles to male recognition of the reality of female infidelity: (1) a kind of high- minded attitude that “my wife simply isn’t ‘that kind’ of woman,” which usually amounts to wishful thinking; (2) an invalid inference from the wife’s lack of interest in sexual relations with them to a lack of sexual interests generally; and (3) a failure to discuss and compare notes on marital problems with other men, as women routinely do with one another.
The author emphasizes the gullibility of the men she interviewed. One man’s wife had walked out on him and rented an apartment; three years later, he still had no suspicions that she might be with another man. Often the wives who took advantage of their husbands’ credulousness were highly jealous themselves: “Some of the husbands learned to look down in restaurants and other public places, because they feared their wife would accuse them of looking at another woman. Some claimed that their wife didn’t want them to watch certain television programs.” Psychologists call this projection: the automatic attribution of one’s own thoughts and motivations to others. Thus, dishonorable women tend to be suspicious; faithful husbands are trusting.”

 

[Pandora]

Neither are women.
That would depend on the society and at what point in history. Germanic societies, pre-Christianity, were patriarchal and even the top brass had only one woman per man. They also had serious punishment for female adultery, public beatings, and in some cases worse, and allowed revenge for homewreckers. Not all patriarchies have been the same. Anyway, in any patriarchy, “game” would not exist and has not existed, as the young females would be and were under the thumb of fathers and other male family members.

You have used the word sane. So in androcentric society, contrary to your stated gynocentric example, men would have authority over their daughter and wives. You know that renders game obsolete right?

Most societies allow men to have a mistress. I can not verify your claim about Germanic societies. I can verify that China has a mistress day which is March 3rd. I can also verify that the most of the world does not care if a man has a mistress. We have the worst family values of any nation yet we care the most about male infidelity. Do you see the connection here?

I remember going to France as a boy during the Monica Lewinksy trial. My dad was talking to a French man and the French man was laughing at how big a deal Americans were making about about Bill Clinton getting a bj. The French prime minister had a well know mistress who showed up at his funeral. By your logic the French society should be in shambles because they are ok with men cheating. In reality it is American society that is in shambles. Our women beat on us and dont know what gender they are.

Again this control over male sexuality is a consequence of gynocentric thinking.

 

[AmsterdamAssassin]

Most societies allow men to have a mistress. I can not verify your claim about Germanic societies. I can verify that China has a mistress day which is March 3rd. I can also verify that the most of the world does not care if a man has a mistress. We have the worst family values of any nation yet we care the most about male infidelity. Do you see the connection here?

I remember going to France as a boy during the Monica Lewinksy trial. My dad was talking to a French man and the French man was laughing at how big a deal Americans were making about about Bill Clinton getting a bj. The French prime minister had a well know mistress who showed up at his funeral. By your logic the French society should be in shambles because they are ok with men cheating. In reality it is American society that is in shambles. Our women beat on us and dont know what gender they are.

Again this control over male sexuality is a consequence of gynocentric thinking.

Nederlanders hebben minnaressen.

 

[Pandora]

Nederlanders hebben minnaressen.

I have heard that this is true.