Who here wants to get married and why?

[FwoGiZ]

I simply will NEVER get married... important to note I don't want kids and will never have kids.
And actually, I'll very soon have to kick my current gf out because of provincial laws here. After 3 years of her living at my place, the government will just doorkick into my bedroom with a forced common law contract which will enable her to get alimony from me and unfortunately, she doesn't work enough for me to feel safe about this whole BS. Not sure I want to spend a grand on prenup when I can just get a new younger chick... she's soon 25 so I am ready for my next 20yo
It's a shame cause she's pretty chill... most of the time ;P And it feels like I won't be able to find an as nice easy going loving gf ...... bahaha but we all know that that feeling is a lie ;D

I don't see a single pros of getting married... not even having a family. A lot of successful families are made out of wedlock where I am from. But I am a slayer, not a breeder.

 

[Tenacity]

This is one-dimensional thinking. You are trying to ascribe logic into a specific cage when there are myriad exceptions.

I met plenty of women 25-30yo that came from these cultures who either started dating very late in their life, virgins who were waiting to get married, had bad experiences, are extremely picky, etc.

I encourage you to expand your thinking a bit, be fluid, and stop placing people into boxes as there are many exceptions to any rule you invest into.

We are discussing benefits of a strong LTR from a subset of women born and bred for strong familial bonds, which is much broader than sex and companionship.

No, I'm taking your stance, words, and position and throwing it right back to you. The woman you described, if she was of "traditional values", then tradition has it that she would already be married long before she turned 25. That's not my opinion, that's just what women of that "tradition" would do back in the day.

There's no way this woman is 29, 35, 40, or 45 on OKCupid talking about how quality she is and how she's looking for "her King". You keep referencing this phrase of "born and bred for strong familial bonds" yet the chick is over 25 or pushing 35 plus and has not yet established any strong familial bonds with any guy?

Why?

Remember, you have been propping this chick up to be very SPECIAL, are you seriously telling me that this chick has NOT met at least 10 - 20 guys that would be more than capable of fulfilling a "quality" husband role? Why didn't she establish the "bond" with them if her whole freaking "being" is centered on it? Oh, I forgot....it's because from 18 - 30 she's been partying, drinking, svcking, and fvcking and now that she's pushing 30, it's NOW that she is finally looking to "settle down".

How about, a woman who bears, raises your lineage while you are out there conquering the world?

If you operate in this structure while married, you will be subject to ALIMONY.

How about a woman who's got your back, come hell or high water? How about a woman who adores you and will do everything to please you? Among dozens of other LTR benefits.

This is completely Walt Disney and any guy getting married with THESE expectations will certainly be disappointed over 80% of the time.

Of course, you will object this is blue-pill, Disney crap, but how do you rationally explain that 90% of the people I know from these select communities where I had grown up have these kind of marriages with these kinds of women, with, like I mentioned earlier in this thread, a nominal 10% or less divorce rate. I personally know and communicate with dozens of couples in our age bracket like this. This is not unicorn material if you are shopping in the correct supermarket.

- Number one, you have no clue what someone's marriage is like behind closed doors, people will put on a show.

- Number two, you have referenced before about being a part of these "select clubs/networks" where super, duper, high quality women walk around. You have been referencing this for the 3 plus years I've been on Sosuave and YET, after 3 plus years, you are STILL not "married" to one of these women from these high quality, super/duper "select clubs/networks".Why?

Marriage is a financial contract. Prenup is a financial contract. Corporate entities are implicit financial contracts of protection. You mitigate a financial contract against you with financial contracts for you--and reap the benefits of a potential soldier from good stock born and bred to enhance your life and raise your lineage. What does perpetual plate spinning leave you with: a soar ****, lots of Viagra to keep up (as you get older), rinse & repeat every few months, time, energy, money, cynicism incited by a crap market, dealing with princesses, dealing with occasional lunatics, headaches--and in your case rants, explosions, and hundreds of hours of complaining about the state of the market?

Sounds like you are trying to convince yourself of why it's a good idea. No BENEFIT you have listed is exclusive to a Marriage Contract, I or any guy can get the same thing outside of the contract. Also my "rants" about the "market" are not resolved by signing a Marriage Contract, that would be like telling a guy ranting about the lack of quality jobs, that he can solve his problems by signing up for $250,000 in student loan debt for a worthless degree. He will make his problems WORSE not better, as the job market is what it is and expectations need to be modified to deal with this NEW MARKET. Plus signing a contract for $250,000 in debt for a bad degree is a BAD business contract (like the Marriage contract is).

But tell you what Guru, how about this? How about you run back out to your select/exclusive "super, duper" high quality woman network and community, find one of these special Unicorns you keep referencing, SLAP a wedding ring on it, and report back to us how it's going now and over time? I mean seeing as though your entire campaign now is to display marriage in this new and wonderful light, the best way to even attempt to accomplish this would be to get married to one of these women you keep referencing and report back to us how it's going.

 

[Urbanyst]

No, I'm taking your stance, words, and position and throwing it right back to you. The woman you described, if she was of "traditional values", then tradition has it that she would already be married long before she turned 25. That's not my opinion, that's just what women of that "tradition" would do back in the day.

There's no way this woman is 29, 35, 40, or 45 on OKCupid talking about how quality she is and how she's looking for "her King". You keep referencing this phrase of "born and bred for strong familial bonds" yet the chick is over 25 or pushing 35 plus and has not yet established any strong familial bonds with any guy?

Why?

Remember, you have been propping this chick up to be very SPECIAL, are you seriously telling me that this chick has NOT met at least 10 - 20 guys that would be more than capable of fulfilling a "quality" husband role? Why didn't she establish the "bond" with them if her whole freaking "being" is centered on it? Oh, I forgot....it's because from 18 - 30 she's been partying, drinking, svcking, and fvcking and now that she's pushing 30, it's NOW that she is finally looking to "settle down".


If you operate in this structure while married, you will be subject to ALIMONY.


This is completely Walt Disney and any guy getting married with THESE expectations will certainly be disappointed over 80% of the time.

- Number one, you have no clue what someone's marriage is like behind closed doors, people will put on a show.

- Number two, you have referenced before about being a part of these "select clubs/networks" where super, duper, high quality women walk around. You have been referencing this for the 3 plus years I've been on Sosuave and YET, after 3 plus years, you are STILL not "married" to one of these women from these high quality, super/duper "select clubs/networks".Why?

Sounds like you are trying to convince yourself of why it's a good idea. No BENEFIT you have listed is exclusive to a Marriage Contract, I or any guy can get the same thing outside of the contract. Also my "rants" about the "market" are not resolved by signing a Marriage Contract, that would be like telling a guy ranting about the lack of quality jobs, that he can solve his problems by signing up for $250,000 in student loan debt for a worthless degree. He will make his problems WORSE not better, as the job market is what it is and expectations need to be modified to deal with this NEW MARKET. Plus signing a contract for $250,000 in debt for a bad degree is a BAD business contract (like the Marriage contract is).

But tell you what Guru, how about this? How about you run back out to your select/exclusive "super, duper" high quality woman network and community, find one of these special Unicorns you keep referencing, SLAP a wedding ring on it, and report back to us how it's going now and over time? I mean seeing as though your entire campaign now is to display marriage in this new and wonderful light, the best way to even attempt to accomplish this would be to get married to one of these women you keep referencing and report back to us how it's going.

The fact of the matter is marriage only holds up to logic in today's climate under one of three conditions:

1. The man is powerful as hell
2. The man is broke as sh*t
3. The man is old as f*ck

Someone like a drug lord, a Mafia guy, a Donald Trump, an Obama or a Pulin can get married because they are either too powerful or too dangerous for a woman to ever successfully f*ck them over or even THINK about trying.

A broke man driving the forklift at Home Depot can get married because he has nothing financially to lose and will probably make LESS than his wife statistically lol.

An old man can get married because he needs someone to call 911 when he falls in the kitchen and having a life partner is more important for him than having a SEX partner at that point.

For all other types of men, getting married is colossally IDIOTIC and does not hold up to logical scrutiny. Everyone in this thread trying to "sell" marriage with these half-baked sesame street BLUE PILL Hollywood arguments are just making themselves look dumber with every post. These people are actually convincing me more NOT to get married lol.

Entertaining to read though.

 

[Urbanyst]

Familial/Religious Indoctrination can be influenced, but not undone. The way a girl is conditioned at 25 yos is 90% likely to how she will remain; hence the extremely low divorce rates in these cultures, as opposed to the consensus.

However, once you remove that woman from her culture and bring her to the U.S. that argument degrades fast.

People are not dogs where what they learn at a young age cannot be undone. Once you remove the cultural pressure of actually LIVING in that culture.. its very easy (and likely) that the woman's values will change more to match where she lives UNLESS she is old as sh*t already (over 30) in which case she fails the "high quality" test based on that alone lol.

We already established true love rarely exists before marriage, as love is tending to her above you which belies the human inclination.

A marriage contract empowers her if you have greater resources.
A prenup empowers you.
Corporate structures empower you.
Your ability to work, expand, network, build your empire and lineage while she stays at home to tend to your lineage, empowers you.
A lasting marriage with high success rate (within these cultures) empowers you.

Walk away from such a subset of women empowers her, not you.

Prenup barely means sh*t these days. Women find ways around it all the time.

Everything else you listed is possible WITHOUT a marriage CONTRACT lol.

 

[ChristopherColumbus]

Egos running riot, and a lot of paranoia on this thread. But then, they are the same thing.

 

[Urbanyst]

Egos running riot, and a lot of paranoia on this thread. But then, they are the same thing.

Do you wear a SEAT BELT when you drive your car?

If so.. I might call you "paranoid" lol.

There is being SMART and there is being paranoid. Learn the difference.

 

[guru1000]

Tenacity, getting emotional? This is good. When your emotional side flares, it means I'm getting you. But why is Guru getting to Tenacity? Because deep down inside ... after all these years ...Tenacity has been yearning for such a relationship but with all of Tenacity's tenaciousness, Tenacity still could not find such a woman. So thus, nothing can be wrong with Tenacity, but rather the WHOLE market is flawed with shark-infested waters, right?

Let's continue ...

No, I'm taking your stance, words, and position and throwing it right back to you. The woman you described, if she was of "traditional values", then tradition has it that she would already be married long before she turned 25. That's not my opinion, that's just what women of that "tradition" would do back in the day.

There's no way this woman is 29, 35, 40, or 45 on OKCupid talking about how quality she is and how she's looking for "her King". You keep referencing this phrase of "born and bred for strong familial bonds" yet the chick is over 25 or pushing 35 plus and has not yet established any strong familial bonds with any guy?

Remember, you have been propping this chick up to be very SPECIAL, are you seriously telling me that this chick has NOT met at least 10 - 20 guys that would be more than capable of fulfilling a "quality" husband role? Why didn't she establish the "bond" with them if her whole freaking "being" is centered on it? Oh, I forgot....it's because from 18 - 30 she's been partying, drinking, svcking, and fvcking and now that she's pushing 30, it's NOW that she is finally looking to "settle down".

Why?

Already addressed. See Post 128.

If you operate in this structure while married, you will be subject to ALIMONY.

Very good. This is called a downside.

When making a logical decision, one weighs the upsides and the downsides to determine the strength of a decision. Spousal support can be mitigated with a solid prenup. Remember, spousal support is a function of how long you've been married. If you married a girl for 4-5 years, and divorced, your spousal support would be minimal and for one year (assuming she did not work at all). But if she were a stay-at-home mom raising your lineage for 20 years while you built an empire (with piece of mind), is she not entitled to live reasonably thereafter? These are matters you want to specifically address in your prenup and be "fair" (as defined jurisdictionally) as not to have the prenup set aside for unconscionability.

What is a solid familial infrastructure in your life worth to you? Let's examine this further.

In the last 14 years, the total divorce rate in the U.S. is at 27%. Comparably, the divorce rate for celebrities on the last 14 years is at 50%.

http://marriagefoundation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/pdf-03.pdf

Let's go on, I'm going to write out the remaining response in a very rudimentary fashion so that you and any others who are also getting emotional with this "talk" can understand with little bias.

There are cultures, subsets, types of people where divorce rates are higher than the norm, and others where the divorce rates are lower than the norm. So if you were to get married, does it make more sense to get married as a celebrity or non-celebrity? Does it make sense to get married to the norm divorce rate of 27% (over 14 years) or to a subset of women where the divorce rate is less than 10% for life?

This is completely Walt Disney and any guy getting married with THESE expectations will certainly be disappointed over 80% of the time.

This is what happens when you attempt to reason with emotion, you inflate numbers, make no sense, and lose some of your audience.

80% is not factual. This is Tenacity's extreme emotion taking over. Intelligent people reason with facts, not emotion.

- Number one, you have no clue what someone's marriage is like behind closed doors, people will put on a show.

- Number two, you have referenced before about being a part of these "select clubs/networks" where super, duper, high quality women walk around. You have been referencing this for the 3 plus years I've been on Sosuave and YET, after 3 plus years, you are STILL not "married" to one of these women from these high quality, super/duper "select clubs/networks".Why?

This notion is grounded in a false (emotional) assumption that I wanted to be married in the last three years. This week was my first stance supporting certain types of marriage with certain people. Actually, this site could operate as a death chamber for marriage altogether for everybody eradicating the chance for all to get married under any circumstance. This changes now.

Sounds like you are trying to convince yourself of why it's a good idea. No BENEFIT you have listed is exclusive to a Marriage Contract, I or any guy can get the same thing outside of the contract. Also my "rants" about the "market" are not resolved by signing a Marriage Contract

Already addressed sufficiently in Post 128. You should address my response, not contend the same thing. These are how discussions work.

But tell you what Guru, how about this? How about you run back out to your select/exclusive "super, duper" high quality woman network and community, find one of these special Unicorns you keep referencing, SLAP a wedding ring on it, and report back to us how it's going now and over time? I mean seeing as though your entire campaign now is to display marriage in this new and wonderful light, the best way to even attempt to accomplish this would be to get married to one of these women you keep referencing and report back to us how it's going

More emotion, and thus illogical words.

Guru does not need to get married to this type of woman to prove anything as by the time Guru is 90 yo and still married to this woman, this argument is no longer relevant.

Intelligent people make logical decisions based on facts, not emotions, and look within those facts for certain biases, to allow them to leverage those facts to support their interests. All you need to do is open your eyes and look into these cultures that I have described to ascertain this info. Don't just take Guru's words for it. I'm simply opening your eyes.

Your positions are getting more illogical and more emotional the deeper we go. Take a break, come back in a few.

 

[guru1000]

However, once you remove that woman from her culture and bring her to the U.S. that argument degrades fast.

People are not dogs where what they learn at a young age cannot be undone. Once you remove the cultural pressure of actually LIVING in that culture.. its very easy (and likely) that the woman's values will change more to match where she lives UNLESS she is old as sh*t already (over 30) in which case she fails the "high quality" test based on that alone lol.

See my response to Tenacity. Though you don't appear emotional, but when you take the losing side of a position, you will often take positions not based on fact.

Your argument is that current social conditioning will undo a lifetime of previous conditioning so her "quality" will deface in time leading you down the same path everybody else in the consensus marriage is in. Correct?

However, the facts within these cultures (that I observed) demonstrate less than a 10% divorce rate. So how does your position hold up within the framework of this factual data?

Prenup barely means sh*t these days. Women find ways around it all the time.

Setting aside a prenup is an exception not the norm. Again ... facts.

Everything else you listed is possible WITHOUT a marriage CONTRACT lol.

Not the argument we're in.

 

[Tenacity]

Tenacity, getting emotional? This is good. When your emotional side flares, it means I'm getting you. But why is Guru getting to Tenacity? Because deep down inside ... after all these years ...Tenacity has been yearning for such a relationship but with all of Tenacity's tenaciousness, Tenacity still could not find such a woman. So thus, nothing can be wrong with Tenacity, but rather the WHOLE market is flawed with shark-infested waters, right?

I have no idea what you are talking about. Let's not go into these weird psycho-analyzations of me and instead let's just stay on the topic.

Spousal support can be mitigated with a solid prenup.

No it cannot. The determination of if a prenup will stand and if alimony will or will not be considered, depends on the roles a particular spouse had in the relationship. Case in point, if she stayed home for 10 years and didn't work, alimony is going to be on the table.

But if she were a stay-at-home mom raising your lineage for 20 years while you built an empire (with piece of mind), is she not entitled to live reasonably thereafter? These are matters you want to specifically address in your prenup and be "fair" (as defined jurisdictionally) as not to have the prenup set aside for unconscionability.

If YOU have no issue paying some chick a monthly payment for the rest of her life, then do it. Not even sure what the basis of your argument is anymore. I do not believe in stay at home moms in 2017/2018 and I do not believe in alimony. It completely defeats the entire purpose of women's liberation, which has significantly changed the market as a whole.

What is a solid familial infrastructure in your life worth to you? Let's examine this further.

In the last 14 years, the total divorce rate in the U.S. is at 27%. Comparably, the divorce rate for celebrities on the last 14 years is at 50%.

http://marriagefoundation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/pdf-03.pdf

Let's go on, I'm going to write out the remaining response in a very rudimentary fashion so that you and any others who are also getting emotional with this "talk" can understand with little bias.

There are cultures, subsets, types of people where divorce rates are higher than the norm, and others where the divorce rates are lower than the norm. So if you were to get married, does it make more sense to get married as a celebrity or non-celebrity? Does it make sense to get married to the norm divorce rate of 27% (over 14 years) or to a subset of women where the divorce rate is less than 10% for life?

Lol. Dude there are stats that show people with college degrees make more money than those without college degrees. But the DEVIL is in the details. Going on the college degree stat alone, it would "appear" that if you just ran into college, majored in any random subject, and got a "degree", then you would be ahead of the pack....when the reality is that one would have needed to dig deeper into the details to determine the true reason for why most with college degrees did/do better than those without them.

I have stats showing that 40% of marriages fail. You have stats showing something different. AT the end of the day, the Marriage Contract makes NO sense and there are NO unicorns. And no matter what stat you show about a divorce rate, that does not mean those who are still married are happy in any form or fashion.

This notion is grounded in a false (emotional) assumption that I wanted to be married in the last three years. This week was my first stance supporting certain types of marriage with certain people. Actually, this site could operate as a death chamber for marriage altogether for everybody eradicating the chance for all to get married under any circumstance. This changes now.

So like I said, you are looking to CONVINCE yourself lol. Because like you just stated, you weren't even looking to marry before and now you are, so you are trying to convince yourself of why it's a good idea.

Intelligent people make logical decisions based on facts, not emotions,

Correct and your entire argument has been based on "emotion", not facts.

Tenacity's Arguments:

- The definition/vows of Marriage and the US Government's Marriage Agreement aren't in alignment (FACT)

- Marriage, divorce, and child support/custody is a big business called Family Law, that allows Attorneys, Judges, Pastors, Churches, Bankers, and others involved in the process to make a lot of money (FACT)

- There are no perfect women and no Unicorns (FACT)

- Logically, the Marriage Agreement makes no business sense (FACT)

- There are no incorporations, transfers, prenups, insurance policies, or any schemes to truly protect you from financial loss in case of a divorce as it depends on the status of the marriage leading up to the divorce, amongst other things (FACT)

- As a man who isn't looking to LIVE off a woman or financially benefit off a woman (like @BeTheChange is) nor a man who needs the Marriage title for political/social reasons......there are NO benefits to getting married that are not available outside of a marriage contract. (FACT)

Guru's Arguments:

- Not all women are the same and there's a sub-section of women available that are different than the general market who could be "marriage material" based on her having traditional values and other qualities. This is based primarily on EMOTION, because you are literally putting this woman in particular on a pedestal when there's really been no PROOF of this woman being this "unicorn" you speak of....because common sense would state if she was....she wouldn't be on the market at age 26 - 45.

- Continuing to spin plates, date, and deal with women in the market gets tiring/old afterwhile, thus, it's more comfortable going forward to settle down and sign a marriage contract with a woman that appears to be "marriage material". This is EMOTION, because again, you have no proof that the marriage would be a better situation than spinning plates. I would argue that spinning plates allows you to keep hot/fresh pvssy and good looking women coming into your life, whereas with marriage you are locked into ONE WOMAN that is getting older and depreciating in looks by the day.

- Getting married allows one more freedom to invest in their career and other business passions. This is EMOTION, because you are assuming the wife would even allow the husband that much time away from the household. You are also assuming that a guy can't properly manage his time and manage his plates (like I do).

- You believe Sosuave is anti-marriage and you are on a campaign to change that. This is EMOTION, because you have over 83,000 members on this board and you have absolutely NO CLUE what the majority of members think about marriage. In my prior marriage debates/discussions on this board, my personal experience has been that it's been split down the middle. Let's even look at this thread in particular. If you scroll from page one to page seven, the sides are actually SPLIT.

 

[guru1000]

I’m glad that I extracted these assertions you invested into. Now I’ll bifurcate between fact and “bald emotionally-held investments.”

No it cannot. The determination of if a prenup will stand and if alimony will or will not be considered, depends on the roles a particular spouse had in the relationship. Case in point, if she stayed home for 10 years and didn't work, alimony is going to be on the table.

All contingencies including her employment (or not), schedules of income are explicitly delineated and addressed in the prenup.

If YOU have no issue paying some chick a monthly payment for the rest of her life, then do it. Not even sure what the basis of your argument is anymore. I do not believe in stay at home moms in 2017/2018 and I do not believe in alimony. It completely defeats the entire purpose of women's liberation, which has significantly changed the market as a whole.

If the girl is earning as much as you, why are you concerned about spousal support? It’s no longer applicable.

Lol. Dude there are stats that show people with college degrees make more money than those without college degrees. But the DEVIL is in the details. Going on the college degree stat alone, it would "appear" that if you just ran into college, majored in any random subject, and got a "degree", then you would be ahead of the pack....when the reality is that one would have needed to dig deeper into the details to determine the true reason for why most with college degrees did/do better than those without them.

I have stats showing that 40% of marriages fail. You have stats showing something different. AT the end of the day, the Marriage Contract makes NO sense and there are NO unicorns. And no matter what stat you show about a divorce rate, that does not mean those who are still married are happy in any form or fashion.

How is this example relevant to the argument?

So like I said, you are looking to CONVINCE yourself lol. Because like you just stated, you weren't even looking to marry before and now you are, so you are trying to convince yourself of why it's a good idea.

It may be a good idea with certain women under certain circumstances. See this position is fluid as it includes words such as “certain circumstances” and “certain woman.”

Your position is black and white when you state “The marriage contract makes no sense” as you entirely neglect that if properly mitigated with certain women under certain circumstances, the marriage contract could make a lot of sense.

Which position do you think appeals to the reader, a blanket all-or-none position or a position that is fluid based on variegated mitigating factors?

Correct and your entire argument has been based on "emotion", not facts.

Tenacity's Arguments:

- The definition/vows of Marriage and the US Government's Marriage Agreement aren't in alignment (FACT)

What is a government marriage agreement? You get a marriage license. That’s it. Accordingly, false, not fact.

- Marriage, divorce, and child support/custody is a big business called Family Law, that allows Attorneys, Judges, Pastors, Churches, Bankers, and others involved in the process to make a lot of money (FACT).

Yes, fact.

- There are no perfect women and no Unicorns (FACT)

As to no perfect “people,” fact. As to the Unicorn we have specifically defined in Post 63, false, not fact.

Logically, the Marriage Agreement makes no business sense (FACT).

False, not fact, there are exceptions, hence our specific positions.

- There are no incorporations, transfers, prenups, insurance policies, or any schemes to truly protect you from financial loss in case of a divorce as it depends on the status of the marriage leading up to the divorce, amongst other things (FACT)

. False as to the second part (your reason why), as all factors, contingencies, alterations, exceptions, should be clearly defined, delineated, and addressed in the prenup.

- As a man who isn't looking to LIVE off a woman or financially benefit off a woman (like @BeTheChange is) nor a man who needs the Marriage title for political/social reasons......there are NO benefits to getting married that are not available outside of a marriage contract. (FACT)

False, not fact, there are exceptions.

Guru's Arguments:

- Not all women are the same and there's a sub-section of women available that are different than the general market who could be "marriage material" based on her having traditional values and other qualities. This is based primarily on EMOTION, because you are literally putting this woman in particular on a pedestal when there's really been no PROOF of this woman being this "unicorn" you speak of....because common sense would state if she was....she wouldn't be on the market at age 26 - 45.

This is fact, not emotion, based on an observable statistic within specific communities.

- Continuing to spin plates, date, and deal with women in the market gets tiring/old afterwhile, thus, it's more comfortable going forward to settle down and sign a marriage contract with a woman that appears to be "marriage material". This is EMOTION, because again, you have no proof that the marriage would be a better situation than spinning plates. I would argue that spinning plates allows you to keep hot/fresh pvssy and good looking women coming into your life, whereas with marriage you are locked into ONE WOMAN that is getting older and depreciating in looks by the day.

False, this position was never made.

- Getting married allows one more freedom to invest in their career and other business passions. This is EMOTION, because you are assuming the wife would even allow the husband that much time away from the household. You are also assuming that a guy can't properly manage his time and manage his plates (like I do).

False, to the extent that this position as the sole reason for marriage was never made.

- You believe Sosuave is anti-marriage and you are on a campaign to change that. This is EMOTION, because you have over 83,000 members on this board and you have absolutely NO CLUE what the majority of members think about marriage. In my prior marriage debates/discussions on this board, my personal experience has been that it's been split down the middle. Let's even look at this thread in particular. If you scroll from page one to page seven, the sides are actually SPLIt.

False, again, SoSuave has been anti-marriage for the past 9 years. This doesn’t mean that all members assume SoSuave’s position.

Yes ... emotions can fool men to believe certain opinions are indeed facts. And I will continue to eradicate false assumptions (Tenacity's "facts") as you and others bring them.

Take a break. Your posts are supporting my position, not negating it. I was hoping for you to actually challenge my assertions based on factual data. Your tangential emotionally-fueled opinions only serve to weaken your position. I want a real discussion based on ACTUAL facts, not all-or-none, bald, emotional assertions.

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

Consider this argument:

Marriage creates moral hazard.

Without any guarantee, both parties are on their best behavior. Else the other person will ditch them.

But within a marriage contract, there is always some kind of safety net, no matter how clever your attorney is.

Marriage will therefore decrease her quality (however you measure it).

Most people get fat and have less sex after marriage, kids or no kids.

A perfect example of the result of moral hazard.

Back in the day when marriage was invented, it was a tool by men to keep women connected to one man.

Now it is a self-destructive device (a bomb ticking as soon as it starts) that generally benefits the female.

The longer it continues, (and the more $$ the husband makes) the more the female will benefit if it breaks apart.

If a male leaves a marriage, AT BEST he keeps all of his own stuff. The longer the marriage lasts, the less likely this will happen.

If a female leaves a marriage, AT BEST, she gets half his stuff, plus her stuff. The longer the marriage lasts, the more likely this will happen.

So one might argue that simply by being interested in marriage, a woman is automatically disqualified from marriage.

From a male standpoint, to create the least amount of moral hazard, no agreed upon commitment should EVER be made.

Unless, of course, the marriage contract stipulates that she can't gain any weight, must have sex X times per week, can never be alone with a non-married male in any capacity, etc.

 

[guru1000]

Yes TO, the marriage contract alone assuming the man has greater financial resources empowers the woman.

Just based on this as a stand-alone, it’s a no brainer not to marry.

However ... mitigated by prenups and corporate structures ... and access to certain cultures (and familial networks attained by marrying into this family/culture), and in the context of the specific girl in question indoctrinated with a “must” get married and serve her family ideal .. then a more weighted decision is at stake .. marry her or eject.

This wouldn’t be a discussion if no significant advantages could be attained by marrying such a woman and into her culture/family, that could otherwise be attained with a civil union without marriage to the average woman.

 

[Dash Riprock]

In my opinion I think men who want to get married are weak men in some aspects. Generally the either do it because of societal pressures, family pressure or they are extremely bored and feel like getting married would fullfull their life and give it meaning, which is short lived and hollow

Could not AGREE more. The main reason for getting married is because you feel you cannot do better for yourself and want to "lock" someone down as to not be lonely--period. Not for me. Some do get married to have kids, so I get that. Otherwise, it's very beta, goes against all things alpha and to some extent DJ. It's for weak men who give in to social and family pressures.

WHY would one push 50% of their assets and everything you've worked for into the middle of the table?

I just don't get it.

 

[Tenacity]

I want a real discussion based on ACTUAL facts, not all-or-none, bald, emotional assertions.

I have actually provided that and it's right there on the screen in PRINT......for everyone to see it. As a result, at this point I think I have pretty much broken down my positions on this along with provided enough details to support my positions. Our conversation is starting to lose quality due to the following:

- You are throwing out a bunch of non-consequential "word salad", which honestly gets annoying after while.

- You are playing the "semantics" game, where I repeat BACK to you the exact positions/stances you have been arguing in this thread, then you respond saying you didn't mean to say "X", you meant to say "Y", and this is when the discussion deteriorates because one party's "positions" becomes unclear.

- You are trying to "slick diss" with personal attacks, which is usually a preview of you getting ready to explode again with multiple racial slurs and similar explosions that you direct towards me once I back you in a corner.

So with that said, I have provided all of the information I'm going to provide and I will excuse myself from this discussion with you going forward.

At the end of the day, you, myself, and others will have to make a PERSONAL/INDIVIDUAL decision on if they want to get married or not. And whatever your decision is, understand it's your decision and it doesn't matter who likes it or who doesn't like it, who agrees with it or who doesn't agree with it, because it's your life and you will have to live with the benefits and/or consequences of whatever decision you make. I've made my decision, you (Guru) have made yours, @Urbanyst has made his, @cola has made his, and so on.

Guys should take the positions I've put out, Guru put out, Urbanyst put out, etc., then do their own research and analysis to determine an individual plan for their own lives. Because like I said, it's YOU THE INDIVIDUAL that will have to deal with the benefits and/or consequences of this decision.

Also keep in mind, Guru is making the case for marriage now based on being a part of some exclusive "club/network" that based on said description of this "club/network", 99% of guys on this forum have NO access to said "club/network". So after reviewing Guru's individual based situation, maybe Marriage works for him in some capacity as similar to @BeTheChange there are financial, political, and social benefits that can be directly acquired as a result of the marriage?

But what about the 99% of men who are not in this network (and/or NEVER run into the type of women Guru describes) and would not be in the same situation if married? Are we really having a discussion over something that only 1% or less of men will have access to (or find)?

That's silly and even further reason as to why I'm excusing myself from this discussion.

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

The main reason for getting married is because you feel you cannot do better for yourself and want to "lock" someone down as to not be lonely--period.

Most people, men and women, get married when they are young.

They are inexperienced, and have the "this is the best thing that has ever happened" feeling.

This ONLY WORKS if leaving the union is a very painful event for both parties. That FORCES them to resolve the issues that come up, and it actually keeps them happy.

But in our current society (where few people can delay gratification to any degree - 40% obesity rates) this is not the case.

Leaving the union is EASY, and it's backed by plenty of SOCIAL PROOF.

It's even a sign of COURAGE to leave a marriage. (What? He didn't treat you like a princess? Girl, you need to take him to the cleaners!)

If any dude wants to get married, I would recommend he find a way to sort for ABILITY TO DELAY GRATIFICATION.

This means:

No fat chicks.

No chicks with debt.

No chicks with student loans.

No chicks with worthless degrees.

No chicks with tattoos.

How many of you, if you sorted for the above, would EVER get laid?

 

[guru1000]

I have actually provided that and it's right there on the screen in PRINT......for everyone to see it. As a result, at this point I think I have pretty much broken down my positions on this along with provided enough details to support my positions. Our conversation is starting to lose quality due to the following:

- You are throwing out a bunch of non-consequential "word salad", which honestly gets annoying after while.

- You are playing the "semantics" game, where I repeat BACK to you the exact positions/stances you have been arguing in this thread, then you respond saying you didn't mean to say "X", you meant to say "Y", and this is when the discussion deteriorates because one party's "positions" becomes unclear.

- You are trying to "slick diss" with personal attacks, which is usually a preview of you getting ready to explode again with multiple racial slurs and similar explosions that you direct towards me once I back you in a corner.

So with that said, I have provided all of the information I'm going to provide and I will excuse myself from this discussion with you going forward.

At the end of the day, you, myself, and others will have to make a PERSONAL/INDIVIDUAL decision on if they want to get married or not. And whatever your decision is, understand it's your decision and it doesn't matter who likes it or who doesn't like it, who agrees with it or who doesn't agree with it, because it's your life and you will have to live with the benefits and/or consequences of whatever decision you make. I've made my decision, you (Guru) have made yours, @Urbanyst has made his, @cola has made his, and so on.

Guys should take the positions I've put out, Guru put out, Urbanyst put out, etc., then do their own research and analysis to determine an individual plan for their own lives. Because like I said, it's YOU THE INDIVIDUAL that will have to deal with the benefits and/or consequences of this decision.

Also keep in mind, Guru is making the case for marriage now based on being a part of some exclusive "club/network" that based on said description of this "club/network", 99% of guys on this forum have NO access to said "club/network". So after reviewing Guru's individual based situation, maybe Marriage works for him in some capacity as similar to @BeTheChange there are financial, political, and social benefits that can be directly acquired as a result of the marriage? But what about the 99% of men who are not in this network and would not be in the same situation if married? Are we really having a discussion over something that only 1% or less of men will have access to?

That's silly and even further reason as to why I'm excusing myself from this discussion.

Straw reasons for accedence to my position. Notwithstanding, the discussion is not a matter of a right way or a wrong way, but rather to tear the dogma of black/white thinking as it relates to marriage and immerse in the fluidity in some of the gray some DJs might one day find themselves in.

I will address this:

Also keep in mind, Guru is making the case for marriage now based on being a part of some exclusive "club/network" that based on said description of this "club/network", 99% of guys on this forum have NO access to said "club/network". So after reviewing Guru's individual based situation, maybe Marriage works for him in some capacity as similar to @BeTheChange there are financial, political, and social benefits that can be directly acquired as a result of the marriage? But what about the 99% of men who are not in this network and would not be in the same situation if married? Are we really having a discussion over something that only 1% or less of men will have access to?

Gentlemen, the subset of women I was referring to is not part of some exclusive club or the elite as @BeTheChange mentioned (although this is rational strategy), but rather cultured, traditional immigrant families where the children (your prospects) are indoctrinated with a primary existential principle to marry, bear children, and service their husband and family; where family is everything. A subset of women where the divorce rate is less than 10%, and those women who are divorced are the "black sheep" and implicitly blackballed. A culture with families that (very commonly) have a few hundred family members, some of whom are very successful/connected whom you can also network with.

Any man here can have access to such a subset of women.

My position is not so much to encourage marriage as it is to stop vilifying men from all marriages under all circumstances with all women. Many of you might one day be in a certain situation, with a certain girl, from a certain culture, who is the anomaly to the "rule" we solicit here. This thread simply opens your eyes.

 

[Tenacity]

.......but rather cultured, traditional immigrant families where the children (your prospects) are indoctrinated with a primary existential principle to marry, bear children, and service their husband and family; where family is everything. A subset of women where the divorce rate is less than 10%, and those women who are divorced are the "black sheep" and implicitly blackballed. A culture with families that (very commonly) have a few hundred family members, some of whom are very successful/connected whom you can also network with.

HOW then Guru is this woman 25 - 45 and not married yet then? That makes no sense if her entire culture, network, and family has programmed her into this belief and also shames the women in some way for not going along with it. How did she get 32, on Match.com, single (never married), talking about she's looking for "her king"? Do you see how this isn't making any sense? Also is this chick already in the US or on her way to the US?

Like I said, how about you go ahead and marry one of these chicks, then report back to us how it's going? Forget these silly discussions/debates, go ahead and tie the knot with one of these chicks you are describing....then tell us what's happening as you go along.

 

[guru1000]

HOW then Guru is this woman 25 - 45 and not married yet then? That makes no sense if her entire culture, network, and family has programmed her into this belief and also shames the women in some way for not going along with it. How did she get 32, on Match.com, single (never married), talking about she's looking for "her king"? Do you see how this isn't making any sense? Also is this chick already in the US or on her way to the US?

Like I said, how about you go ahead and marry one of these chicks, then report back to us how it's going? Forget these silly discussions/debates, go ahead and tie the knot with one of these chicks you are describing....then tell us what's happening as you go along.

I thought you were out of this discussion. Now you crawled back in?

I date young, so I cannot answer your question as it relates from 33+, and typically the girls whom I describe in these cultures whom I date are 22-28, and they are extremely hot and extremely picky, so I definitely understand why they didn't marry early as they are the "cream of the crop" of the LTR market and desire the best.

And for some of you older DJs reading this, I date 15-20 years younger and will continue to date women in their 20s into my 50s (hopefully), assuming I do not LTR.

 

[Tenacity]

I thought you were out of this discussion. Now you crawled back in?

Yes, I'm leaving it because I think all that was needed to be said, has been said.

I date young, so I cannot answer your question as it relates from 33+, and typically the girls whom I describe in these cultures whom I date are 22-28, and they are extremely hot and extremely picky, so I definitely understand why they didn't marry early as they are the "cream of the crop" of the LTR market and desire the best.

Okay so your theory is that the woman is still single/not married because she hasn't found a good candidate to fulfill the marriage role yet? Just think for a minute Guru......you said the woman is extremely HOT and has all of these great internal qualities which include coming from great familial networks that demand her to maintain certain aspects of traditionalism.

Would NOT this woman be getting scores of guys lined up to date her Guru? So she's 25 - 28, are you honestly telling me this woman has not had at least 10 SOLID candidates who have came into her life up until that point, that she could have did this marriage thing with if she wanted to? Remember, you said her family has programmed this into her and they also in some form or fashion are pressuring her to enter said arrangement as well, correct? So with 10 SOLID candidates, how is it that she didn't pick one of them?

Are you sure this isn't a "Bush Daughters" type of situation? You know, they come from tradition, come from a strong network, their parents and grandparents remained married.....but the Bush Daughters wanted to go out and party, fvck, svck, etc., then WAIT to settle down once they got older. Are you SURE the chick you are describing isn't a Jenna Bush??

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

Would NOT this woman be getting scores of guys lined up to date her Guru? So she's 25 - 28, are you honestly telling me this woman has not had at least 10 SOLID candidates who have came into her life up until that point, that she could have did this marriage thing with if she wanted to?

Also, how does she manage to fall for the triple header play from POF?