Who here wants to get married and why?

[guru1000]

Vet all you want, there are no guarantees.

Many years ago, my ex-business partner stole my business. True story. And he was a "good" guy, from a good family, with "good" values.

Thus, according to you, having "good" values and from a good family does not mean anything, correct? This is the fallacy.

Since then, I vetted nine other business partners, and we had lucrative relationships.

If a portfolio lender vetted their debtors and had a 92% success rate and an 8% default rate, does the lender state "vetting is useless" because we had a 8% default rate?

You backwards-rationalize based on a default, and ascribe it partially to vetting. This doesn't change the premise that vetting is absolutely necessary in any endeavor to mitigate--not eliminate--your risk.

For man, marriage is a legal contract on a depreciating asset that has about a 50% chance of failure with a court system acting in the woman's favor when it does fail.

The court system operates by its case law or by prenup. No one in this thread promotes being subject to the current family laws without a contract a/k/a prenup of your own, and how to navigate the prenup as well as corporate structures, thus steering the court system to your advantage.

Unfortunately, you were a statistic of default with no protective umbrella (prenup, corporate structures) just as I was many years ago when my business partner who I vetted screwed me over (as I also had no protective umbrella). Neither default encompasses the argument we are making here.

 

[The Duke]

Not at all. Good values/good family is part of the vetting process. I chose someone from a good family with good values. I also was quite involved with her entire family so I used that to figure out who she was and what she stood for. I vetted her over the course of 9yrs. I did exactly what you are supposed to do......And it didn't work. That is all I am saying. Just like you said, "you can only mitigate risk, not eliminate."

So why get married? I see all sorts of benefit for the woman to marry, and next to nothing for the man.

Benefits For a chic to marry me:
-She'll highly likely have access to financial benefits that are far greater than her current situation.
-She won't ever have to worry about retirement if I was to die and decided to leave my assets to her.
-I'm highly stable, loyal, and score higher than most men in the categories that matter to women. I'm perfectly aware of what my value is and where I stack up. Its in the 85th percentile.
-Commitment
-Security(financial, mental, etc)

Benefits For me to marry a chic:
-Instead of spending time chasing pu$$y, I can devote time to more beneficial activities.
-She can do things for me that free up my time.
-I get regular sex and better sex.
-She can support my endeavors.
-I hope she can cook like my mom and Grandma but I've only had 1 of those out of 50+.

Any of us could get all of those benefits with out having to marry. So if I can make it 5yrs before they start whining about not being married then that's the game I'm running. They can take me out with the garbage if that's what they want and I will go find their replacement. There is not anything about any one of them that makes them so special that you should commit to them for life. I wish there was, and I would be all about marriage. Its not that I'm anti-marriage, its more like I don't see the return on investment. Relationships are short term deals these days.

Here is something else to ponder.........IF there was no financial gain for women to marry, would women want it so bad? Would men be so hesitant if there was no risk?

The girls I've dated that have money, are not as excited about getting married. They think more like a dude does. The financial risk concerns them.

So what are the benefits that are important to you that make you think marriage would be beneficial?

 

[guru1000]

Out of curiosity Howiestern, I remember you mentioning your last LTR leaving you, because she needed to marry, and you refused. Not to say she was or was not a good girl, or that you couldn't find the same type of LTR elsewhere ... but why was this "need" to marry so important to her? Was it socially indoctrinated from her family or just a checkbox to mark off?

Also:

1) Do you want kids?

2) You mentioned an LTR with a shelf-life of 5 years. If this were true, wouldn't you prefer to have an intact family structure with the same mother looking after your lineage?

 

[Tenacity]

It's called vetting. This is what SMART people and institutions do to properly mitigate--not entirely eliminate--their downside.

Guru here's what you need to understand (which I'm sure you already understand, you are just arguing just to argue at this point).

Every contract you enter into should be properly vetted, that goes without saying. From a contract with a telephone company, car company, bank, etc. What you are VETTING includes all of the following:

- The person, team, and/or entity you are partnering with
- The system, environment, or surrounding nuisances that are accompanied with said partnership
- The price you are to pay for said partnership
- Your expectations within the partnership
- Their expectations within the partnership
- The process and COST to cancel/get out of said partnership

Got it? Now, when we are talking about vetting Comcast for phone and internet service, I go through the same process above to vet them, but the COST to cancel/get out of said partnership might be a couple hundred dollars if everything goes to hell (which is usually does as Comcast service sucks).

When you are talking about a marriage contract, the COST to get out of said partnership if it goes to hell can be extremely expensive financially and there is NO prenup, corporation, transfer, nor legal structure you can setup to completely and utterly remove you from having to pay said cancellation COST to get out of the partnership.

Based on this, marriage is not something that Tenacity will entertain. Now if you eliminated the potential high COST to get out of the partnership (should I need to get out of it), then it would be something that could possibly be considered.

Going back to the Comcast example, nobody would sign up for Comcast if the cancellation fee to get out of their service was $100,000. This is with even fully understanding the benefits, features, and values of having a Comcast internet and telephone service, the problem is with the cancellation fee as any PRUDENT ADULT understands that sometimes a partnership goes to hell......sometimes for reasons beyond our control......and you have to exit said partnership.

 

[The Duke]

And think about this too....We all know women see men as success symbols and men see women as sex symbols. So after 20yrs of marriage, the woman still benefits from the marriage because the man is still successful, yet the man gets little benefit because she is no longer a sex symbol. His value increased, her value decreased. How in the hell is that a good deal for the man? Why would you do it?

 

[exhausted]

Vet all you want, there are no guarantees. You are delusional for thinking that way, but proceed as you wish.

For man, marriage is a legal contract on a depreciating asset that has about a 50% chance of failure with a court system acting in the woman's favor when it does fail.

Now how many of you would make a business deal with those kind of odds? Forget the fact that women are highly emotional/irrational and frequently act on whims. You guys are trying to make rational decisions based on the behavior of an irrational animal.

The only way it works is when you take opportunity away from women. That means no income, no social media, etc. Its the reason it worked in 1955. There also needs to be social sanctions in place for women who don't honor marriage vows and have multiple partners. They all need a scarlet letter "A" burned on their forehead if they don't act as they should. Women are too emotional to deal with temptation properly, that's why you have to remove the temptation in the first place. The majority don't have the discipline to keep themselves in check.

I vetted my exwife for 9yrs before I married her and we were married for almost 5yrs. 95% of the time was very good. Guess what happened......she started making more money, moved up to management, got in the gym and got that body looking fine, then found some other dude to get attention from. And to this day I am #1 on her High Score List, I have no doubts and she has admitted it. Once she realized she fuhked up and I was never coming back, she got fat and depressed and had to go to a shrink. She would leave her current husband if I told her I would take her back.

My last live in girlfriend demanded marriage after 5yrs and left me because I wouldn't give in on her time table. She regretted that after her irrational emotions settled.

See the trend here? Women do stupid things when they let their emotions dictate their actions. And it always leads to regret.

I'm not willing to put my financial life in jeopardy for a piece of pu$$y that may or may not cause me financial harm. If I have to trade them out every 5yrs because they leave me after I deny them marriage, then that is what I will do. And that's what happened with the last one. She also now realizes how stupid she was.

Makes perfect sense. How the hell do you stay detached enough to just let them go so easily?

 

[Augustus_McCrae]

The rational stated so far seems to come down to this:

There is agreement on the thread that the current marriage laws/family court are a potential hazard / trap and are morally bankrupt.

There are some people on the thread who believe there are "quality" women from a good background who won't settle for anything less than marriage. And that this woman is so High quality wife material that you need to wife her up because if you don't, she will move on. So even though you know that the marriage laws are fvcked, you need to do it so you don't lose this little marriage worthy snowflake.

So you go through the trouble/expense of researching family law and or hiring a lawyer to put legal structures/contracts together to hopefully protect yourself from the potentially hazardous marriage contract you are entering into out of the fear of losing your marriage demanding Lil snowflake.

Seriously?

-Augustus-

 

[Tenacity]

The rational stated so far seems to come down to this:

There is agreement on the thread that the current marriage laws/family court are a potential hazard / trap and are morally bankrupt.

There are some people on the thread who believe there are "quality" women from a good background who won't settle for anything less than marriage. And that this woman is so High quality wife material that you need to wife her up because if you don't, she will move on. So even though you know that the marriage laws are fvcked, you need to do it so you don't lose this little marriage worthy snowflake.

So you go through the trouble/expense of researching family law and or hiring a lawyer to put legal structures/contracts together to hopefully protect yourself from the potentially hazardous marriage contract you are entering into out of the fear of losing your marriage demanding Lil snowflake.

Seriously?

-Augustus-

Right and here's another thing to consider..........who is to even say this snowflake is going to sign a prenup? Think about it, what are the chances she is presented with a prenup and gets "offended", then STILL decides to walk away? Chicks do that all of the time.

 

[Urbanyst]

Planet Earth. We don’t seem to share that one commonality though.

You don’t have any more arguments either.

I don't need any more arguments. My original argument is the truth.

Your argument is wishful thinking.

 

[Urbanyst]

Isn't it common knowledge that someone with unnaturally conservative values are actually just repressed as fvck? They always flip hard at some point. Women having very strong opinions about anything should be a red flag, your friend could easily have been aware of this. He is aware now and so are you, for every failure we learn how to better succeed. Every mistake you make vetting is a mistake you won't make again.

You'd think there's infinite possibility for how women can mess you up, but really it's just the same few commonly known things over and over. Things you can recognize early if you're willing to learn the early warning signs.

Having to be a licensed DETECTIVE, psychologist and sociologist should NOT be necessary just to find a woman worth "marrying".

Hens why marriage is dumb a sh*t lol.

 

[Urbanyst]

Well I'm glad you recognize this. At least one active member in this thread believes all women are the same and there is no difference between a hooker and good LTR material!

At least, you're logical. Well ... until I read this:

Let's begin with the bolded fallacy:

Can change <> Will likely change

Your and others' positions are why vet, when people can change anyway. This is the most imprudent strategy one can use to govern their life. If we assume that people will change anyway, then why:

Vet your business partner for his ethical background. Just partner up with Bernie Madoff. Because an ethical partner could turn into a cheat and steal your business capital anyway;

Vet your investors. Who cares if they don't have enough capital to service your business now. This can change and they can be well capitalized in the future and fund your business then.

Vet your friends. Who cares if he is a heroine addict who steals from his mother. He has a good heart and he can change in the future and be trusted.

Vet your clients. Who cares if he doesn't have enough money to pay you now. He may change and become liquid later, and pay you then.

Vet your debtors. Who cares if he doesn't have a good credit score and doesn't pay his debts. He may change and become a good-paying consumer then.

Why can't you obtain a mortgage if your credit score is 500?

What can't you obtain credit cards if your credit score is 500?

Why can't you obtain business loans if your credit score is 500?

It's called vetting. This is what SMART people and institutions do to properly mitigate--not entirely eliminate--their downside.

You guys who don't promote vetting seem like you have no working brains in your head. And I say this in the most diplomatic way

No one has ever said NOT to vet. Stop lying just to win your weak argument lol.

You missed the point.

The point is you can "vet" all day but it doesn't "guarantee" sh*t.

 

[guru1000]

Going back to the Comcast example, nobody would sign up for Comcast if the cancellation fee to get out of their service was $100,000. This is with even fully understanding the benefits, features, and values of having a Comcast internet and telephone service, the problem is with the cancellation fee as any PRUDENT ADULT understands that sometimes a partnership goes to hell......sometimes for reasons beyond our control......and you have to exit said partnership.

Here is the fallacy, specifically ascribing a $100,000 penalty to a cable contract. An extreme stance can influence the "facts" you contrive and use to make a smart decision. How about ascribing a $100 penalty to a cable contract. Equal penalty for equal value. Now the argument changes.

So you go through the trouble/expense of researching family law and or hiring a lawyer to put legal structures/contracts together to hopefully protect yourself from the potentially hazardous marriage contract you are entering into out of the fear of losing your marriage demanding Lil snowflake.

Change the bolded into "advantage of gaining."

If an employee asks for a $100,000 salary, the first question I consider is why is the employee demanding such a salary? I could hire an employee for half that number, but would the $50,000 employee service me as well? Maybe, maybe not. It comes down to the value that employee could provide for the firm. If I hire this $100,000 employee, I don't fear losing the employee, but rather have made a weighted business decision as to what I am gaining for the value that I am giving.

It's pretty simple actually. But ... if you take the position that all women provide the same value, then this argument is moot.

 

[Urbanyst]

The fact of the matter is.. until @guru1000 can tell us why marriage is a SMART decision and express an argument free of emotional crap.. he will continue to make the case AGAINST marriage stronger lol.

 

[Roober]

Not sure I would ever get married again. I don't really see any advantages to it.

Advantages
-Shared bills and finances (not all)
-lower medical premiums - split by both parties or included in plan
-Couples tend to be more resilient to challenges, knowing it is not as easy to bail.

Disadvantages
-divorce
-Possibly less sex
-Possibly poor behavior
-any other negative possibility

Pretty much all of the advantages can be attributed more to living together than to getting married; with the exception of medical premiums. For example, I live in the Bay Area, and splitting bills would save me about 1-2k per month. If I was making oodles of money, this would be a moot point. If the woman (or the man) has dramatic behavior changes or life changes, then the other partner can determine if those changes are worth working through. That is a bit of a double-edged sword though. When not married and difficulties in the relationship arise, both men and women are less willing and likely to work on those problems together. They know the door is open to walk through. The door is open in divorce, but there is money, attorneys, family, and other factors in the way. It is a much more difficult path.

So it really depends on your need for certainty. If you or your partner don't both have that need for certainty, then there will be an issue regarding marriage...

 

[The Duke]

Out of curiosity Howiestern, I remember you mentioning your last LTR leaving you, because she needed to marry, and you refused. Not to say she was or was not a good girl, or that you couldn't find the same type of LTR elsewhere ... but why was this "need" to marry so important to her? Was it socially indoctrinated from her family or just a checkbox to mark off?

Also:

1) Do you want kids?

2) You mentioned an LTR with a shelf-life of 5 years. If this were true, wouldn't you prefer to have an intact family structure with the same mother looking after your lineage?

Background Cliff Notes:
Yes I did refuse marriage and she moved out. Its not that I would not have married her, but I only wanted to do so on my time line. She had bugged me for 2-3yrs. She was a super loyal girl, hard worker, supportive, deferred to me, attractive HB8, good genetics, huge heart, very kind, very low partner count, old school belief's(man is in charge, women are inferior). She did get pregnant when she was 16. There were some skills she never learned at a young age that she needed to work on. It caused severed chaos in our relationship. She scored a 5 on her personal relationship skills, and I told her she needed to get to at least a 7. Bless her heart, she was serious about it and did what I asked. But by then, I felt like I was her life skills coach/counselor and lost attraction. she gave me a time frame for marriage and I said no. She left.

Her reason for marriage was it was something she had never done before and always wanted it. She wanted security in the form of close relationships. She was one of those people that has few friends but the ones she does are very close. It was definitely indoctrinated in her from her grandparents that had a big part of raising her and helped instill her belief system. Financial gain was probably only 20% of her desire to marry. The majority of it was about developing a deeper/closer commitment. Her grandparents died, as well as her brother and she wanted that feeling of "family".

After we split, she also told me I was the best guy she ever had and I had every thing she wanted minus the romantic part. That also drove her desire. She knew what she had in me. I knew what I had in her, except I just really don't want marriage. Had she stuck around another 2yrs or so, she would have probably got what she wanted. She has since told me she wishes she would have just stayed with me.

1. I like kids, but don't want kids. Don't have any either.
2. Yes definitely. My family is pretty much the All-American blue eyed, blonde haired poster family. My sister and I were raised right. We all get along well. My mom and dad always supported each other, we always talked out all our problems. There was no dysfunction. The best way to raise a kid is with a mom and dad that live in the same house and respect/love each other. And mom needs to be at home raising her kids, not at work. Dad needs to go make the money.

 

[Tenacity]

Here is the fallacy, specifically ascribing a $100,000 penalty to a cable contract. An extreme stance can influence the "facts" you contrive and use to make a smart decision. How about ascribing a $100 penalty to a cable contract. Equal penalty for equal value. Now the argument changes..

I already stated that the regular cancellation fee on a Comcast contract is a couple hundred dollars. That was in the post.

I'm asking you a question, would you sign up with Comcast if they had a $100,000 cancellation fee? I assume the answer is NO, correct? So then why are you asking me to sign a marriage contract, which based on my assets, future income, etc., for me it would come with at least (at leasttttt) a $100,000 cancellation fee?

And like I said above, when I run into these "I want to get married" type of chicks, you know what they always say Guru? They say they won't sign a Prenup, because it makes it seem as though I'm already planning for the END when they (the girls) quote, unquote would "never get a divorce" (which we all know is bullshyt).

So your strategy of some magical prenup might not even get through the front door, nevertheless, holding up in Divorce Court on the back door.

 

[Urbanyst]

I already stated that the regular cancellation fee on a Comcast contract is a couple hundred dollars. That was in the post.

I'm asking you a question, would you sign up with Comcast if they had a $100,000 cancellation fee? I assume the answer is NO, correct? So then why are you asking me to sign a marriage contract, which based on my assets, future income, etc., for me it would come with at least (at leasttttt) a $100,000 cancellation fee?

And like I said above, when I run into these "I want to get married" type of chicks, you know what they always say Guru? They say they won't sign a Prenup, because it makes it seem as though I'm already planning for the END when they (the girls) quote, unquote would "never get a divorce" (which we all know is bullshyt).

So your strategy of some magical prenup might not even get through the front door, nevertheless, holding up in Divorce Court on the back door.

If she REALLY believes she will NEVER get a divorce.. she would have no problem signing a prenup.

What refusing to sign a prenup REALLY says is: "This isn't worth doing unless I get a guaranteed cash refund if it fails"

Lol.

WOMEN of all people know marriage is stupid as f*ck. That's why they only marry UP. They know doing otherwise is pure Grade-A stupidity. Only MEN are this stupid.

 

[guru1000]

1. I like kids, but don't want kids. Don't have any either.
2. Yes definitely. My family is pretty much the All-American blue eyed, blonde haired poster family. My sister and I were raised right. We all get along well. My mom and dad always supported each other, we always talked out all our problems. There was no dysfunction. The best way to raise a kid is with a mom and dad that live in the same house and respect/love each other. And mom needs to be at home raising her kids, not at work. Dad needs to go make the money.

Good.

Let's add to No. 2 and take the position, for the moment, that you also wanted kids to carry your torch for generations to come.

I'm sure most of us agree that we would prefer No. 2, especially in the context of raising children, if possible.

It is also an observable fact that the women who are best molded for the role listed in No. 2 are women from certain cultures where marriage is a mandatory, indoctrinated "need," and the lifelong purpose of these subset of women is only to marry, procreate, and raise a family. These women will also not entertain civil, non-marital, unions, but are the best women to procreate and raise families with.

Now ...

Let's assume the following:

• The woman will not entertain a non-marital relation;
• The woman is best molded for the role in No. 2;

What is the value of this woman?

$0
$100
$1,000
$10,000
$100,000

Certainly, she has value, right?

The value we ascribe to her is what shapes our decision to marry or not.

Keep in mind, you are likely (99%+) to walk into a marriage with a strong prenup and corporate structures, and lose ZERO of your pre-marital assets. You would also likely lose ZERO pre-marital assets without a prenup as premarital property usually belongs wholly to the spouse who brought it into the marriage and the other spouse has no right to it, unless certain other factors exist (which can also be eliminated).

An incidental argument was made to keep a civil, non-marital union with a good candidate that was properly vetted. If this properly-vetted girl is willing to entertain procreation and raising a family, outside of a marital union, then absolutely, do that. This is not the subject matter of contention.

And like I said above, when I run into these "I want to get married" type of chicks, you know what they always say Guru? They say they won't sign a Prenup, because it makes it seem as though I'm already planning for the END when they (the girls) quote, unquote would "never get a divorce" (which we all know is bullshyt).

So your strategy of some magical prenup might not even get through the front door, nevertheless, holding up in Divorce Court on the back door.

No prenup, no marriage. Simple.

Prenups do hold. If you would like me to be more specific and ascribe a percentage, prenups hold up in more than 95% of divorces. And strong prenups with corporate structures can bring this ratio to 99%+. And even those prenups which are set aside, your pre-marital assets are still protected by the law.

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

I don't need any more arguments. My original argument is the truth.

Your argument is wishful thinking.

Negligible. I’ve already countered everything you said. Again. This thread should be closed already. You are grasping onto straws here with your own wishful thinking just so that you don’t feel like you are wrong.

It’s okay, don’t respond to the above. Answer me this though: If you already know everything about women that you are willing to learn, or perhaps you somehow do know everything there is to know, then why are you here arguing with the rest of us ‘fools’?

 

[ImTheDoubleGreatest!]

WOMEN of all people know marriage is stupid as f*ck. That's why they only marry UP. They know doing otherwise is pure Grade-A stupidity. Only MEN are this stupid.

Women date UP not because of the financial issues that would ensue if they date down. It’s because their nature is to have a partner of equal or greater value. Men are thus always greater than their women, but this is due to their inherent nature, not becaus eof legal logistics or technicalities. Few women are actually this aware, you give them too much credit.