Why many men are refusing to get married.

[Peña]

I'm convinced you're a troll but the sake of any bystanders...

You are confusing cause and effect. Many of us would like to married and have families but it is the huge cost of divorce and draconian levels of child support that deters us from doing so. Going their own way is the result of this.

Cause and effect.

Cause and effect.

Say it slowly.

A troll because I support marriage and go against the fictional narrative of marriage being bad? I guess you have to follow what every one else says eh? So you assume you are going to get a divorce because other people have and you do not want to get married because of it. Some guy got divorced so I will get divorced too. That is a stupid way to think. Why not look at all the successful marriages and use an open mind instead? People die in car accidents each day. Do you still drive a car with cause and effect? Think slowly about that. If you create children you should be responsible for their support. Think slowly about that.

 

[jurry]

Who said anything about refuting the census data? He simply cherrypicked particular charts and ignored the rest in favor of a hilariously absurd conclusion.

We are not expanding the argument, I am asking if you actually support the thesis that you quoted on this very thread.

 

[jurry]

No im saying this guy "dalrock" cherrypicked the census data to produce the conclusion he already wanted to make.

For clarity, this is the newest census data I see: http://www.census.gov/prod/2009pubs/p60-237.pdf

He looks at the data and says women are getting custody way more of the time, and they are getting way more money. Therefore this leads to his conclusion that women are regularly using the child support system as a way to "remove the father from their household" and take money from him.

Nowhere does he question what percent of the time child support is even awarded in custody cases, what percent of cases require legal intervention, what percent of the time were men even requesting custody in the first place, the income differences between the mother/father, etc.

Its very shoddy work that is done in an attempt to produce a predetermined conclusion, a ridiculous one at that which doesnt make any kind of logical sense as I mentioned above.

 

[jurry]

The data is correct, but it is incomplete to draw the conclusions that he does - that this is some common, orchestrated scheme by women to force the father of their children out of their life and take his money.

If two people go to court for a custody battle (which they are doing in only about half of the cases), and only one side asks for custody, the court is going to side with them. So we dont know what percent of these cases women are seeking custody, the census data doesnt go into that detail.

What we do know is that when men get child support they are receiving the full and partial amounts at about the same rate as women. They do get less money on average than women, but we do not know the income differences either. If we assume it followed income disparities at the national level, it would make sense that women have less income to pay in child support.

None of this at all lends itself to the ridiculous conclusions that this guy comes up with, which even if women were doing, isnt even rational or beneficial behavior for them.

 

[Masculinity]

Now you use negative sarcasm trying to tear down what I wrote. If you do not want to get married and reproduce to continue your family generation that is your business and you are free to live the life you live. MGTOWs and people like you have a mission to destroy marriage with your negativity wanting others to follow you because you hate marriage. That is what I'm against your negativity based on hypotheticals to attack the fundation of marriage that is the pillar of our society. Fringe groups like you are trying to turn society upside down with your beliefs wanting society to be how you want. Atheists, gays, feminists, MGTOWs all fringe groups trying to dictate to the rest of us how you want it to be.

A good argument looks at both sides of the discussion, rather than just criticizing the one your aren't supporting.

What are your non-hypotheticals for getting married?

And what are your non-hypotheticals for NOT getting married?

 

[jurry]

Good question. Perhaps the income disparity is high enough that the court doesnt deem it necessary, we dont know if this is sole or primary custody with visitation.

The report doesnt include much interpretation of its data.

 

[Hollowpoints]

Good question. Perhaps the income disparity is high enough that the court doesnt deem it necessary, we dont know if this is sole or primary custody with visitation.

The report doesnt include much interpretation of its data.

MGTOWs want to use child support, alimony and kids to manipulate, control and punish the same females they woke up from their blue pill delusions of. They call them blue bill delusions because these men cannot handle women being anything else but their perfect obedient sex slaves and mothers.

They pretend as if they care about custody like they want to be a single mother but know they don't want to be single dads because of the negatives stigmas of single moms. Its just they pretend they care about custody as they want a revenge and control tool. If it came down to custody men who claim they arent doing anything for society would blame society for making them take custody. Same with alimony etc. Its a bargaining chip they feel they can use as women dont listen to them like other men.

Thats how you know these MGTOW female mind scientists are frauds who need to resort to extortion tactics much like they blame women on. Pathetic

 

[jurry]

Child support payments are determined by income levels. If the childs needs are estimated at say 1000 a month and one person makes 100k and the other 50k, then the 100k income would pay 667 a month.

Again, the report doesnt go into that. It could be that women are simply asking for custody more of the time or both parties have agreed to that. It isnt clear.

 

[jurry]

Ive heard of the ridiculous amounts being paid by high earners in divorce, but not in relation to child support. Not sure about the caps, if youre some superwealthy couple sending your kid to private schools then obviously the amount would need to be higher.

Court mandated child support is not required nearly half of the time as I mentioned earlier, the court is needed when the two parents cannot resolve the issue between themselves.. Deadbeat mom or dad who wont pay or is bitter about the former spouse for instance.

 

[Hollowpoints]

So suave Danger is angry with me for not taking his and the MGTOW fatalistic viewpoint on life.

Why many men are... 05-15-2015 12:02 PM Danger Keep attacking the people instead of the arguments. Hallmark of a weak position, which is what you have.

This below video explains MGTOW to a T.

MGTOW Cowards EXPOSED! Standing up to the "Men Going Their Own Way" movement

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZhESUnx8Z8

 

[Peña]

So suave Danger is angry with me for not taking his and the MGTOW fatalistic viewpoint on life.

Why many men are... 05-15-2015 12:02 PM Danger Keep attacking the people instead of the arguments. Hallmark of a weak position, which is what you have.

This below video explains MGTOW to a T.

MGTOW Cowards EXPOSED! Standing up to the "Men Going Their Own Way" movement

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZhESUnx8Z8

He accuses me of attacking him playing the victim when he does the attacking. I'm only stating my position in support of marriage He attacks the foundation of marriage and call people names. He says I'm attacking and he is not? I guess you have to attack marriage to not be a attacker. If you attack marriage you are not a attacker but if you stand up for it you are one. So crazy how they are. Why do they care so much if they went their own way?

 

[Peña]

A good argument looks at both sides of the discussion, rather than just criticizing the one your aren't supporting.

What are your non-hypotheticals for getting married?

And what are your non-hypotheticals for NOT getting married?

I see only criticizing from your guy's side of the argument. Nothing positive about marriage at all. When I stand up for something normal like marriage I get called names and accused of attacking people when they are doing the attacks.

Where is your argument in support of marriage? I don't base on hypotheticals since anything can happen. I work with a man who has been married 30 years. He is in love with his wife since the first day and so is she. Another guy got divorced in 3 years when it went wrong. Which hypothetical are you going to use? The good or the bad? It depends on each individual not on a hypothetical based on divorces to make your claim of marriage being bad. A poll says so many people got divorced and then you assume you will get divorced too because of a poll and will not get married. That is a stupid way to think. Marriage is a normal thing to do and a few people in the fringe want to attack it getting others to join along.

Your argument has no steam. You guys say people get divorced so I might get divorced too. A weak argument based on fear and hypotheticals. Why not look at successful marriages based on a positive hypothetical? It goes both ways right like you say? People die in car accidents each day. I don't see anybody talking about hypotheicals of getting in car accident when you drive. It's pick and choose hypotheticals you guys do. You hate marriage so you pick the bad hypothetical for your fictional narrative. You like to drive so you do not use those bad hypotheticals for accidents. None of you have been married but you hate on something you never tried. Seems really strange to me.

Pena,

Seems odd that the child support money flows mainly in one direction, doesn't it? And that we don't seem to care that the money is being spent on the child, only that the money is being collected from the father to the mother.

I have the US Census data on my side to back my claims. Where is the data backing your claims?

No it is not odd since it is based on income. More women today are paying alimony and child support since they are making more money. 47% of women are according to divorce lawyers. It is on the net. Go look it up. It is the father's responsibility to provide and pay the mother for the child. The man's role is to provide and protect his children even with divorce. The mother has the responsibility to do the same. Laws were made because fathers split and refused to pay anything and the mothers did not provide for their children either. That left the children with nothing and that is not right to leave a child with nothing to have. Parents need to step up and be responsible. Lot of them are not. When people divorce kids get neglected and that is wrong.

Why do you care so much when you do not have kids and hate marriage? Why do you care about census data when you went your own way? It should not be a concern when you left this way of life. So why do you care so much?

 

[Hollowpoints]

He accuses me of attacking him playing the victim when he does the attacking. I'm only stating my position in support of marriage He attacks the foundation of marriage and call people names. He says I'm attacking and he is not? I guess you have to attack marriage to not be a attacker. If you attack marriage you are not a attacker but if you stand up for it you are one. So crazy how they are. Why do they care so much if they went their own way?

The MGTOW's act just like feminists. They claim they are a reaction to feminism and act just like it. Females lead them by the collar even as they claim to be going their own way (which is always online). They claim they're never getting married nor want to yet can't stop complaining about what they aren't going to do. They need to recruit as many angry men to a movement based off negativity and tell them it will make them happy yet all the main MGTOW's and members are still complaining and haven't gone anywhere.

It's a cult of entitled, frustrated, control freak, loons who are poorly equipped to go through life without everything going their way and when they claim to go their own way they still complain about it.

Go on ANY MGTOW forum or video blog etc. they do the major amount of shaming and attacking and then hilariously enough can't take it when someone calls them out on their entitled monologues they like to deliver to head nodding yes men. They only want to speak. Hear themselves speak. Agree with each other and then all complain about it while getting more paranoid and resentful of everything around them.

Sounds like a group of "happy" cult members to me.

 

[Peña]

The only reason I disagree with that is because we often hear about high earners paying ridiculous amounts of money in child support.

Is there actually a cap on the childs "needs" as defined in dollar amounts?

Why do you care when you went your own way? What is a ridiculous amount of money to you?

Or that women are by default granted custody more often. We don't have data to support either way, so all theories are valid here.

Women are the nurturers and men are the earners. The evidence is wrong because more joint custody is granted to the parents. If the father does not ask for that it can not be granted. All cases are different where the child goes.

So givens are:

1. Mothers get custody more often (We don't have data to tell us why, so all theories are valid at this point).
2. Mothers get more money when they receive custody (Again no data to tell us why, so all theories are valid at this point).

Next question.

Why do we have child support? Why does one parent have to supply money to the other to pay for the child?

If you are going your own way away from women and kids why would you want men to have custody? Seems strange to me when you guys talk about having freedom. How can you have freedom with kids hanging around?

Mothers get custody because they are nurturers and the father works. File for joint custody and it won't be a problem but is had on the kids. Fathers who make more money will pay more. Women who make more money will pay more.

Ii is the father's responsibility to pay for the child he created. Why do you want fathers to neglect their responsibility for not paying and protecting for his child? Deadbeat dads refused to pay for their kids and laws are to help the child to be cared for.

Why do you care so much about this when you have no kids, not married, and went your own way? You only want to attack marriage. That is your reason to play a victim so you can't get married.

 

[jurry]

Not sure where you came up with those numbers, I dont see anywhere that it is a percentage of income.

I entered these numbers into the massachusetts (bout as liberal as it gets) child support calculator, and for 500k income for non custodial parent with two children, the custodial parent making 50k a year, it tells me 1800 a month. Thats about 4% of income for someone making wayy more than almost everyone else in the country to support two kids they dont live with. Doesnt seem all that outrageous.

How often are both parents seeking custody?

 

[jurry]

I used the calculators at alllaw.com which has one for each state, but lets go with your numbers.

It appears to only go up to 200k, and assuming you have 2 kids that means the child support obligation is 50k. It doesnt tell us if all of that has to be paid by the non custodial partner. Assuming it does, thats 25% of their income. Dont you think that is a pretty average amount to spend on your children, whether you are married or not? What is the alternative you would prefer?

The 50% are going to court because they cant agree on child support, doesnt mention anything about custody. There are not many stats on who is petitioning for child support from what I can see.

 

[Alvafe]

MGTOWs want to use child support, alimony and kids to manipulate, control and punish the same females they woke up from their blue pill delusions of. They call them blue bill delusions because these men cannot handle women being anything else but their perfect obedient sex slaves and mothers.

They pretend as if they care about custody like they want to be a single mother but know they don't want to be single dads because of the negatives stigmas of single moms. Its just they pretend they care about custody as they want a revenge and control tool. If it came down to custody men who claim they arent doing anything for society would blame society for making them take custody. Same with alimony etc. Its a bargaining chip they feel they can use as women dont listen to them like other men.

Thats how you know these MGTOW female mind scientists are frauds who need to resort to extortion tactics much like they blame women on. Pathetic

you know using kids as revenge and control tools was always a female thing right? parents divorce, she will always tell her kids he don't love us anymore.
or just kill the kids and herself to hurt her ex, course men do that too but funny the first page is always when a men do that.

also can you please turn down the hate, its showing pretty a lot.

i'm still wondering why so much hate? envy? self delusion? just a troll? a female who hit the wall and is trying to shame others to accept her? tell me why put something here so we can at least think your point of view are valid not just something reaking of a emotional response to something only you know.

btw you do know waht is this blue pill delusion you hate so much? is that thing the dude stay with a girl when everything she does tells the guy she is not the "one" he hope she is, he want to change her, to his love win her over, they love will survive the test of time and they will life forever and ever happy, then reality hits, not a little slappy, but like a damn truck passing over him, everything he did, to make her happy all money spend to make her happy the marriage she wanted, the dresses she wanted, the house she wanted, he worked hard for it, to suport and cherish her, then one day he come back earlier from work to hear her moaning with a dude he never even know (if is it not the cleaning poll boy or the janitor),

Then he goes around and look for what he did wrong (still thinking it was his fault) then he found out he is not the only one, there are several mens around happening the same, they get tired and start to learn on how to deal with it and make use of it then puas show up, have some sucess and use the marxism idea of all female are *****s (since feminism like to preach it), then we have guys who start to screen woman even more and still try to be happy with a female in a marriage (knowing pretty well its a gamble but cover his tracks to lesser the hit if such gamble is a fail), then we have guys who will still have females to date and all that,but never commit to anything more serious then living together, and then there are guys so damn tired of all that sh!t who stop caring with females who don't care and don't want to be draged again in the sh"t storm.

also there is guys who don't learn, they don't want to change to consider then what they did was wrong, they ego don't let then, so they keep goign and going trying and failing.

 

[zekko]

How about these cases where the judges base the male's income on what he decides is the man's potential for earning, not his actual income? They do this supposedly to keep guys from being deadbeats and just earning minimum money to keep from paying. But we've all seen stories of the guy thrown in jail because he doesn't make enough to pay the child support, and it's all subjective and at the discretion of the judge.

It is the father's responsibility to pay for the child he created. Why do you want fathers to neglect their responsibility for not paying and protecting for his child? Deadbeat dads refused to pay for their kids and laws are to help the child to be cared for.

There's nothing wrong with marriage per se. The problem is that current society is sick. In today's culture, a guy can get married and start a family and be an earnest father. But the vast majority of divorces are initiated by women.

So the poor schmuck guy can have his family - his wife and children - ripped away from him against his will, and he's stuck living in some apartment all by himself while he has to pay child support to the woman (because he's the earner) for the next 20 years to the woman who has custody (because she's the nurturer).

Certainly it doesn't shake out that way every time, but it does in a lot of cases. That's why marriage is a high risk enterprise for men, these days.

 

[jurry]

The table in the pdf goes that high, but that does not mean the child support stops there.

And yes, all of that has to be paid by the non-custodial parent. Ask anyone who has gone through the family court system in NY.

I dont know anyone who has gone through the family court system in NY. The link you have doesnt make it clear. My understanding is that the amount is split based off of incomes.

So let's look at it. If a man makes $200K a year, has one child and the wife gets custody (pretty much by default). That means she AUTOMATICALLY gets $50k a year direct to her pocket without taxes to support that child right, does not have to prove she spent it on the child right, but can be taken to court if she is neglecting the child or not taking care of its needs and can block visitation by the father with no recourse where are you getting that information? It is whatever arrangement is worked out in the custody decision. Just because you are a custodial parent doesnt mean you have the child all the time or can stop the other from seeing them.

The courts only enforce that she gets $50K a year tax free from him (and she gets the tax write-off for the dependent, not him).

I think everyone can agree that is pretty fvked up, wouldn't you agree?

we havent even found out whether that is a common or legally plausible scenario yet, so its too early to say.



If that is the case, then the burden is on your side to provide statistics showing that most men don't even try to get custody.

The burden of proof is on both of us, you insist on this being about sides and right and wrong when I am trying to uncover the facts.

 

[jurry]

The link is quite clear. There is no cap anywhere, it is a percentage and those table are just there for easy reference.

Im not talking about the cap im talking about how you are determining that the non custodial parent is responsible for that entire amount.


Those are different measures than what I am stating. A man making $200,000 a year has to give $34,000 a year in cash to her which is almost $3000/month, free of taxes AND she still gets the write-off for the child.

She does not have to prove she spent this on the child. She merely has to "not neglect the child". What does that tell you about who is benefiting here?

She has to uphold the living standards the child had prior to the settlement, and the payments follow from income which determines living standards. There isnt going to be that amount and then by the way heres another 50k for a new car.

Decision by court is one thing, what is enforces is entirely different. If he doesn't pay, he goes to jail. Extremely rare scenario If she blocks visitation or makes it difficult (as often happens)according to who?, then it's back to court.....what happens to her? She still doesn't lose custody, she mightnor does she go to jail.probably not jail isnt common in child support dispute for any reason

The burden of proof on who gets the child, who pays child support and how much money flows in one direction is already proven by my links. The assertion was made that this is because men don't file for custody. I am asking for proof of that assertion.

The assertion was made that this is incomplete data to conclude that women are systematically abusing the child support system to get rid of the father and take his money - for a variety of reasons including that we dont know if men are even asking for custody.

When you make a conclusion that serious while admitting you dont know all the facts it ruins your credibility. This is why I say this the guy from the original article you posted is only interested in pushing a certain agenda, and that people should do their own research.