-
I agree with darkseid that the reason the US has lower divorce rate than some other countries because Americans are much less liberated. Also because in America difficult to live for
man if he alone. You don’t need bitchy wife to have sex if you live in Europe or Latin America.
Here the man in many cases is just slave of his wife.
Joe_zop, what definition of the happiness for man in this studies? If American men have to cut of his friends
and his interest and to do that his wife telling him to do what kind of happiness is it?
This is just happiness of the slave.
And if men are generally happier being married in this studies than women it is just could mean that AM afraid to lose his marriage because he know that he is going to go through hell after divorce and he appreciate his marriage just like a slave, and AW know what she can get the better deal if she will be divorced or remarried that why she is not satisfied. She is not satisfied just because the bitches are never satisfied.
I am absolutely agree with darkseid that this statistic could be flawed.
Also it is difficult to find correlation between divorced rate and unhappy marriages.
What is better: to have two marriages and to live 75% time happy during
both marriages in Russia or to have bitchy American wife 100% time and afraid to divorce her because there are not much better options for men here in North America?
To clarify all these problems more sophisticated statistic is needed if such statistic could be done at all.
Exactly that why "feelings" based on personal experience could be more useful than unrelated statistics.
Personaly I got from darkseid much more useful and more correct information about situation in US than from whole bunch of useless statistics.
-
Lenin, in most of the studies I read happiness was self-defined ("rate how happy you are on a scale of x to y") so it's a general measure. Sure, it could be the happiness of the slave, but since most of these studies measure married and unmarried men and women, I think putting that particular spin only on the married man is a bit of a stretch -- one could just as easily say that unmarried men define themselves as less happy because they troubles getting fed as often as they like, or whatever. I've noted before the correlation between health problems for unmarried versus married guys -- with one researcher going so far as to say that life expectancy is more adversely affected by being unmarried than by being poor, overweight, or having heart disease -- so it might simply be that they're happier because they're healthier (or vice versa.)
There's a very new study (March issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology) that looked at 24,000 people in Germany before and during relationships asked them about their happiness levels, and while people who were couples reported that they were happier, in general those same people reported before the study that they were happier. People got a bounce in happiness levels leading up to being married and in the early stages of marriage, and then dropped back to their normal levels, which were still generally higher that that of others. (Most people, btw, rate themselves between 5.5 and 8 on the scale of 0 to 10.) When those who define themselves as generally not very happy [i]do[/i] marry, they report more of a rise in their happiness level, the study found. This might be because they stand to gain more from the union than a happy person who has always had many social contacts. (This was a longitudinal study covering 15 years, with participants contacted yearly.)
From this we can conclude three things -- one, that perhaps marriage itself isn't the issue even though you get a bounce from it; two, that it's not simply an American issue; (and there are other studies that say the same thing is true in other countries) and three, that happy people tend to end up in relationships, where they continue to be happy.
So if you're a miserable fuck, you're probably going to be a miserable fuck in or out of a marriage, though your odds appear to improve on the inside. If you're happy, you're going to be happy, married or not. C'est la vie.
Studies are what they are, and they only measure what they measure -- if people want to denigrate them for not speaking directly to this or that point they're obviously free to do so. I seriously doubt this collection of bitchy guys is likely to influence research design all that much, since if the conclusions of the study don't support their point of view, they'll just come up with another flaw.
And I'd have no problem with Darkseid's perspectives on marriage had he ever actually [i]been[/i] in one, as testimony of the damned is eminently legit and eloquent, as Dickhead ably demonstrates. But otherwise it's like someone talking knowingly about prostitutes when he's never visited one.
Thanks, Paddy, it would have been interesting to hear just how the case might be made and the perspective of the cousin, especially since any social group, men or women, has a tendency to be supportive by default. As far as Lookr's story, well, such behavior is obviously grounds for walking away, and anyone who doesn't walk ought to know full well what they're signing up for. I'd have gotten the ring back and told her to explain to her married friends why I dumped her, though that's the easy perspective of one who's not infaturated -- we all know what kind of trouble we can get into when we're not thinking with the big head.
-
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dickhead
[i]
The fact that a partially reasonable woman such as RN would even think of justifying not returning an engagement ring really scares me.
[/i][/QUOTE]
good point DH, this is just one more prove that woman is woman's natural ally
-
I'm only "partially reasonable", Dickhead??? LOL
Please don't get the wrong idea, though...I did say that I don't know which side I'd really stand on if it came to the crunch. I have never received an engagement ring, so I can't say for sure. All I was thinking of, in my "justification" for keeping the ring, was some of the women I've spoken to who have just been given one. You know the type...their lifelong dream of meeting Mr Right and walking down the aisle has just come true, they sit at their desks writing their 'married name' over and over (or even picking baby names!!), and they run around showing complete strangers their new engagement ring, grinning from ear to ear. I was just thinking how soul-destroying it would be if, through no fault of her own, she was suddenly dumped and not only had all those dreams of married bliss dashed, but also had to give her ring back. It wasn't so much a matter of "compensation", as Joe suggested - I just feel sorry for women in that position.
In all honesty though (and maybe this shows I'm a little too "reasonable" for my own good!!), if roles were reversed and *I* was the one giving the engagement ring, and *I* was the one doing the dumping - then I would let the guy keep the ring. In fact, it would never have crossed my mind to ask for it back in the first place. Call me a softie, but that's how I feel.
Oh and for the record - I, personally, have no need for an engagement ring. Why should a man have to buy me an expensive trinket as "proof of his love"? Isn't the fact that he asked me to spend THE REST OF HIS LIFE with him, proof enough???
And Lenin - Of course, as a woman, I am going to always speak from a feminine point of view, but I would never back up a woman JUST because she was a woman. I would have to firmly believe that she's right. I hate bitchy, catty, materialistic cows as much as you do.
-
Many years ago . . . more than I like to think about, I broke up with my 1st girlfriend due to her sleeping with some other guy after requiring me to be faithful. Yet she did keep the ring. It didn´t really bother me at the time. What was I going to do with it? Sell it? Give it to someone else? But what bothered me much more was her seemingly irrational need for the ring in the first place. The ring had more importance than I did. Very common with young love . . . the White Dress syndrome. But we were both a lot less jaded then. I wonder what the hell SHE did with the ring? She´s married now with 2 kids. Maybe I´ll ask her . . .
-
Joe, I admit I haven't actually been in a marriage but I have been engaged and it is like a preview of marriage. If my experience with being engaged with a bitchy fiancee was bad, marriage would probably have been worse. I agree that I have not experienced marriage personally but I have enough divorced friends and relatives who tell me horror stories of it. It is like seeing someone get third degree burns all over his body and just by seeing that victim, you know that what he went through is the worst thing to happen to him in the world. The burn victim experiences pain from the burns, and even worse, disfigurement. He is like an outcast whose identity has been erased. He also loses his abilities. You wouldn't want to experience it yourself by jumping into a fire or lighting yourself up. I've seen more guys get screwed by marriage than guys going through happy marriages. Everyone who is married or divorced tells me not to do it. This feeds my fear of even considering marriage and yes, I AM scared of getting married because the consequences seem greater than the rewards.
-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Dickhead
"The fact that a partially reasonable woman such as RN would even think of justifying not returning an engagement ring really scares me. "
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lenin
[i]good point DH, this is just one more prove that woman is woman's natural ally [/i][/QUOTE]
Dickhead and Lenin, I don't think RN's viewpoint is due to the fact that she is a woman, and would support other woman in such cases. She herself said she sees both sides of the issue.
There are many instances where I think it is highly debatable whether a woman should give the ring back. As mentioned, what if the guy fools around and found someone else while the girl's family are preparing for the wedding? The family have to suffer the embarassment of having their daughter dumped and still have to give back the ring? Maybe. Or say the guy moves into the woman's apartment and because he spent money on the ring, she said she'll pay rent for now. There are many other senarios but it's kinda ugly and I'd rather not get into it.
For one thing, though the court normally says that she have to give the ring back, imagine the complexities of enforcing that. First of all, do you want to take your ex fiancee to court over a ring? Wasting your time and hers? And she may call her sister, mom etc to testify against you?
Secondly even IF you win the case, the court awards you the ring but does not help you collect it. What are you gonna do? Call her everyday to ask for it back?
But if the woman finds a better guy, perhaps she should give the ring back-if the guy really want it back.
If it were me and I gave a ring. I doubt I'd ask for it back if it means something to the girl.
joe_zop, when someone asks a question on this forum, it is not unusual for people to step in and answer. Other people want to know the answers too. If you don't like it, tough luck.
I don't blame skinless for telling you to not engage in me, I TOLD you to not engage in me. Then you came back at me like a mad dog on another thread DJ you $%^&. And I said :haven't you had enough? And you went on. Later even when no one was argueing with you you were talking to yourself "I'm going to ignore DJ". BTW, skinless also agreed with me some stuff you were writing is bourgeois crap.
I'm pulling my punches. Now let's all get along:). It's better to be my ally than my enemy.
-DJ
-
Hey Darkseid,
I agree totally. I recently read a major study from the University of Michigan (my fair alma mater) which indicated that approximately 50% of marriages in the US end in divorce in 2-5 years. Furthermore, and I thought that this was very significant, they found in their samples that another 22% were profoundly unhappy and dysfunctional and that these people SHOULD be divorced. So, you have about a 28% chance of having a good or acceptable marriage. That's about a 1 in 5 chance of experiencing marital bliss (however you want to define marital bliss). 1 in 5 are pretty lousy odds.
On a personal level, none of my guy friends are happy being married. A famous Irish writer once referred to a bachelor as "... a lad who never made the same mistake ONCE."
RN,
Yes, an engagement should be a type of "trial" period. However, once the rings are purchased, deposits are put down on halls, dresses are ordered, etc., SOO much money has been spent that there is almost no way to back out. That was the primary reason why I hung in during the so called "engagement. "
BTW, I loved your description of the girl with the new engagement ring showing it to everyone including complete strangers, etc. Your descrption of the whole scene was both witty and highly accurate.
-
OK, RN, your last post seems fair so I will upgrade you from partially reasonable to generally reasonable. Paddy, maybe time for some other college, at least for math. 28% is greater than one in four and is closer to one in three than one in five. But then I was a history major so WTF do I know. Go Spartans.
Here's a good one on rings. I have a friend who has twice married women he's only known a short time. The second one he only knew for a few days. He spent I think it was $8,000 on her ring, on credit with "easy monthly payments" that were killing him. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the marriage didn't last. It was partly because I elected to take him to a strip bar. He'd never been to one in his life, or so he said, and he hooked up with one of the strippers and didn't come home for a few days. His wife, whom I'd never actually met, was calling me constantly until I finally had to tell her to fuck off.
Anyway, while they were going through the divorce process, he showed up at her apartment and gave her a big bullshit story about wanting to get back together, give me another chance, you are the love of my life, blah blah blah. He fucks the hell out of her and then she goes to take a shower. He goes in there while she is naked and soapy, physically yanks the ring off her hand and runs out the door, leaving her naked and screaming. He returned the ring and made a settlement with the jeweler. Later in court, it turned out she hadn't listed the ring on the property declaration so there wasn't jack shit she could do about it.
I think my friend still ended up out about $2,000 with the payments and the settlement. Now he is living with some doctor who makes a lot of money and he hasn't worked in years. What a douche bag. His first wife, whom he knew for I think six weeks before he married her, left him for another woman.
-
Dickhead, thanks for the laugh -- that's a hilarious story. Can't imagine why women don't think highly of us...
Just as an aside -- is there any other industry that can manage, as the diamond monopolists have done, to define what percentage of your income you ought to be spending on a luxury? Two month's salary? Try having a conversation with many women about the silliness of such a "rule" and you get absolutely nowhere. Weddings are to women what watching sports are to men -- something the other sex simply can't get into, tries to negotiate into some degree of reasonable, and ultimately just has to put up with.
Paddy, can you point me to some information on that study? It runs counter to all the others I've read, and it's certainly doesn't agree statistically with the census bureau in terms of the number of marriages ending that quickly. Sorry to hear about your friends -- my experience is the opposite; my friends are a mix of the happy and unhappy that pretty well matches up with the basic statistics. And when I ask some of the unhappy ones if the'd rather get out of the marriage, many will also say, no, they're just bitching. 'Course, that's often typical of guys, too, given how at times secreting and hard to read we can be about emotions -- they could just be bitching, or they could end up divorced in a week. I'd also note that I've got a fair number of friends who are miserable with being single, as well as those who are happy with it.
Darkseid, perhaps your experience with a fiance was a preview of a bad marriage, but that's still not the same as actually living with someone over time, and seeing a burn victim still isn't the same as being one. And if we want to follow that metaphor down, (and I agree that it's a dramatic and sometimes apt one, and that many guys do walk around disfigured) the basic problem is that you tend to say that anyone who lives in a house where there's a gas stove ends up a burn victim. That's just an exaggeration -- yes, those who get burned have it bad, but not everyone ends up with third degree burns. And don't get me wrong -- I've got no problem with your making comments on marriage, as that's clearly your right; it's just that they're almost always knowing and blanket statements, and if you're going to turn things into black and white as opposed to many shades it seems fair to question qualifications. Again, maybe it's a New York City or big-city thing, but I just don't see the same level of vitriol and crispiness out here in the heartland.
RN, I have to say that a fair number of the brides-to-be that engage in the behavior you've eloquently described seem to me to end up being disasterous wives, as they're often more in love with the idea of being brides than they are with the guy they're hooking up with. Once they get hitched, reality tends to creep into the equation for the first time, and it doesn't always look like the magazines they've been reading. The problem for some of these brides is that there tends to be a real marriage that follows the dream wedding. I've got several nieces who were exactly this way, and it didn't matter how much anyone talked to them, they couldn't be dissuaded into actually looking at reality. All but a couple of them ended up divorced pretty quickly.
And screw you, DJ -- Skinless tried to make peace because he felt we were counterproductive, not because you're something fearsome. A very typical misreading of the situation by you. You're nothing dangerous, you're just a bonehead who can't read very well and thinks he's about ten times smarter than he is, whose chief talent seems to be chasing people out of sections via repeated attacks. Your "warning" meant nothing to me at the time, and means nothing now, nor does your conveniently twisted version of events or your monumental ego. (Not to mention your even more obnoxious claim that you'd somehow "changed" my behavior, as though I'd ever make a change in reaction to something a fool like you did. I change my behavior or my opinion based on reason or persuasion, not grade-school idiocy.) You started things out of the blue in the first place with a personal attack, and complain because it didn't end just because you royally proclaimed you'd put in the last word. Whoop-de-do. I don't have to end something just because you say so -- you want it ended, then post an apology in the appropriate section for attacking me in the first place. Otherwise, as far as I'm concerned, it ends whenever I feel like it, fuck you, and I'm going to react anytime you get in my business.
I'm sure as hell not going to be your "ally" as that implies you can trust someone if you turn their back on them. A snake is a snake, even if it's a snake that hisses constantly that it's really a big scary lion.
-
ERROR MESSAGE:
When I re-read my earlier posting, I made a small but perhaps significant typing error. When I stated that the University of Michigan study concluded that you had about a 28% chance of a good or satisfying marriage, I typed those odds as being 1 in 5. Of course, mathematically, 28% is close to about 1 in 4. Sorry. I hit the 5 key when I meant to hit the 4.
Having taught statistics for many years I felt compelled to correct my error. I used to burn students for mistakes like that and now I engage in them. Must be a senior moment or something. Endless apologies.
Paddy
-
DH,
Just read your last posting. That has to be one of the funniest stories I've read in a long time.
If my niece's fiance ever tried that she would not only whip his ass in the shower but she'd then have him arrested and jailed for assault and battery.
-
More on rings. Yesterday I went to a baseball game with my two best women friends. I noticed the non-married one (a Gopher) was not wearing her "engagement" ring. She has been "engaged" for about six years now, having called off the scheduled wedding due to seeing her BF groping her drunk and virtually passed out bridesmaid (to be) and good friend while the bridesmaid was up for a weekend to pick out dresses and etc. She told me that she wasn't wearing her ring because she was having the stone replaced with one she liked better. Then the married one (a Spartan) chimed in with her story of having the stone in her ring that hubby had given her replaced with a stone from a ring she inherited.
I asked them how their BF or husband felt about them doing this and they both responded that they hadn't asked them! This would [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord140][CodeWord140][/url] me right off if I were the guy in question. Another strange thing is that this made me realize that the married one never wore her wedding ring, only her engagement ring. Now I don't know about the rest of you but I never knowingly screw married women, or even bother to flirt with them, but am willing to hit on ones who are merely engaged for practice if nothing else. I voiced this philosophy to my friend, who knows me very, very well, and she said she thought she did get hit on more because she just wore the engagement ring, and that she rather liked this.
I don't think the married one would ever cheat on her husband (a very good friend of mine), but the other one cheats all the time, including with me sometimes (I don't like her boyfriend much at all). I make her take her ring off every time I screw her just to remind her what a tramp she really is. Women are pretty strange.
Hey Paddy, you know you can edit your postings. I wouldn't even have pointed out the mistake if I weren't such a Dickhead. Go Wolverines.
-
I agree that rings are an important indicator, though it's surprising at times for what -- a couple of my single friends wear rings because they say they get hit on more by women when wearing them. When I've worn a ring I've had the same experience. I'm absolutely with you, DH -- I'd be pissed if someone changed stones in an engagement ring I gave them, unless there was already a marriage ring exchanged. Once the marriage has happened, it's truly her ring to do with as she pleases, but before that it's more like a deposit or collateral. (I'd probably still be pissed if it was done without talking to me, though.)
Again, Paddy, I'd love to track down that UM study, especially since I just read another from Rutgers directly contradicting the conclusions you report. This includes a chart over time of married people over 18, broken into male and female, who indicate that their marriages are "very happy." While it shows a decline of about 5% since the 1970s, it pegs the rate at over 60% for both sexes, with men consistently scoring higher than women. ([url]http://marriage.rutgers.edu/Publications/SOOU/TEXTSOOU2002.htm[/url]) Seems high to me, especially for a "very" response, but so it goes, and the methods and measures are probably different between studies. Even though Americans are now less likely to marry than they were thirty years ago, around 55% of all those in the US over 15 are married at any given time (a couple of percentage points higher for men), with the number between 35 and 44 hanging around 70% for both men and women. If close to two-thirds of them say their marriages are "very happy" then those who are truly unhappy are in a clear minority. My math says using these numbers that around 45% of [i]all[/i] men between those ages describe themselves as being in a "very happy" marriage. If [i]that[/i] is actually true, the odds aren't nearly as bleak as one in four. I'd presume this number has to include those who get it right the second time.
My understanding of the 50% divorce rate is that it means that half of all marriages are expected to end in divorce before the marriages break up through death. I can't find anything anywhere that says half of all marriages fail before five years are up.
-
My married friend had been married for years before she changed the stone but it would still [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord140][CodeWord140][/url] me off. I think??? Ahh, how the hell would I know. I just think it's strange to change your ring that your lover gave you, and it might hurt his feelings. Good thing I'm a Dickhead and don't have any feelings.