Show ALL Forums
Posted In Forum:

Home   login   MyForums  
 
 Author Thread: We all heard of deadbeat dads-what about deadbeat moms?
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 136 (view)
 
We all heard of deadbeat dads-what about deadbeat moms?
Posted: 4/13/2014 7:33:53 AM
You are exactly right, lovefun. It is about fulfilling one's financial responsibility to their offspring, who are entitled to the financial benefit. No matter how anyone tries to portray it, losers are always the children when a parent refuses to support them. The sacrifices are borne by them, and they are truly the only innocent ones in these situations. Good for you!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 51 (view)
 
would you turn down a relationship with someone who believes in a God?
Posted: 3/5/2014 5:00:56 PM

I believe that this stems largely from the cause or reason that drove them into being Atheist. If it was a reactionary or unterse reason (in defiance of organized religion) because they felt that "they" were not given life's due rewards (or any other form of imaginary entitlement); or even perhaps that such a 'God' has not offered them personal or empiric proof of his existence (as though they were worthy of it in some way) before they would acquiesce. Thus, I think that such an arrogance is more a reflection of that person's character or personality than anything else.


Aren't your first & last statement contradictory? I completely agree that the arrogant would be so regardless of the presence or absence of theism, but one does not become arrogant based on their perception of the effects of either theism or atheism, rather based on their perception of self & others, no? One needn't be "driven" into atheism. Neither theist nor atheist corners the market on pomposity, as far as I can see (although I admit to finding within these forums the most pompous atheists, personifying zealotry, I have ever come across but I don't believe they reflect reality behind these [fire]walls, so to speak).


To be fair, there is no shortage of arrogant religious (fundamentalists of all kinds) people who look down, disrespect, belittle, even do harm to others who they feel to be above because their "sky-creator" is better or more real than someone else's.


I don't believe that those who do as you cite do so because of their feelings in regards to their "sky creator"; they do so because they have character flaws. For the most part, religion (no matter the religion) advocates tolerance & love of fellow man, at its' core. It is the misguided who use religion as an excuse to treat others poorly, who defend their actions in the name of religion when no such excuse exists in the larger picture painted by religion.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 79 (view)
 
Prostitution
Posted: 2/25/2014 7:09:00 PM

For me, I think making/keeping prostitution illegal makes it far more dangerous than it needs to be. Although I deplore anyone who has to engage in such work, I think we should try to protect those who actually do it (after all, they are human beings too). In other words, the government shouldn't encourage prostitution, but they should make sure prostitutes, both males and females, are protected under the law while doing their trade.


Frankly, I am surprise at you, given your level of intelligence. You truly believe that prostitution is dangerous BECAUSE it is illegal?!

Perhaps I am mistaken, but I am inclined to believe that the vast majority of prostitutes did not grow up with dreams of becoming so. More likely the profession is fed by drug addiction, instability & hopelessness. Not sure what "protection" you speak of,op. I would imagine any dangerous "profession" would then call for government protection; drug trafficking, running illegal weapons, hit man, etc.

Interesting that you claim to deplore those who are (most often & most likely forced, at least in their minds) engaged in the trade. You disapprove of them, yet you are willing to spend your hard earned dollars to protect them? Makes little sense to me. Wouldn't it behoove you to instead invest in preventing them from engaging in such a trade to begin with? "An ounce of prevention..."?
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 96 (view)
 
Unable to afford child support, any advice ????
Posted: 2/25/2014 6:22:52 PM
I have no problem with the premise both parents should be responsible for their children....however unlike you and ohwhynot...I also suggest any custodial parent be held to the same expectation of employment and responsiblity. Your lack of financial capabilities have nothing to do with your ex...they are a result of your choices in the past and I suspect continued choices.


Unlike you, some of us recognize that a parent, of either gender, can not suddenly be expected to earn income that they were not qualified to earn whilst in a relationship with the other parent of their child. The "same expectation" of employment & responsibility does not equate to equivalent dollars, not in the real world. More often than you seem able to admit, forfeited work experience & the resultant lesser income is the choice of both parents. More often than not, one of these parents has the lower paying job which affords them the flexibility to transport children to & from school, activities, doctor's appts., etc.


Yes it is income or revenue coming into the home....you have no problem castrating a guy for not being what you feel is financially responsible.....and yet you defend the part time employed mother as being acceptable and over worked.
I expect either custodial parent...be it a male or a female to be expected to work full time to provide for themselves and their children.
You on the other hand seem to advocate that it is okay for the poor mother to leech off the non custodial father. Or as you whined before...You did not have a career as it was agreed...((supposedly)) for you to stay home and do nothing.


Technically, no. CS is not considered income, neither legally nor by the IRS. CS very rarely covers all of a child's expenses & hardly ever results in disposable income to a cs, even if you are unable to wrap your brain around that fact.

I have never castrated a man, nor would I want to (after all, what else are they good for?! lol).

I would never defend a parent who reduced their work hours to part time (as did my ex, btw, and I am sure you are applauding him, although the only ones who paid for that were our children, who sacrificed time with me, as I had to put in 60 hrs/wk so they had food on the table), but certainly I defend a parent who continues in the same employment situation they were in during a relationships, and certainly in the employment & income level for which they are qualified. You seem to believe that becoming a single parent suddenly makes you qualified for higher income jobs.

Don't twist my words. I certainly did have a career. I earned more than my ex at the time I left my job. He did not want to stay home with our children, but we both agreed that having a parent home was in the best interest of our children. I have never regretted that decision and my children are grateful that I spent my time with them. I take offense at the suggestion that I "did nothing". Not that it's any of your business, but I ran my ex's business as a union contractor, quoting & booking jobs, certified payroll & union reports, receivables collection, etc. & often worked from home performing bookkeeping & accounting for local small businesses as well. All the while taking care of the home, cooking, cleaning, laundry, children's activities, etc. All of my children read before Kindergarten, all were well behaved, and are well adjusted wonderful individuals. Certainly I deserve some credit for that. Still, being out of the full time workforce for several years affected my earning potential, reduced my retirement funding & certainly made it more difficult financially to support our children on my own.

Me thinks you need to redefine whining & take a good look in the mirror.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 93 (view)
 
Unable to afford child support, any advice ????
Posted: 2/2/2014 5:48:18 PM

•76% of custodial parents who were due child support in 2007 received at least some support; 46.8% received all of the support due (up from 36.9% in 1993)


Not a number one can suggest is good...but 76% receives some is in stark contrast to some wild suggestion of 60% not receiving anything....but cheap unsubstantiated comments do make for great rhetoric!


Here we go again, Tealwood. I guess you fail to see that her stated 60% is not so far off, is it? She did not "suggest" nothing, you did! Less than 50% received what their CHILDREN were entitled to, correct?

This is not about the woman.man. parent, but the children. No matter how you phrase it, or where you get your stats from, I would say that this is abhorrent.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 92 (view)
 
Unable to afford child support, any advice ????
Posted: 2/2/2014 5:44:11 PM

^^^^ I think she was joking, but it does point to larger issue. Do women feel that they have a built-in income when they have kids and know that the financial suffering or consequence during and after a divorce will never fall into their hands (rare exception excluded)? I wonder how many women hold that thought in their heads as they let relationships/marriages die. Do they hold that over their boyfriend's/husband's head? Do they use it as leverage?


Larger issue? I think not. Those foolish enough to believe that cs is income are fools. It is not women alone who "allow" relationships to die.

There is quite enough gender warfare on this site. This particular thread, however, seems evidence that we all, regardless of gender, believe that two parents should be responsible for their children. Please take your ignorant/misogynistic views elsewhere.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 91 (view)
 
Unable to afford child support, any advice ????
Posted: 2/2/2014 5:30:19 PM

^^^Another example of a poor ass mother wishing she could drain your wallet. Pathetic..


puhleeze.. get a sense of humor!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 90 (view)
 
Unable to afford child support, any advice ????
Posted: 2/2/2014 5:19:06 PM

which of course I cant afford considering that I was barely making ends meet before the automatic deductions started


Of course, your children can't afford not to eat! Get a second & third job if needed. You are responsible to support your children.
btw, many of us don;'t but into the notion that one gets custody because they have more money. In truth, most often custody is granted based on primary caregiver role. Time to grow up.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 43 (view)
 
Child Support: How To Obtain If Whereabouts Unknown?
Posted: 2/2/2014 5:13:30 PM

It doesn't sound to me like you need his help, it sounds more like you are pissed off at him and trying to punish him. He should by all means help with the child, but you need to be doing this for the child and not yourself in my humble opinion.


Agreed, the op's motivation is suspect. Still, there are two parents & both should be held accountable.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 127 (view)
 
We all heard of deadbeat dads-what about deadbeat moms?
Posted: 11/27/2013 5:48:50 PM
Pursuing a parent for cs doesn't equate to viewing one's children as a revenue stream. It is about holding someone accountable, enforcing the notion of responsibility. Even if you can provide for your children on your own, why shouldn't they reap the benefit of two parents who contribute? No one dictates that the money go to household expenses. One who pursues cs & is successful is certainly able to make a decision to, say, invest in a college fund, or hand over the cash to the child when they turn 21, get married, etc.

I have little doubt that this poster's children benefited from the monies he did receive as a result of his perseverance, as they should. It's a matter of how you look at it, is all. You are no more "right" than are the rest of parents; whatever works for you.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 104 (view)
 
Legalizing drugs
Posted: 11/12/2013 5:09:33 PM

But I'd rather come across a drunk wanting to fight me but can feel pain. Than some psychotic person high on bath salts wanting to eat my face and trying to fight off a person who can't feel any pain what so ever. You can't compare the two.


True enough (actually, possibly not, as there are both numbing effects and increased hostility related to alcohol consumption), but just as unfair is the comparison of marijuana & "bath salts".
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 120 (view)
 
single pregnant mother
Posted: 11/12/2013 5:02:17 PM

TBH, i prehaps wasnt in the rightframe of mind when i posted this thread but thank you all for your comments, like i say i am doing the best for me and my girls we are all happy and i dont quite know when i would fit in time for a man even if i had one.
And now no dating whilst pregnant.
Thank you xxx


Congrats to you for refraining from such display of immaturity as many of those who responded. Frankly, I was more concerned about your seeming need for companionship. Your post above indicates that you are, indeed, more mature & cognizant of what is really important. Good luck to you!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 40 (view)
 
Why do single parents WANT other single parents?
Posted: 11/12/2013 4:50:26 PM

I've read several profiles of single Moms that aren't even subtle about the idea they are looking for a guy who is already a father vs. someone who does not have kids. Although I understand having 'experience' is a huge plus in that field, I seriously wonder if people think through all of the issues that can come about because you're essentially multiplying the difficulties of scheduling/dating for a single parent times TWO.


I don't disagree with the notion that being two single parents can make dating even more difficult, especially early on in a relationship, but I think it's a bit assumptive to suggest that the reason is because one who is already a parent is "better". Perhaps it has to do with understanding; understanding when you have to cancel a date because your child is ill; understanding when you have to postpone an overnight date because a child decides they don't want to spend the night at a friend's, etc. Perhaps it's not about "thinking through", but rather having had experiences.


Everyone I've ever met says I'd make a decent father, but convincing a single mom of that over the internet seems nearly impossible sometimes.


Try not to take is personally, as it may have nothing to do with another's view of you as a potential parent. More often than not, their child(ren) already has another parent, after all. A fairly brief perusal of these forums would indicate that most nonparents do not wish to be second. Most (decent) parents are not willing to put another before their offspring, so it would seem to make sense that they wouldn't choose to waste time on a relationship that is not likely to succeed, and at least is likely to take much longer to progress than would be the case if they did not have children.


Why is it that some people STILL assume at first blush that someone else being a parent makes them 'better' in the long run for their OWN kids?


Why is it that you assume that parents make relationship decisions solely on what is better for their children in the long run?

What I'm trying to say is that many of us, parents or not, choose our potential partners based on what past experience shows will be better for US in the long run, children included. Your feelings are valid, but please don't assume that is your potential for parenting alone that reigns supreme over one's decision whether or to date you.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 102 (view)
 
The school bully
Posted: 10/17/2013 7:42:20 PM
Stupid & pathetic, although words you have chosen, are sadly quite true. I feel badly for you that your own parents messed up, but that is no excuse for you to continue to do so. Your attitude is apparently one borne of pain, but it does you little good nonetheless. It would behoove you to seek counseling or at least parenting classes. Unfortunately, the only one who will learn a lesson here is your son, and I am quite confident that it will not be an easy one. The "real world" does not exist to a 4 yr old, and the one you have chosen for him is unrealistic at best. I wish the best for him.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 101 (view)
 
The school bully
Posted: 10/17/2013 4:57:48 PM

I'm a very, VERY liberal individual


Strange use of the word liberal. Sounds like an excuse for lazy parenting, as you don't seem particularly stupid.


Who am I trying to impress? I couldn't care less what others think. Thats the thing. Takes alot more to tear down this fortress, lmao


Thanks! Simply another indication that you lack maturity. btw, "A lot" is two words.


There's lots of parenting ways. I'm using the way of permissive parenting.


Again, substitute lazy for permissive. As I mentioned earlier, what if your 4 yr old wanted to play with a loaded pistol? Allowing a 4 yr old to do whatever they want is not permissive, it's irresponsible. You have a responsibility to teach your child appropriate behavior and boundaries and to equip him with the needed tools to grow & succeed. Use any excuse you wish, and any words you can find to describe your "style", but the fact remains; your child will not be allowed to do whatever they want, whenever they want in real life. Those who are too lazy to parent shouldn't breed.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 100 (view)
 
The school bully
Posted: 10/16/2013 7:27:39 PM
You are right, as thankfully, my children and yours will NEVER run in the same circles. Very telling, though, is your statement ("he wants, he gets") intimating that you believe that a child should get what they want , when they want. True indicator of a narcissistic personality, and hardly a good way to prepare a child for success in society. A sense of entitlement with disregard for others is the mark of dysfunction. Hopefully your child does not desire & want to play with loaded pistols.

"Poor" encompasses far more than monetary desire.

I strongly suggest you further your education. There is nothing about your words that are impressive to anyone with a modicum of intelligence & maturity.

btw, "yawn" is not the mark of an interested, caring parent. It is your RESPONSIBILITY to educate yourself in the ways of parenting. Your disinterest in doing so hurts your own child more than it hurts anyone else. I challenge you to do so, and come back in 5 yrs. Are you up to that challenge?
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 99 (view)
 
The school bully
Posted: 10/16/2013 6:58:15 PM

My kid plays Grand Theft Auto 5, Gears of War, Resident Evil, etc. and he's 4 yrs old lol! He doesn't have the hand, eye coordination yet..so he's pretty bad at it, but loves it still. Ain't nothing wrong with him..so must be something else

Although, your kid does sound pretty bad ass xD


You may not think so, but then again you are a child yourself, as exhibited by your immature comments. There is very much something wrong with a 4 yr old being exposed to those games, and the parent who exposes them to such things. Why don't you ask your child's pediatrician? Or any teacher, psychologist, social worker, parole officer or myriad of others more expert in the field. Of course, I am quite sure YOU know better, and you can keep telling yourself that, as I am quite confident that your child will have problems in school & you will be the parent blaming everyone but them self. I am also confident that you believe "bad ass" to be a compliment. I only hope you don't believe that your child's success in life rests on such a label; come back when you get the results of his college applications. I am sure you know the shear numbers of school age bullies who went on to become great successes (familiar with sarcasm?), right?. You are reason enough to suggest licensing requirements for parenting.

In the meantime, perhaps if you took your son outside & threw a ball with him, he might have better hand/eye coordination. Of course I realize that this falls on deaf ears, but I guess there is always hope. Poor kid.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 18 (view)
 
Daughter has problems with stepmother, what to do?
Posted: 10/16/2013 6:04:35 PM

Another strange twist….this young 9yr old seems to have reported she was rough housing with her father and she was so strong she hurt her father? 9yr old hurts….35+++ something male


Perhaps you are doubtful of the op's story, and that is your right, but what a silly statement! Certainly a 9 yr old wrestling with an adult male could accidentally kick him in the groin, no? Not much strength required. My child, at the age of 4, unintentionally broke my nose! Don't be so ridiculous in your attempts to foster "father's rights". Your own history points toward an obvious agenda.


f children don't learn not to wind up people bigger and stronger than them because those people might exert their physical advantage when do you think they will learn that lesson ? When they are being raped or seriously beaten up ?

There is a world of difference between beating kids up and using reasonable physical force if they are misbehaving. whether they are you kids, your partners kids or not.


Spoken like a true non parent! Roughhousing with a child should NEVER be deemed "winding up" one bigger and stronger. You allude to a rape victim "asking for it". Digging one's nails into a child is not "reasonable force", and there are very few misbehaviors for which the consequence should be using force. One uses force to protect oneself, not to teach a child proper behavior, nor as a related consequence for improper action.

Grow up, guys & address the issue at hand. If you doubt the sincerity of the poster, one might suggest failing to respond at all. Get your jollys elsewhere.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 100 (view)
 
Do you have a dating philosophy?
Posted: 10/16/2013 5:30:37 PM

Isn't the idea of dates to see if someone could wind up being a would-be boyfriend


Not for everyone, no.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 12 (view)
 
Friends after break-up
Posted: 10/14/2013 8:12:10 PM
Friends after breakup: nice idea, but in practice I have not seen that it works. Nice idea, though.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 134 (view)
 
Is there such thing as too many sex partners?
Posted: 10/14/2013 8:10:06 PM
My personal philosophy is that before I met you I didn't exist and my sexual past is not your business. If you are worried about STD's get tested, request a test. What some call information, I deem ammunition. I remain forever a virgin!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 150 (view)
 
It may be stupid, but what did we do with out cell phones?
Posted: 10/14/2013 8:06:08 PM

What did we ever do without cell phones and social media?


We waited; we had patience; we actually focused solely on the task at hand and made face time for those who were important to us. Truthfully, I think that those of us who grew up prior to such things were better off in some ways. We learned how to form personal relationships, deal with conflict face to face (or at least voice to voice), learned how to work through problems and although we had a different definition of multitasking, were more capable of actually performing. Sometimes I feel sorry for our children!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 41 (view)
 
Are we really who we think we are?
Posted: 10/14/2013 8:01:12 PM
We are who we think we are, to US (the individual). While self awareness generally increases with maturity, the truth is of course we are who we think we are. Perception really is reality, as reality is subjective. In the context of how others may perceive us, however, we may likely not be anything at all as we perceive or describe ourselves. How confusing is that?!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 51 (view)
 
Pushing for yahoo messenger.
Posted: 10/13/2013 3:08:20 PM
I don't disagree with zuglo, but wordsmith is right as well. It is true, however, that you could probably ascertain pretty quickly on IM if your "friend" was non English speaking, at least.

To each their own!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 37 (view)
 
Do you have a dating philosophy?
Posted: 10/13/2013 3:00:44 PM
Good for you, steam, as most of what is being said here (imo) relates to preference, not philosophy. Philosophy, as far as I know, involves thought, not mere reaction. not wanting to date someone shorter than yourself, with dark hair, etc. is a preference, usually sparked by a physical reaction related to attractiveness. Philosophy involves thought, introspection, etc.

Just sayin'.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 60 (view)
 
Legalizing drugs
Posted: 9/30/2013 4:41:37 PM

Yep....... pot makes you stupid, and most people don't need much help in that aspect. I have no problem with allowing a small amount of pot to be possesed and used. The same laws that apply to drunk drivers should apply to pot users......... not that hard to tell who is stoned. Saying that pot is less harmful than alcohol is true in someways, and not true in others.


Just for the record, I never said that pot makes one stupid, although I did suggest apathy & loss of ambition as potential detrimental side effects. I would imagine that a stupid person smoking pot would be, well, a stupid person smoking pot. I base my opinions on this subject on observation (and plenty of it); I have seen what could only be described as a plethora of extremely intelligent pot users. The problem with those ("potheads") who don't amount to anything is not their lack of intelligence, but their seeming inability to get off the couch! One may not need to have scientific proof, if they simply acknowledge what they experience.


Taxing SALES of MJ would not be a moot point and has nothing to do with growing pot for personal consumption. We don't even entertain the discussion of taxing or the legality of those who make moonshine, or homemade wine, beer, etc. do we? This appears to be a topic broached for no reason other than to take the focus off of the topic at hand.

You seem to agree that pot is comparable to alcohol, but then choose to continue to make an argument as if you were totally against it. What are you smoking?!?!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 43 (view)
 
Legalizing drugs
Posted: 9/20/2013 7:18:49 PM

Guess who are first and second in IQ rating, Russia and South Korea. Not only drugs are illegal in Russia, gays are illegal too. That makes you go hhhhmmm.


hmmmm. Given the choices you present, versus the US: where would I rather live? In the US, thanks!!!!

IQ is, perhaps, not all it's cracked up to be.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 42 (view)
 
Legalizing drugs
Posted: 9/20/2013 7:15:54 PM

I've never tried pot, but always wanted to.


Forgive me for singling you out, but.... I think you should! (smiley face)
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 41 (view)
 
Legalizing drugs
Posted: 9/20/2013 7:09:40 PM

Those who cite that MJ is safer than alcohol & tobacco is an appeal to ignorance. I can similarly say that Knives or swords are "safer" than guns/explosives; but they both do harm in different ways


You certainly can say that, but please keep in mind that we talking legality here, and knives & swords are legal to own.

Personally, I view pot as equal to alcohol & actually less harmful in many ways. That having been said, I am not ignorant to the "Fu#!" effect. As I tell my kids, alcohol makes you dangerous, often violent, can ruin your life & that of those around you; pot can make you a loser, as it saps one's energy, drive & ambition & leads to a degree of apathy. That having been said the legal issue is historical (whether we choose to admit it or not, it is!) and proof that not as much has changed as we would like to think.

Without giving out too much personal info, I don't know all that much about too many other drugs, but I simply cannot fathom why we don't legalize, regulate & tax pot as an intelligent decision which takes into account all sides of the argument. Certainly the arguments over medical marijuana are preposterous; we prescribe far more dangerous drugs & the number of those addicted to, say, prescription painkillers is evidence enough for me.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 22 (view)
 
Dating and the full time single parent
Posted: 9/20/2013 6:23:49 PM

I had the same problems and issues…no wait…I am full time employed and have never seen a dime in child support. So I am not the same as 50% of custodial mothers. I pay my own way for myself and my daughters.


No doubt you are not the same as most single mothers...

-more than 55% of these single moms who work less than full time have a child under the age of 5. Ever consider that perhaps the cost of daycare makes working full time a less preferred, not to mention financially unsound option?
-Sure, custodial mothers are more likely than custodial fathers to get cs, yet nearly 89% are owed back child support.
Minimal support is included in your stats, with no allowance for the amount, versus the amount awarded.

Your incessant need to spout meaningless statistics in such a way as to make them completely irrelevant to the topic at hand to anyone with a modicum of intelligence is getting old, Tealwood. You seem a decent, hardworking man & a good father, but you can't seem to see past your own bitterness to acknowledge the real world.

Simply put, you don't want to date anyone who might cost you a penny! You are entitled to feel that way, but just be honest about it.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 28 (view)
 
child Abandonment
Posted: 9/16/2013 6:34:27 PM
Lest we forget, a child's (especially a young child) world is very small, and very self centered. If someone loves you, it's BECAUSE of you, when you're 4; if they don't love you, it's because of you as well.

I would imagine that specific personality traits are common among those who have a harder time getting past this, but it is not unlike other childhood traumas. Certainly it can qualify as traumatic.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 75 (view)
 
To accept children, or not to accept children? That is the question.
Posted: 7/1/2013 8:35:28 PM
No need to feel guilty about your personal preferences, however....



Was at work trying to multitask on my iPad


You SHOULD feel guilty about that! I'd fire your azz!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 17 (view)
 
Would the NFL welcome an openly atheist player?
Posted: 7/1/2013 6:59:25 PM
I'm thinking that quite a few players can't even spell atheistic, let alone know the definition!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 54 (view)
 
Your prison is walking through this world all alone ?
Posted: 6/21/2013 8:05:17 PM
I am really curious.

What does this line mean to you???

Were they (the Eagles) simply advocating togetherness?

Was it meant specifically for the subject of the song, that she was incomplete as a single person?


I am curious why you assume "she". Perhaps simply an indication of the differences between the genders. Maybe because I'm female, and maybe because stereotypically males are less likely to exhibit emotion, but I always thought the song was about someone (man) who, due to their inability to express their feelings, was destined to remain alone. I think the general consensus is that alone is not ideal.

In any case, one of the best songs ever! (imo)
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 98 (view)
 
The school bully
Posted: 6/20/2013 8:40:13 PM

Call it ridiculous or whatever, I find there are no issues with him playing them.


It is quite obvious that there are issues, or this thread would not exist. Differences of opinion as to the what is at the root of or exacerbates those issues is the result of your request for input.


Sure I am argumentative and all, but you can take it how you will, call it bullying or whatever you heart most desires, then ask yourself this question: Do you think I give a flying spoon?


Why post here then? You ask for input from others, then attempt to berate & belittle those who respond. You fail, pathetically. I feel sorry for your child, even if you don't care.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 66 (view)
 
Predator or Paranoid? What are his intentions?
Posted: 5/18/2013 7:54:24 AM

If at 30, none of my contemporaries fit the bill, I'll get a girl who's 18, fresh out of school.


Thereby making you the reason threads like this are started in the first place. Way to go!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 32 (view)
 
latest case of Blasphemy and Freedom of Speech
Posted: 5/9/2013 8:26:42 PM
Freedom of any kind is relative to other afforded freedoms & carries with it responsibilities. Constitutionally speaking, there certainly are those who skew the concept, viewing it as absolute with total disregard for the related importance of civil duty at its' inception. Values & morals of society were taken into consideration & those have most definitely changed over time. There is a difference between exercising a right & taking advantage of one. Just sayin'.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 32 (view)
 
Women have it easier than men!!
Posted: 5/9/2013 7:24:06 PM

What business?


The legal partnership. It was a comparison. There are valid comparisons to a marriage contract & a business partnership, legally speaking.


Yes, men do earn more. The money doesn't just fall into their laps


No it doesn't, but men do earn more for the same exact work.


And contributions other than mere finances can be measured how?


Again, I suggest you consult an actuary, or simply ask an insurance agent. Do you believe that when you are not at work you are not contributing, to anything? Geez, one can contribute to/via.... a conversation, the quality of life of another, time spent, etc.


"Seen by some" would be an opinion.


So, whats your point? Are we not all entitled to an opinion? Do you not allow for the fact that your particular contribution to society is subject to the opinions of others?


If your empathy weren't so superficial, you'd of understood that this comment could be offensive to me. It seems you have much more to learn than I do.


You are quite incorrect in your assertion of my superficiality, and I have no desire at all to offend you. Your comments could be seen as offensive as well, but I am mature enough to realize that all of our opinions are colored by experience. You have quite clearly indicated your personal experience with a "bad" parent, and certainly it affects your judgement of those who place a high value on parenting.


My point was that the legal system screws over men. If anybody wants to challenge this assertion, then go ahead. But neutralism gets nothing accomplished.


The legal system screws everyone over. My point is that the basis of the laws regarding marriage & the legal dissolution of same are not gender biased, even if instances of gender bias in the application of those laws occur. Lest we forget, the legal system has as it's base mostly men making the decisions. Relative to the topic at hand, a valid example to refute would be that, since men are far more likely to commit violent crime against women, women may well be described as having it harder. I guess it would depend, in those cases, on whether one would define "having it easier" as being a victim of violent crime or being made to pay for having committed such a crime. It's all relative. Perception rules.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 49 (view)
 
Predator or Paranoid? What are his intentions?
Posted: 5/8/2013 5:14:36 PM
You may be wrong about his intentions, but what's the difference? If you have an inkling that something may not be quite right, why would you bother to pursue this? Given that you have children, even if you aren't worried about his intentions toward them, I think you could do better than to connect with a man so irresponsible as to get to the point where he is jailed over parking tickets. There may a valid defense to this, but who cares? There truly are plenty of fish in the sea. Next!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 27 (view)
 
Women have it easier than men!!
Posted: 5/7/2013 7:37:36 PM
Men make more than women, so naturally men get screwed in this instance. Unless you have facts to verify the average female makes more than the average man.


"Getting screwed" is nothing more than your take on it. If you enter into a legal partnership, one party investing more cash & the other investing more time & effort into running the business, you still split profits equally. If your statements are correct, then I imagine you believe that women get screwed in life in general, as, by your own admission, men earn more.


Your perspective allows you to view it this way, I can say the same for you. It's rational to suggest that a majority of the financial contributions came from the person making 200k, and not the jobless person.


Perhaps one day you will define contribution as encompassing other than mere finances.


She did raise me, and I believe she did a poor job at it. As you've said, contributions are assumed, not promised. Household contributions can't be measured, but financial contributions can. The only problem with changing divorce in the legal system to reflect financial earnings would be the drastic increase in divorce lawyers... Though I admit experiences like mine do vary, I would still be on board for such a drastic change.


I am sorry about your feelings toward your mom, as clearly they color your perception of women in general. As for household contributions, they most certainly are measured. Speak with an actuary or any insurance agent. You leave out the most important part of the financial determination during divorce; children, made by two & entitled to be supported by two in the manner which those two agreed to support them. This is the basis of the determination of funds awarded to a custodial parent and to an extent, alimony, which is not a given these days anyway.


Forgive me but I'm too young to get what you're saying here. All I know is I've always been philosophically against marriage, specifically after hearing divorce results in a default 50% split regardless of situation.


I don't feel the need to forgive you, as you are entitled to your opinion and at least remain respectful. Philosophy has little to do with finance. To be honest, you sound quite like a wounded child, & I do feel for you. The situation is always that marriage is a legal partnership, a legal contract which acknowledges that both parties make contributions which allow them to gain assets, assets which are shared after the partnership dissolves. It's pretty simple, really.


Pregnancies and parenting seem to prevent women from advancing to higher positions

Keep in mind that parenting is seen by some to be one of the highest positions they can attain. Not everything is measured in dollars. I am hopeful that one day you may find that out.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 12 (view)
 
Women have it easier than men!!
Posted: 5/6/2013 9:27:01 PM
I think the point here is that either sex can be said to have it easier, given a specific situation. The truth is that neither truly have it easier on the grand scale. There are differences, most assuredly but in any given situation, it is what it is, and like most things perception is colored by personal experience, and it is reality.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 10 (view)
 
Women have it easier than men!!
Posted: 5/6/2013 9:09:40 PM

Recently my mom(Jan) has divorced her 2nd husband, the marriage lasted a decade up till now. During the marriage she had almost no jobs, the only jobs she ever had were minimal pay. Meanwhile her husband has a 200k salary, working every weekday and commuting miles to get to his job. Throughout the years Jan has spent a lot of the cash her husband had made. Well the moment I became an adult, it seems Jan was scheming to divorce her husband. It seems to have finally happened, and of course, Jan is guaranteed 50% of all her husband's money, including my college funds. To top it off, her husband must pay her $2000 a month for the next 5years.


She is not paid that amount because of her gender, but because marriage creates an equal partnership. Monies earned during the marriage are joint funds, and both parties are (or should be; ignorance of the law is not a defense) aware of that when they enter into the legal marriage contract. Her contributions are assumed; had she not contributed he would not have been able to earn those funds. It is only your perspective that allows you to view it this way. It is not a matter of law, nor is it a result of gender bias in the legal system.


In the midwest: The only gender inequality favoring men are biological factors; men being the physically dominant sex. Otherwise, the cultural bias supports women more than men just a little bit, but on a massive scale when it comes to the legal system. It seems in society's efforts to even the playing field, it creates inequity. Divorce should in no circumstance involve a 50/50 split, it should be based on whether you sat on your ass doing squat or whether you financially contributed to your household.


Again, that is your take, not the legal basis for decisions favoring otherwise. Contributions are more than merely financial. Do you suggest there be no consideration for the forfeiture of income, retirement funding, SS, medical insurance, etc., resulting from remaining at home to raise children (for example)? Is that really your idea of sitting on your ass doing squat? I assume you have no children. Contributions are not, and I see no reason why they should be, based solely on the financial. Even if they were, you must at least allow for the cost of child care, house cleaning, etc., where applicable. As an aside, check out the cost of child care; you might be in for a shock. In the majority of cases, it is both parties who agree that one of them will forego earnings, work experience (affecting future income), the ability to support oneself. Why should both parties not then equally bear the cost of this forfeiture in the eventual breakup? You seem to suggest that the party who forfeits these things should suffer from a choice made by two. Lest we forget, the legal contract that is marriage results in one legal entity, similar to a corporation, split equally upon dissolution. Contributions are assumed by virtue of the contract KNOWINGLY entered into by both parties, not merely financially equal.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 29 (view)
 
My Boyfriend's Dog
Posted: 5/6/2013 8:51:33 PM
Personally, and as fellow dog lover, I don't believe that this is about obedience nor manipulative behavior. Dogs know no such thing. They are pack animals, and neither you nor your bf is perceived as leader by the dog. It is time for your bf to assert himself. Luckily ( I guess) the dog isn't bigger, or you'd both be in trouble. It's not about attention, it's about dominance & perhaps anxiety. I agree, Cesar Milan! Seriously, a good book about dog behavior might be in order. Good luck!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 16 (view)
 
Online Dating=Unhealthy?
Posted: 5/6/2013 8:29:53 PM

I think it's all about the power of your mind. I love human behaviour and interaction, it amazes me to no end. This place is just pure education in the subject.


I so agree! Several years' experience in the world of online dating has afforded me quite an education in human nature. Anything to which one gives too much credence is unhealthy.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 8 (view)
 
Women have it easier than men!!
Posted: 5/6/2013 8:27:26 PM

This is a generalization and it involves western civilization, not the third world. I know that in many cultures women are still treated in very poorly, but in western civilization, it's time for them to own up to the fact that they are treated better than men.


You admit it's a generalization, and you are right. Why, then do you buy into it? Just because women aren't treated poorly in western civilization doesn't mean that they are treated better than men.

Yule is right in that we humans, men & women alike choose the victim role as an excuse. Cut it out!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 140 (view)
 
Is Texting Cheating?
Posted: 5/6/2013 8:21:41 PM

He has a GF and his texts have crossed the line. Why don't you tell him that


Never mind telling him anything; why are you participating? What exactly is it that makes a man in a relationship with someone else ok for you to flirt with?
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 33 (view)
 
Young guy dating a girl with a child - would you?
Posted: 5/6/2013 5:48:25 PM
HTM, I applaud your honesty and your ability to remain respectful whilst voicing it.

As for this:

Even if she's not trash, the whole situation is trash for the man.


Remember, perception is reality, and all of the stepparents out there are not likely to share your view. To each their own. Thank God for my stepdad!
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 37 (view)
 
Learned my lesson dating a single parent
Posted: 5/5/2013 10:30:14 AM
Just curious: whilst we wage the war against marriage, whom will you find to date as more & more children are born out of wedlock?
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 10 (view)
 
High IQ Vs High EI
Posted: 4/30/2013 7:26:20 PM

EI means Emotional intelligence. I am getting pressed on the subject heavily at the moment. IBM invested tons of money into this project for a reason, trust me. Kasparov lost the battle, but not the war.

Just like I accepted I did not know much about evolution, I am asking you kindly to read more on the subject. I can't give you any good links, it's too complex, but I promise it poses huge questions on our understanding of the world today.


I admit I haven't read too much on the subject, but I don't really need to. Evidence abounds, particularly in this section of these particular fora. As I've said before, if you aren't understood by the masses, you are unable to communicate & unable to make a point. There are reasons why IQ alone does not suffice. EI counts.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 47 (view)
 
Psychotic or Logical
Posted: 4/22/2013 7:02:01 PM

This is gonna sound douchey and I apologize for that, but I find people who say that about stats have no formal training on the topic.


Most people don't have formal training on the topic, and that's the point. We all use logic, philosophy & statistics to make a point. I apologize as well, but one's inabillity to connect with the masses, to communicate in such a way that others can interpret & understand whilst remaining grounded enough so as to realize that perception is reality doesn't simply make one "douchey", it renders them inapable of effective communication. If you aren't understood by the masses, you can't make a point at all.
 
Show ALL Forums