Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  > Divorced? Would you re-marry?      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 onewayoranuther
Joined: 3/21/2011
Msg: 176
Divorced? Would you re-marry?Page 8 of 21    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21)
Yes. I want to share my life with someone. I want to cook his breakfast, dinner and him do the same for me sometimes. I want to wash his clothes and him wash my car. I want to laugh with someone, cry with someone and sleep with someone...every night for the rest of my life...or until I am put in a home cuz my arse done turned crazy :)
 4ms4me
Joined: 4/24/2010
Msg: 177
view profile
History
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/30/2012 3:06:29 PM

Up until about the late 1990's sole custody in Canada was granted to mothers about 85% of the time

I'm in Canada, and my parents were in Canada when they divorced. Whatever the laws or trends were at that time (early 60s), my mother believed that if she fought my dad about custody of one child, she'd lose custody of all three. She couldn't count on the courts giving her custody merely because she was female, and she certainly did not have the financial resources that he had. She believed the courts favored the male over the female because usually, the male could provide a more financially stable home, and there were still some remnants of children and wives as chattel belonging to the male. I know things have swung in the other direction, but it's a pretty recent phenomenon and it's swinging toward equality pretty darn quickly (relatively speaking of course).

and it was not because of the myth that men did not want custody.

I think many men are very interested in raising their own children, but how do you explain so many men who walk away, even when visitation is actively sought and encouraged by the women, and in some cases women are actually willing to give up custody to the father? I once found a study showing that even when a man gets custody of kids, it often reverts back to the woman within a year or two. Why is that? Men can say that things are unfair, and in many cases they are - I agree - but men also need to acknowledge where they're shooting themselves in the foot. If I have 8 grandchildren, and 5 of them have disinterested bio-fathers, what does that tell me? I think it's a whole lot more complicated than "the courts favor women" or "women know how to work the system" or even "men don't want their kids". I think it's a very complex combination of societal attitudes, historical patterns, legal issues and the inability of two parents to get along, before and/or after the kids are part of the family.

That is the lie that has been perpetuated by women's groups,

I've seen lies perpetrated by men's rights groups; if there's an agenda, there's a lie. It takes a remarkably astute and clear-thinking person to be able to identify lies on both sides of the fence, instead of just the other side.

It was resoundingly shot down from again women's groups who protrayed men as either abusive

I agree that female violence is under-reported, but I still see evidence that male violence is more likely to lead to death than female violence. I don't think this should have been used to block most men from access to their kids, but the issue wasn't a made-up one, either.

not wanting to be involved in their children's lives

See above.

or using it simply as a means to lower child support.

Which is more true - that women seek custody so they can feather their personal nest egg with cs, or that men seek custody to avoid paying cs? In my opinion, both are insults to (most of) their respective gender and neither of them should be accepted as a reason for anything. The fact that SOME men and SOME women think of their kids as nothing more than a means to an end has nothing to do with the majority of men and women.

Having said this as more court cases have been setting precendents of joint custody the percentage of mother sole custody has dropped to approximately 65%.

I'm always happy when improvements are noted.

The issue that I have with re-marrying here in Canada is not with the division of assets but with the strong possibility of having to pay child support for step children.

I certainly agree with that, except possibly in cases where the step-parent is really the only father the child has ever known, and there is a significant history starting when the child is quite young. But for an older child, or one who has an involved bio-father, the stepfather should not be made to pay cs (unless he chooses to, of course).

With the above in mind it does not suprise me that men do not want to get married again,

Well, many men do want to get married - even again. Both men and women may take steps to mitigate financial loss in the event of a divorce, but the majority of men and women still do remarry. Perhaps that'll change, marriage may change beyond anything we recognize today - although I'm certain that the tendency to blame the other gender won't abate.
 4ms4me
Joined: 4/24/2010
Msg: 178
view profile
History
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/30/2012 4:24:57 PM

Due to what was called the tender years doctrine employed by judges since the 19th century it is my opinion that your mother would have had a greater chance of ending up with her children than the father.

Maybe, but she didn't think so and because she feared losing what she had, she didn't even try. Many men, today, are "afraid" things will get worse if they try to enforce the law as it is written (my son is one of those); they end up without their kids, not getting cs or paying more cs than they think is fair. Then they complain.

This is the same myth that was put forward by women's groups when opposing the change to shared parenting.

This is not a myth; it's a fact for many, many children.
http://www.dadsdivorce.com/component/content/article/31-lifestyle/167-the-ghost-dad-phenomenon
They are the ghost fathers, the ones who disappear from the lives of their children in the years following divorce. According to experts, fatherlessness is an epidemic problem. But let me make a radical proposal: Rather than vilify them, which feels easy, perhaps we should try to understand them. And yes, it is a male problem. "There's a pretty good body of research that non-custodial mothers, who are smaller in number, are more likely to be involved with their children, post-divorce, than fathers," says Nick Bala, a family law professor at Queen's University in Kingston. ....... But there are many divorced dads who fail to remain involved in their children's lives for reasons that have more to do with the emotional restrictions of their gender than an absence of love.
Read the whole article, it's well worth it.
 Sniper308
Joined: 10/21/2004
Msg: 179
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/30/2012 7:39:52 PM
OP: I would, if I found the right woman. That is, however, less likely than winning a lottery, so I'm not losing sleep over the situation. What would be my concerns about remarrying? Arguing. Arguing, arguing, arguing. I'm just not going to do it again. I'm not going to put up with it again. I understand MINOR (!), differing points of view on MINOR (!) things... but major stuff, philosophical stuff, values, beliefs, et cetera? No way in Hell. No woman ON THE PLANET is worth having to put up with arguing over those things... and where I'm concerned, yes, it would be an argument. In actuality, I'm just aging and falling apart more and more, day by day, and my marketability (if I ever had it to begin with) is s__t. So, again, I'm not losing sleep. I had my shot, it didn't work, and that was that. Period. Game over.

My Dad has never remarried... but he's had two LONG-TERM relationships, the second one still enduring. I think, with him, it's a matter of a broken heart... and he's just happier to be in a relationship that isn't a marriage. Maybe it's a broken heart with me, too... I don't know... but I'm NOT going through the ________ arguing s__t again. Ever.

Mom... she remarried a GREAT guy and they've been together longer than she was with my Dad. For some people, second marriages (or just "long-term relationships") just seem to work out better.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 180
view profile
History
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/30/2012 7:40:05 PM

As I said the changes are coming like them or not the days of mothers getting sole custody are coming to a end the importance of the father in the life of the children is becoming evident.

I just a few years custody is going start at joint and be figured from there. Some here have said you have to use a one size fits all divorce and custody. That a case by case basis is not the best. It is only the best if you want to actually do what is best for the children.

Expert after expert agrees on this makes you wonder why the ones calling for the status quo plan is best for.


Most of us have admitted that changes are coming & that they are for the best, and I have yet to read anyone argue that fathers are unimportant. I know not from where your assumptions to the contrary come, but that is your issue, not mine, nor is it most parents'. In any case... for the majority of divorced couples, custody is not even determined by the court, it is agreed upon, and as per the legal system, the basis for custody lies in which parent has been primary caregiver, not which parent has specific sex organs. Case rulings on a case by case basis surely are best, and that is how decisions are made on a case by case basis if they are brought before the courts, but the basis for statutes are not based on gender, as is asserted by many here who state these statutes as being unfair. The truth is that the changes that are happening are slow, and that is due to individuals and couples who make decisions together (lest we forget) as far as who bears the most responsibility, financially versus physically, for the children. That's all I'm saying. Statistics don't reflect the why, as least those cited here don't, as they are quantitative.


The fathers that get custody are nowhere near 70% about 50% get custody get it when they sue for custody and less than 20% actually go for it.

This should get them to the point of at least trying for custody if they want it. As just a few years ago only 10% filed for custody and then only 1% received custody.


Agreed, but that is hardly on the female gender, now is it? I could continue to argue that your number is off by about 20%, as I have seen the 70% cited numerous times & from numerous sources. For me personally, and as I have said before, from my court room experience, that men lose custody or don't see their children post breakup is their own doing. Time & time again, blatantly harmful statements & even threats against their families is what causes many absent parents to be absent for reasons other than parental alienation, by either parent. Tell me, why would it be that if a male parent "wins" half the time, only 20% even attempt? Why is it that 80% of women seek custody if, in those cases, only 50% of them prevail? What do your stats tell you about that? Absolutely nothing, as the answer is qualitative, and that is exactly my point as it relates to the numbers game you are playing every time you point us towards some statistic or another.


As you can see this is why I say it won't be long before custody will start at joint and support will be mostly a thing of the past as the cost will be shared between the parents.

Which is where it should be.


Most of us won't argue with that, although, in truth I find that joint custody doesn't work all that well in practice, but if it works for you, I have no problem with it. As far as support, well then, I would imagine that the unfortunate victims of that will be the children, as more & more parents will refrain from sacrificng so as to be around for their children. We are seeing this now, and we are already seeing the resulting inability of children to form healthy, meaningful & sustainable personal relationships, the devaluing of human life, an increase in bullying & a seeming need to avoid consequence, via diagnosing every self entitled brat who lacks respect, has no idea how to be self sufficient or to value family.


When you find such opposition to equal treatment one has to ask why. And that is just what is happening and the answers are people are not willing to remarry or marry in the first place in more and more cases.

If wanting equality in marriage and raising our children is a agenda then yes we have a agenda.


Again, a matter of opinion, not fact, and not provable either way via statistics. Why you fail to see that sacrificing income, both present & future, retirement funds, social security benefits, medical benefits, and adult interaction is equal to sacrificng time with one's family, is indicative of a bitter attitude that often presents itself upon dissolotion of a relationship where the equal sacrifices were decided upon as a couple. Marriage has no bearing here, as one need not be married in order to have children. If you want equality in your marriage & in child rearing, then make that decision whilst still married, no? To make a decision one way then turn around & call it unjust or gender biased some years down the road is simply immature, not an earnest attempt at fairness. Far more often than not, this is the basis of the parent who calls their situation, post relationship, "unfair".

That having been said, what I see in the real world is that more often than not, both parents do see reality, and do acknowledge the sacrifice of the other party. That is why we work too hard, accept less than what is statutory & customary when it comes to cs, and at least try to work to co parent effectively. Still, it is tiresome to see the same meaningless drivel posted here time & time again, as if the vast majority of women bear children simply as a means of acquiring funds. To use some of the statistics to prove the opposite point (as statistics are all too easily manipulated), more single parents live in poverty than ncp's or childless individuals. Wow, what a goal to aspire to; lifelong poverty! Spare me.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 181
view profile
History
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/30/2012 7:49:36 PM

Maybe but I know in my marriages my wives worked but spent their money as they saw fit. Neither saved a dime yet wanted the assets I had accumulated when they filed for divorce. So they had nothing to divide also they wanted nothing to do with the debt we acquired as a couple just the assets.

They were not successful but that was only because they didn't want a messy adultery trial.

So just because the assets are all divided doesn't mean each contributed to them.

A truly equal system would account for these facts.


I beg to differ; a truly equitable system would have you acknowledge that it was YOU who allowed & decided that these women would take advantage of you. You decided that the joint assets acquired were acquired via monies you alone worked to acquire, as you didn't ask for their contribution during the marriage. Is there no acknowledgment that any contribution by the women YOU CHOSE to marry and their participation in said marriage or child rearing allowed you to earn the income needed to acquire those assets? You yourself have acknowledged that the likely result of their infidelity would have harmed them, just as you have acknowleged that they were unsuccessful, further evidence that fairness does indeed exist. A truly equal system would have you bear the consequence for your choice. Even the consequence for what is mere misfortune is not unfair in the legal sense. Asking the courts to clean up your mess is what is unfair.
 onewayoranuther
Joined: 3/21/2011
Msg: 182
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/30/2012 9:19:49 PM
Adult
2 teenage children not yet driving

1000 Rent/mortgage
150 Gas
300 electric
60 trash
100 cable
50 water
400 food (edibles only)

Take the adult out of the equation dived it by three times two, just the reg bills alone for the two teenagers is
$1373

now add their dry goods at $200, this is only $100 per month, per kid and they probably use more (shampoo, conditioner, soap, tooth brushes, toothpaste, foot powder, baby powder, baby oil, makeup remover, face cleaner, zit removers, moisturizer, lotions, gels and other hair products, deodorant, paper towels cleaning products, toilet paper, nail polish, nail polish remover, and etc et etc to the things I can’t think of right now)


That is now $1573


I didn’t include makeup for my daughter because five or more products a month can cost $ 50-100 add perfume and other toiletries it gets more expensive. But let’s add another $100 to be safe.

Now that is $1673

$100 Entertainment (this is going pretty cheap for the kids only) this includes the gas to get them wherever they are going, movie ticket prices, game zones, water parks…like I said that is cheap and doesn’t compare to what the true cost is especially during the summer time.

That is $1773

This does not include the cost for Gaming consoles or the games themselves or my daughter getting her nails done at $40 a pop every 2 weeks or her hair done at $30 every six weeks and my sons haircut at $10 every week because he keeps it short...but f you added it up per year…it would be about $145 per month. So, let’s add that.

$1918

This also doesn’t include eating out, at restaurants or fast food places or stops at the convenience store. Lets go cheap with that and make it $12.50 a week per kid. We all know it is more than that but lets just add another $100 to make it easy.

Now we are at $2018

It also doesn’t include their School Sports needs- dues, clothes, shoes, etc.

Or their
Clothes and shoes…bras, underwear
Or their
School items, note books, back packs, pens or whatever else the need for the school year.
Now figure in the little things like
Hairdryers, curling irons, hairbrushes, etc , purchased at need. …or how about a computer?

But let’s just say that is ONLY $1200 each per year for each kid so lets add another $200

Now we are at $2218. None of this money goes towards the Adult in the situation. Just the kids. It also doesn’t pay for many of the things I haven’t even thought of but think hard enough and you can.

So let’s say each adult pays their part for the kids, which is half. That is $1108 each.

I find it amazing that some people complain when their child support doesn’t even come close to the actual cost of the child’s existence. But let moma by her a new pair of shoes or dad take a date out and the other parent SCREAMS~~~ “IT PISSES ME OFF, CAUSE I AM PAYING FOR IT!!!” ~~~

What a freaking joke.

P.S. I haven't included any of the adult expenses like car payment, insurance, house insurance, land taxes or anything else it takes for the adult in the situation to live.



P.S.S. cap_n_mORGAN your picture on your profile of the chickens (I happen to think the white chicken is much more appealing than that skinny starving looking on)....OK so, it's true for some women. But why not be fair and show what a male pig looks like when it's overfed and gets lazy like some men get? When your partner starts looking rough, you should say something. Help them out. Workout together. Not just blame them, make fun of them or leave them because of it. Some people do get way too comfortable and that is a shame because their health is at risk. A lot of people take care of themselves...some don't...that goes for both men and women and your little showcase is self defeating.
 onewayoranuther
Joined: 3/21/2011
Msg: 183
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/30/2012 11:00:16 PM
Now lets say I'm your baby daddy for a second.
You lost me right there. How about you are the father of our children? Now I will listen.


Why am I responsible for half your rent? So half your rent is yours. So rent is $500 to the kids. Your half is 250 my half 250. Gas? Why I got to pay your gas? Half of that gas is yours.


There is three people in this imaginary household not one. If there was only two I would be living in a two bedroom home which is cheaper (as I am IRL) remember we split the cost of the children so I am actually paying 666.33. Which here where I live is about the cost of a 2 bed room home. You are cheating. Which is no surprise.

Half the utilities are not mine...1/3rd is (remember children use mroe than adults as they have no clue how to turn off the lights) but again, in the equation I am paying for 2/3. One of the children and myself. You are only paying for one and apparently you do not see yourself wanting to do that.


Either way $1000 a month isn't going to the kids.
I agree. It is going towards only one of the children and $12,000 a year doesn't even come close to the cost of raising him and his needs...or hers.


If you can't afford your kids don't be raising them. It isn't in the childrens best interest to lose out on their father cause he is busy supporting two house holds. It isn't right to thrust your unjustified anger at him on your children. These things aren't ok.


I thought they were "OUR" kids...hmmm. Have you decided that the children in this imaginary world will lose out on you?

By-the-way, I have only one child, she is grown and on her own. My ex and I didn't do the big D until after she turned 18. We figured up the cost of raising another child before we decided to have another one then decided not to. Even back then it cost more than what I figured here.

Both of us have friends who do not pay near enough child support but think they over pay...like you....who basically would say things like " don't care if you got cable or not that's your personal choice. If I want cable I got to pay for it" you seem to dislike paying for normal everyday services for children.

Personally, I hate the T.V. but if I had kids in the house it would be normal to have it and the internet. But in your world maybe they should only be allowed to have it at your house. Maybe they should only eat cornflakes and walk everywhere they go while living with me and only eat decent food and ride in a car if they are with you. Maybe they should never go to the movies with their friends unless they are with you but with me they should sit in a house all day bored.

Yea, I see where you are going with this. I am sure you need all the money you can muster to buy your cigs, your alcohol and to take yourself gambling. The kids, they can do without.


The picture is doing just what I put it there to do. Let me know if a lady has a sense of humor. As it is meant to be funny The women that don't find it funny well that tells me what I need to know about them.


So Cpn ....a sense of humor from me, is not given towards bias gender bashing. I probably would have laughed had I seen both genders displayed letting themselves go after marriage.

I will say though for the first time in more than a year, I drove through McD's tonight because I wanted a burger and that damn fat chicken popped into my head so I told the lady I was sorry I was going home and eating Tuna.....so yea, thanks for embedding that into my head!!! I really wanted that burger!
 4ms4me
Joined: 4/24/2010
Msg: 184
view profile
History
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/31/2012 7:53:25 AM
I've heard the conversations on speaker phone and was asked advise on how to deal with it. My answer was leave them. Why? Because their exes where horrible shrews who only cared to destroy the father child relationship.

I would never advise a parent to "leave" their children, it simply would not be an option. (Aside from abusive parents, that is). Wrong advice, as far as I'm concerned. If a woman is bent on 'destroying' the relationship between the father and his kids, a the man leaves - she wins! If dad hangs in, the kids are much more likely to disregard what mama's saying (assuming what she's saying are lies, of course).

every time these men went to get their kids they got berated by their exes in front of the kids about it. The time they spent with their kids had zero quality to it cause the fathers after being raped in court couldn't afford to put two nickels together to do anything for them or with them.

Two nickels or not, Dad should spend time with his kids. It isn't necessary to do more than BE with them. Play scrabble, go to the library, toss a ball around a park.

At the end of the day if the dads stayed in their kids lives they were panted as horrible fathers. If they leave they are panted as horrible fathers.

So they should stay, because then the kids get to know who their fathers really are - and who their mothers' are. Leaving is cowardly, in my opinion.

So just like your grand children 4ms4me they left them be.

The men in those cases are not dealing with shrews. As a matter of fact, I disaproved of the way in which my daughter supported visitation for the very abusive father; he never took advantage of that of course.

Raise them on your own and hope the kids understand later on.

When the daughter of the abusive dad was around 12 years old, dad contacted her on FB and started putting her mother down, saying how she'd lied about him and wouldn't let him visit her. Daughter knew they were lies and called him on it. He played nice for while, then began attacking mom's morals; daughter refused to talk to him till he apologized. He played nice a while longer, then he called his own daughter some nasty names. I think that's when she gave up on him. Of course, not all disappearing dads are like that, but being a 'shrew' is not strictly a female domain.

If they don't f*ck em.

Really? Dad deserts the kids and if they don't understand then "****'em"? I simply do NOT understand how you can say that.

Personally the way some of these men get treated I don't blame them.

What this looks like to me is that it doesn't really matter what the kids feelings might be, dad has to feel good or he's outta there! I'm sorry, but as much as I can sympathize how emotionally difficult it would be trying to deal with a difficult ex, I don't believe leaving your kids is an acceptable option. There are resources available to men (and women) to help them deal with the emotions surrounding divorce and part-time parenting, but men have to be willing to take that step. Avoiding difficult situations, expecting the kids to understand and saying "****'em" if they don't, and then blaming women/system for alienating men from their children looks like a complete cop-out to me.
 4ms4me
Joined: 4/24/2010
Msg: 185
view profile
History
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/31/2012 9:15:44 AM

I have my kids a weekend out of two, and a wonderfull relationship with my ex, that works great, and the kids are cool, and everything is numero Uno. Some single fathers had a rough time, but are working their crap and getting a good life and a helluva time. Kudos to them. Same applies to single mothers who lived through rough periods and came out on top. Instead of crapping on people, we should look at the upside.

Just thought this was worth repeating. :)
 4ms4me
Joined: 4/24/2010
Msg: 186
view profile
History
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/31/2012 10:02:28 AM
I've seen a man who raised his children all their lives. He divorced his wife for what he felt was abuse after 30 years. His children were in their 20s and they spit in my friends face cause their mother brain washed them.

That's children HE raised, not children he deserted when they were young. If they were spitting in his face, I daresay there was more going on than mum "brainwashing" them.

What's the point in them being involved with that? It is in the childrens best interest that he disappear. Less conflict. I'm not going to go through hell to raise my kids just to have them spit in my face. I really don't blame another man for not doing it either. If they are going to hate me either way I may as well make their life peaceful. What don't you understand about this?

For one thing, we're not talking about kids who, after knowing their dad all their lives, spit in his face. We're talking about young kids who are DENIED the chance to know their father, because HE decided it was easier to leave. Not to mention, all kids are different; my mom wasn't too hard on my bio-dad, but she wasn't above taking pot-shots at him from time-to-time. I also saw the way she treated my stepfather. As an adult, I fault my bio-father for leaving, and I fault my mother for her selfishness and meanness to my stepfather. Of the three parents I have, I respect my stepfather the most: he hung in when it was hard, and never let me down. This isn't to say that he was ideal, but even with his faults, he did what was best for the kids and my mother, NOT what would make life easier for him emotionally or financially.

To listen to them complain the entire time about how hanging out with him sucks cause he is always broke.

That's a matter of how they're raised, and I would hope a resourceful father would use those opportunities to teach his kids different values. Anyway, why fault and punish the kids for the way in which they've been raised?

"a woman scorned" Ring any bells?

From what I've seen, men are no less vindictive when "scorned", so how about you leave off the gender-stereotypes.

If it's always mom=goodguy dad=badguy what's so cowardly about leaving before the end of a movie you already know the ending to? What's the point in staying? They are already on limited visitation.

Why give up before you have to? I can't count the number of posts I've read on here claiming that "women are no longer willing to commit to relationships, they just leave when things get rough or they think they can get money out of the guy", and here we have a guy promoting lack-of-commitment toward his children when things get tough.

Guy with no arrest record has to see his kids surrounded by a bunch of child molesters. Good job!! Yea you!! Let's see now I have to be current on my child support then I have to pay to see my kids every time a fee of at least $75 and I don't get to do anything with them or go anywhere at all. Hmmmm I'd say "no deal" too. I guess you blame him though. Right? Also that little move doesn't come straight out of the shrew hand book either I guess.

My daughter had to have supervised visitation for nine months, while her daughter was in foster care, even though child welfare knew it was the dad who was violent and abusive; but he decided to accuse her anyway. She didn't walk away, bawling about how hard it was; she hung in, kept fighting and eventually her daughter was restored to her. There was then some indication that the three-year old had been sexually molested, but not enough evidence to prove anything. So how about you stop your little pity party, recognize that men aren't all victimized little angels, and start EMPOWERING men instead of telling them to give up!

People leave their children everyday

I don't care if it's a mom or dad, people should not leave their kids. Parents should not hinder visitation by ncp. No matter how many parents do that, it's not the right thing to do.

Maybe some women should take steps of their own.

Women do; according to one poster, that's exactly why the laws are so lopsided - women empowered themselves and said "We will not give up". Men, on the other hand, seem to be saying "Give up, it's not worth the hassle".

It would only be a cop out if it wasn't true.

When people run from their issues instead of dealing with them, it's a cop-out. Doesn't matter if it's addicts using cause their parents abused them, a mom drowning her children because "the new man doesn't want kids" or a man leaving his kids because "the wife is a b*tch" - they're all cop-outs, people unwilling to take responsibility for themselves and their situation, and looking to blame anyone else. I can understand and sympathize with whatever predicament people find themselves in, but I am not going to accept that they can't make, or shouldn't be expected to make, a better choice.
 verygreeneyez
Joined: 3/15/2006
Msg: 187
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/31/2012 10:25:40 AM

I will say though for the first time in more than a year, I drove through McD's tonight because I wanted a burger and that damn fat chicken popped into my head so I told the lady I was sorry I was going home and eating Tuna.....so yea, thanks for embedding that into my head!!! I really wanted that burger!

Funny how that works, huh? I had cheesecake for the first time in years two weekends ago. I did two extra pilates classes out of guilt. (I enjoy reading your posts. Sadly? All of your words are wasted on those you are trying to communicate with. The majority of us "old timers" here have tried reason, logic, empathy, sympathy, and even a few "tough love" posts trying to impress that it's not women who are the problem, it's the women they chose which was the problem. You'll do nothing more than give yourself carpel tunnel if you keep on posting. The truth about one or two? They f*cked up and now someone is gonna pay. And yep, that means financially. Such a sad sad state of affairs. I once communicated with one of those boys. Thought he might be datable even. Thank God for forums!!!! Made my eyes and my jerk-o-meter go full tilt.)


My kids have ipods they have itunes accounts we have high speed high definition internet fastest possible. We all have flat screen tvs and computers hooked up to them with blue ray players. They have nice beds and of course they have cable. My kids hate going to their moms cause she doesn't have any of that.

Your kids have it all figured out. There was a joke told at our house post-divorce. And yep, even my son said it many many times when he'd be going with his Dad. "He's with the Fun God this weekend." When all was said and done? He was happiest with me. The nurse, the tutor, the counselor, the car-pooler, the shoulder to cry on, the pit-bull who always had his back, the one who was there when he truly needed someone, etc. All that fun meant nothing to him when he had good news to share or hard times to get through. He wanted the parent that was truly there for him, not just "there." All the luxuries don't mean jack. If you're kids are attached to the luxuries, they're not choosing YOU over their mother. Their choosing what you have versus what she has. I'd not take that as much of a compliment. (And I didn't get to read the rest of your post because POF has blank screens for me today for some reason. So if I missed the part where you state that you are more than just "the luxury man" ~ I apologize in advance for not seeing that.) JMO
 4ms4me
Joined: 4/24/2010
Msg: 188
view profile
History
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/31/2012 10:42:40 AM

Many times if you are nice and just allow them to take the rope they will hang themselves. Remember you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. ...
Besides be nice treat the children good as well as their mother. Let her be the one acting like a azz the children will figure it out. ... So while marriage is not worth the trouble anymore your children are. Be the better person no matter what.

Not often I can get behind what CapM has to say, but in this instance I can - I think this is good advice from an unlikely (in my opinion only!) source! :)
 chameleonf
Joined: 12/22/2008
Msg: 189
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/31/2012 1:17:27 PM
Sounds more to me that marriage isn't the problem, so much as having kids while married is the problem. It may well be why you find so many who have kids live an unsatisfactory married life until the kids reach the age of majority and then divorce. Then it's blamed on a "mid-life crisis" and one or the other partner "didn't see it coming" when, in fact, the crisis was there all along and one party may have had their blinders on and the other just didn't want the horror that they've heard about from so many others experiencing custody, child support and financial problems.

Divorce is difficult enough without children involved - I can't imagine what it would be like when they are. Everyone thinks they're 100% blameless when it comes to these fights over custody and child support but there's generally the third side to the story. The guy I see has his own story when it comes to his daughter and his ex, but I can still see where he's made all kinds of mistakes himself to be part of the problem, but in his mind it's all one-sided and she's the evil biotch, much like many of the posters in this thread if you knew the true story and not their one-sided version of it, both men and women.

I'm not saying there isn't a lopsided system in a number of ways, but I'm sure there is some form of contribution to the problem by both parties when the matter actually winds up being brought to the courts instead of working things out between yourselves before it reaches that stage - unfortunately, in some cases that's an impossibility because of different matters that come into play. It's funny (not) what hate and hurt make both men and women capable of.
 DragonBits
Joined: 1/6/2012
Msg: 190
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 5/31/2012 5:04:41 PM
Let That Be Your Last Battlefield

The Enterprise picks up two survivors of a war-torn planet who are still committed to destroying each other aboard the ship.

Instead of calling a truce, the two beings begin to blame each other for the destruction of the planet and a physical brawl ensues. As the two aliens fight, their innate powers radiate, cloaking them with an energy aura that threatens to damage the ship. With no other choice, Kirk sadly allows the two aliens to chase each other down to their obliterated world to decide their own fates, consumed by their now self-perpetuating mutual hate.
 DragonBits
Joined: 1/6/2012
Msg: 191
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 6/1/2012 11:02:30 AM
cap_n, there isn't any such thing as a non-state sanctioned marriage.
So while I would never be in another state sanctioned marriage I would like many others here would be willing to marry without the state contract, if the right lady came along.


When I got divorced it wasn't such a big deal to me. I told my ex-wife to file several times. She surprised me one day by actually filing. She paid for a lawyer, I didn't have any money at the time and I never bothered to get a lawyer.

I was out of a job for a couple of years, and it was impossible in Texas to get back into a job that was similar, so I had to either change careers, move to a better locale or eke out some sort of crappy life married and in a low paying job. So IMO it was an excellent time to get a divorce, she could stay in Texas and I would go live for a while with my parents.

We had a system worked out. All the debts were in my name, about $80,000, so I filed for personal bankruptcy. She kept all her assets, maybe about $90,000, don't know exactly because even after 13 years of marriage she kept her finances to herself. She filed, I signed, it was over in 3 months. Then we sell the house and split the proceeds, she had made the down payment I think. But I had given her $35,000 at one point in the marriage (which was more than the down payment) to buy a stock I thought she should own. It went down to $8,500 but then went up to $300,000 after that, but she wouldn't sell till it fell back to $60,000. It's hard to sell a winner, and she never really fully trusted me.

So we wiped out $80,000 of debt and kept all of our assets, we could have gotten back together a year later and started over, but I wasn't that happy being married to her. No one cheated, there were no other men or women involved, I just wanted to have a more active sex life and better communications.

Poor communications and a crappy sex life was just too much for me to put up with, even though she was an excellent cook and would have taken care of me.

I suppose I could have argued about getting more of her assets, if I did I think I could have gotten ~$25,000, but I didn't really care all that much about the money. Likely she needed the money more than I as she was never a big earner and was older than me. She had owned a small business long before we got married, which is where most of her original assets had come from. But since then she never earned more than $25,000 a year. I had ran up most of the debts so my filing bankruptcy seemed fair, she was always a saver and I liked to live it up at times. But I always made pretty good money till I lost my job.

I got about $7,000 cash out my end of the house, I used that to run up to $144,000 in the market in about 9 months. It isn't that hard to do when the market is running in your favor and I didn't have any expenses to worry about. So the extra money wouldn't have been a big deal to me. I haven't worked a regular wage job since 1998, but I don't have a very easy to explain lifestyle, and it could change at anytime. I do have to maintain a good balance in my emotional life.

IMO it was better to just leave all this behind and move on with a fresh outlook, I seldom think about my previous marriage. I don't have any problems with marriage laws, I can't worry about other people's problems, but I didn't have any children to worry about.

What I have seen from personal experience with others is sometimes the women gets screwed, sometimes the man does, sometimes it is fair and equal, sometimes the women was at fault, sometimes the man, sometimes they were just both idiots.

One male friend of mine went to jail for 7 years because of his wife and step daughter, you could say that was a nasty divorce. So when I say screwed, besides losing a ton of money and his career, I mean a little more than what you mean. No idea if he was guilty, but odds are he wasn't. BTW, when he got out he did get remarried and now has 2 children.

I did get remarried recently, it should work out well, but I am not worried about my assets even if it doesn't.

I tend to be a nester, so even if I tried to date causally, it usually turns into a LTR and I would have to make a lot of effort to keep it casual.

To each their own, take care.
 DragonBits
Joined: 1/6/2012
Msg: 192
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 6/1/2012 12:25:13 PM
cap_n, I could have a Buddhist wedding in Thailand, it's the same sort of thing. Nothing new with that.

For that matter, why bother with God, a minister or the bible, just click our heals together 3 times and declare ourselves husband and wife.

I got married because I needed to in order to get her a visa, I want her included on my Social S, and it makes putting her on my life insurance easier.

But if it wasn't for that, I would just date and not bother with marriage, either contractual or otherwise.

Put your assets in a trust for your children, you can set it up so you have income while alive, it's hard to break a trust.
 greenIsis777
Joined: 3/14/2012
Msg: 193
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 6/1/2012 12:43:28 PM
like you said, I think marriage is about the person, not just the marriage factor. 'for the right guy' is key. I recently met someone who absolutely made me rethink my views on marriage. he's the first one ever, after spending time with him, I didn't walk by a ring store and roll my eyes...!
 DragonBits
Joined: 1/6/2012
Msg: 194
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 6/1/2012 1:45:54 PM
capn, of course a contract is a lot more serious commitment than just your word. Your idea of marriage means nothing really, it's the same as buying a car and tell them, take my word for it, I will pay you each month.

I have a thought, before getting married they should roll out a contract like you get when you buy a house and sign a mortgage. It actually makes sense, since a marriage commitment is no less serious than a 30 year mortgage on a house.

If they did that, maybe people would think twice before signing on the dotted line.

Without the government you can't enforce any sort of contract, so of course the government has to be involved with contracts. We left anarchy a long time ago, and frankly most people couldn't survive without the Gov protecting them, everyone wants the Gov involved in the USA, as long as it helps them, everyone likes to play the victum, it's a moderm phenom.
 nightowl2004
Joined: 1/18/2011
Msg: 195
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 6/10/2012 9:55:50 PM
Yes. I did it 3 times. Now @ 54. NO.
 gentleplus
Joined: 9/8/2008
Msg: 196
view profile
History
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 8/3/2012 8:15:57 AM
@janetalways.... Spot on!!!!
 betteroffsingle
Joined: 7/24/2012
Msg: 197
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 8/3/2012 5:15:28 PM
I think my username (and the tattoo0) states my stance on remarrying. I have 3 in the rearview. I'd date someone monogamously but marriage is off the table.
 Sebastopol2011
Joined: 8/31/2011
Msg: 198
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 8/3/2012 9:59:06 PM
Absolutely.. If I met the rite man
 simplesous
Joined: 5/27/2012
Msg: 199
view profile
History
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 8/4/2012 2:09:34 PM
At this point I would settle for a boyfriend, and even that is an overreach. Little did I know just how low on the totem pole I am in the world of dating!
 Maleman999
Joined: 2/14/2010
Msg: 200
Divorced? Would you re-marry?
Posted: 8/4/2012 2:49:34 PM
The bigger question is if you were to re-marry, and when the honeymoon phase wears off and there's a snag in the relationship, would you be quicker to divorce this time around to avoid feeling hurt like the first time, or would you try harder this time to make it work to avoid the mess of divorcing again?
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  > Divorced? Would you re-marry?