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  > Science/philosophy  > Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Dee4166
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 76
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)Page 4 of 15    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)

Any man marrying a woman who is poorer than her can be taken to the cleaners. That is the difference that irks me and has me very anxious


As can ANY WOMAN making more than a man CAN,under those same laws....

Or do you think the LAW only applies to men?

Difference is that women are either smart enough to "go their own way" without joining a movement of ANY kind and/or to get a pre-nup to protect their assets, or NOT get married in the first place....

As for the lack of "evidence" of wage disparity across gender lines, you REALLY need to do some research before making such a statement...

Not to mention the fact that many "traditionally male" jobs such as nailing up drywall, hauling garbage, etc. pay more than many traditionally "female" roles such as caring for the elderly, or house cleaning.

I would LOVE to see ANY man come and work with me for a day and tell me that what I do is in ANY way less physically OR mentally exhausting as either of those "male" jobs that I mentioned....
I CAN say that as I HAVE actually put up drywall and filled in for someone on a garbage route....So I speak from experience...
Generally the rule of thumb is SUPPOSED to be the higher the demand, the higher the pay, unfortunately it really doesn't work that way in reality, as here in Canada rather than raise the salaries of those doing those traditionally "female" jobs in accordance with the demand, our government instead just made it easier for women from other countries to come here on a work visa and get paid even LESS than minimum wage, in many cases, which for THEM, is a lot of money compared to what they would be making in their home countries. They only realize how badly they've been SCREWED when they actually become acclimatized to their new country and discover just how difficult or IMPOSSIBLE it IS to never mind get ahead, but to even SURVIVE...on so little money.

This the NEXT "big story" and there are ALREADY many women immigrants who have already been taken advantage of with the help and facilitation of our own government...It's shameful and disgusting...
So that basically leaves those who are qualified to do the work with little or no choice but to take jobs that are underpaid, IF they actually want to work....Or pay even MORE money to become MORE qualified to perhaps become more competitive as a nurse for example, which, by the way is ANOTHER field where our wonderful government is trying to "phase out" as MANY nurses as possible in order to save money in the health care system...by hiring people who are LESS qualified and PAID LESS to do the SAME WORK....and guess who THAT is? Well WOMEN of course....

So if anybody thinks that it's even a case of the stats being the "absolute truth", then they are missing a MUCH larger picture, although that MAY be a good place to start, if you're actually interested in the reality of the subject....
 ArticLife
Joined: 2/25/2010
Msg: 77
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 8:57:06 AM
Oh wow, such a delicate flower. I'm not going to treat you like a child or walk around on egg shells so that you won't go way out on a limb to take offense. It's *very* manipulative. Are you used to guilt-tripping people into getting your way?


No. I generally refrain from insulting a group or individual and expect the same in return. There is no "my way" here. Only general civility which you seem to lack.


There is nothing logical in what MGTOW people say. They are ****y little whiners. If they were actually logical, they would simply stop talking about the women they don't want and go away. Everything they say is based on chronic whingeing, lousy coping skills, latent hostility, and an emotional reaction to their own existential pain and/or miserable relationship patterns, for which THEY have always been the common denominator.

If that resonates with you, then you're dangerously close to being on one sorry assed, delusional path for the very limited time you have on this planet. I'm beginning to see now why your trying to convince me that I insulted you seems so important. Hey good luck with that, cupcake.

Y'all keep hatin' on women now, ya hear??


They do want women, though. They're still men, and biology doesn't go away. The thing is, they want women who honestly believe in equality in all aspects, and not to take advantage of the powers the state grants them, against them.

Since finding girls like these are very rare, they instead focus on other aspects of life, and some elect to spread this ideology, movement, whatever you want to call it. If you think that's whining, I don't think you understand the word.

The only women they're "hating" on are those that abuse the powers of the state to take kids from their fathers, to extract wealth that does not belong to them, falsely accuse men of rape, and still refuse to be equal in relationships (absorbing the financial and rejection burdens equally).

In essence, they don't agree with common gender roles or theft/violence. If this offends you, so be it.


What, that's it... all that anxiety about a bit of money? How about a pre-nup? Or choosing someone who isn't poorer? Or giving the difference to charity? Or accepting it as a reasonable risk vs reward proposition?

There's nothing to be irked at if they knew what they were potentially liable to pay and freely agreed to it. If someone put a gun to their head and made them marry on those terms, then we'd be as irked as you. Maybe even irkeder.

So if your goal is to help people make informed decisions and understand their duties and obligations in partnership, that's very civic-minded of you... but I'm fairly sure the basics are widely known.

If it's to instruct people on what values should guide their decision-making, maybe you need to reconsider the likelihood and merit of that.


Prenups can be thrown out of court if they are deemed unconscionable, and if your prenup does not include a 50/50 split, it can be deemed so. If there was no authority to throw out an agreement between two consenting adults, that would solve a whole lot of issues in one move.

I think a lot of men don't think about it properly. Many still do not get basic prenups to protect their pre-marriage assets. And many think their marriage is special and will last forever, when divorce statistics place the odds on very shaky grounds. The idea is to inform men of the potential dangers involved. That's really just the main goal. Many men then decide the risks aren't worth the reward and GTOW.


Logic says we should all have the same rights regardless of gender. Logic says. But it wasn't always that way and yes, the past does cloud some of the "logic" that you put forth. But to many of us remember fighting for the logical way in careers, work, home life, child rearing, politics, child care, health care, and on and on and hitting walls. Hell, I had to get my husband's written permission to have a tubiligation. WTF. This is the stuff that us older broads went through so don't go all "logical" on a very "logical" as well as "emotional" issue because when you do...you get laughed at and your opinion is discarded like last night's leftovers.


I am quite sorry you had to live through those times and I can see how it can affect your perspective on things even when they're better now.

There is nothing to discard though. The logic is sound when applied to current times. The fact you went through absurd inequality, while terrible, doesn't change the realities of today. I mean, it's something to be happy about now isn't it? Why keep fighting and being angry when the battle is won?


As can ANY WOMAN making more than a man CAN,under those same laws....

Or do you think the LAW only applies to men?

Difference is that women are either smart enough to "go their own way" without joining a movement of ANY kind and/or to get a pre-nup to protect their assets, or NOT get married in the first place....


Yes, it can apply in reverse, but rarely ever does because men don't usually seek such settlements. It still happens, it's just very rare. But that isn't my point. Whatever direction it goes, it's nonsensical and people should be fully aware of it.



As for the lack of "evidence" of wage disparity across gender lines, you REALLY need to do some research before making such a statement...


I've already stated many times that the gender wage gap exists, but it is not about discrimination but the differences in professions, skill, experience, education and hours work that account for it.


I would LOVE to see ANY man come and work with me for a day and tell me that what I do is in ANY way less physically OR mentally exhausting as either of those "male" jobs that I mentioned....
I CAN say that as I HAVE actually put up drywall and filled in for someone on a garbage route....So I speak from experience...
Generally the rule of thumb is SUPPOSED to be the higher the demand, the higher the pay, unfortunately it really doesn't work that way in reality, as here in Canada rather than raise the salaries of those doing those traditionally "female" jobs in accordance with the demand, our government instead just made it easier for women from other countries to come here on a work visa and get paid even LESS than minimum wage, in many cases, which for THEM, is a lot of money compared to what they would be making in their home countries. They only realize how badly they've been SCREWED when they actually become acclimatized to their new country and discover just how difficult or IMPOSSIBLE it IS to never mind get ahead, but to even SURVIVE...on so little money.


I don't particularly want to debate immigration, but I will just say, what you earn has nothing to do with the difficulty of the task, only the output. If you generate more value for society (and what you do requires skill sufficient to make you hard to replace) you will be paid more.
 bluemoon24_7
Joined: 4/18/2014
Msg: 78
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 10:13:05 AM
I am quite sorry you had to live through those times and I can see how it can affect your perspective on things even when they're better now.

There is nothing to discard though. The logic is sound when applied to current times. The fact you went through absurd inequality, while terrible, doesn't change the realities of today. I mean, it's something to be happy about now isn't it? Why keep fighting and being angry when the battle is won?


This is all I'm going to respond to as the rest of your post (and the other one you're responding to) is mumblo, jumbo b.s. rants of no value....to me. We can do this back and forth dance of "men get paid more" "I work harder'" for days and it will go nowhere....

Logic. You want logic because .... why? You read a book? You saw a movie? You read about a movement? A guy at the comic book store told you about guys going their own way? You took a course? You're the son of Spock and all things must be logical?

The guys joining MGTOW (and the respective females without a "movement") are generally the divorced, non custodial fathers, the broken, hurt, disillusioned, disappointed, disrespected, etc. and I get that.

Logic says - you have no personal experience to draw from , no dog in the fight, haven't "been there/done that", nothing, zip, nada. So be as logical as you want...those of us that have lived it, including the dudes in MGTOW, will laugh at your logic cause in the long run, you know jack shyte of what you talk. Again, you're of the general that got a blue ribbon for attendance and have nothing to back you up. It's one of those "looks good on paper" things.

If you want to learn more - go talk to your mother, your aunts and your grandmother.
 bluemoon24_7
Joined: 4/18/2014
Msg: 79
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 10:28:16 AM
I'm going to simplify this for you - it's like you're talking to a veteran that served in WW2. You've read some books, watched a few movies, looked at the war logically have determined how the outcome should have been plus given your analysis and the WW2 army veteran is looking at you like "what the hell is he talking about". And you want to debate?? Debate what? The fact he was there, participated and lived it....you read a book.
 forums1
Joined: 2/14/2010
Msg: 80
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 11:53:11 AM

I think a lot of men don't think about it properly. Many still do not get basic prenups to protect their pre-marriage assets.


I almost spit my coffee out on that one. A 24y/o talking about "pre-marriage assets" who probably doesn't own a home, doesn't really have much in the way of "assets" to speak of in the first place...

First off, in most cases any "pre-marriage assets" are not something that can be taken in a divorce *unless* those assets get "co-mingled" together or you actually sign their name over to them. Maybe not in some states (CA is "community property"), but in a majority of them the assets you had *before* marriage are still yours after. What gets split is what was "gained" during the marriage - so, for instance, if you get married with $50K in a retirement account, you are the sole earner (she's a stay at home mom say), and you divorce 5yrs later and you have $100K in there (lets say you put in $8K/yrs + ~$2K/yr in gains), you have to split the $50K in what the account gained in that time - you will not lose the $50K you came into the marriage with.

Where things can get into a "gray area" is where, for instance, you "own" a home (lets say a $200K home, you put $50K down with a $150K mortgage, and paid off $50K (leaving $100K on the mortgage) before you get married. In general the $100K is your asset, and you won't lose it. That being said, if you put her name on the title & mortgage, then it becomes far more of an issue (technically you've split "ownership" with her), if she pays 1/2 the mortgage for the next few years then she is entitled to 1/2 the gain in the house from your original $100K you'd paid off (and if the house has gained in value that might also figure into that, since the increase in value happened during the marriage).

Of course, at 24, I'm sure women are just dying to get their hands on all those "financial assets" of yours, right?

The vast majority of marriages between people in their early-to-mid 20's neither person really *has* any serious financial assets, and post marriage if you buy a home, etc, those are not "your" (singular) assets they are "yours" plural.

You might want to actually read up on the laws you are purporting to be so "against you", because you seem to be confused. The only assets that get split in a divorce are "marital assets" (those gained during the marriage).

The last woman I dated flat out told me that if we got married (which she was against) *she* would insist on a pre-nup, because she'd been married twice and both times got screwed over (the 2nd she almost lost *her* house that she had bought herself, and had to pay off half *his* credit card debt that he had run up because legally the debt 'belonged' to both of them).
 Dee4166
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 81
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 4:45:15 PM

This is all I'm going to respond to as the rest of your post (and the other one you're responding to) is mumblo, jumbo b.s. rants of no value....to me. We can do this back and forth dance of "men get paid more" "I work harder'" for days and it will go nowhere....


Yeah well for those of us who work for a living, it actually IS relevant....and not "mumbo jumbo b.s." whether of value to YOU or not.

Thanks, I have been on "the front lines" marching to ensure that the confidentiality of sexual assault victims was not repealed as the courts wanted to do back when I was 18 as well as again to ensure that women kept the right to abortion on demand as opposed to those given only as deemed "medically therapeutic"...
I also had to get my stepfather to co-sign a loan for me at the age of 21 although his retirement income was LESS than what I EARNED, and my mother's salary and good credit wasn't considered to be "sufficient" as a co-signer for a loan of 5000$.
So as you can see, while it may not be of value to you, there are still plenty of points that actually ARE relevant that may not have thing one to do with your, personal, experience....
Also I am not in my 20's and while I may not have needed my husband's signature for a medical procedure, that was because I realized that the only person with LESS rights than any woman, ...was any MARRIED woman...and I decided that the little autonomy that I was afforded as a single woman, was better than the even less I would have been afforded as a married woman and so, I chose not to get married for that reason.

I'm sorry if you don't think that pay equity is an issue, you're entitled to your opinion and are lucky to have no concerns about that in that case, unfortunately for millions of women all over the world it can be the difference between feeding their families and not....
 ArticLife
Joined: 2/25/2010
Msg: 82
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 4:56:04 PM
I almost spit my coffee out on that one. A 24y/o talking about "pre-marriage assets" who probably doesn't own a home, doesn't really have much in the way of "assets" to speak of in the first place...

First off, in most cases any "pre-marriage assets" are not something that can be taken in a divorce *unless* those assets get "co-mingled" together or you actually sign their name over to them. Maybe not in some states (CA is "community property"), but in a majority of them the assets you had *before* marriage are still yours after. What gets split is what was "gained" during the marriage - so, for instance, if you get married with $50K in a retirement account, you are the sole earner (she's a stay at home mom say), and you divorce 5yrs later and you have $100K in there (lets say you put in $8K/yrs + ~$2K/yr in gains), you have to split the $50K in what the account gained in that time - you will not lose the $50K you came into the marriage with.

Where things can get into a "gray area" is where, for instance, you "own" a home (lets say a $200K home, you put $50K down with a $150K mortgage, and paid off $50K (leaving $100K on the mortgage) before you get married. In general the $100K is your asset, and you won't lose it. That being said, if you put her name on the title & mortgage, then it becomes far more of an issue (technically you've split "ownership" with her), if she pays 1/2 the mortgage for the next few years then she is entitled to 1/2 the gain in the house from your original $100K you'd paid off (and if the house has gained in value that might also figure into that, since the increase in value happened during the marriage).

Of course, at 24, I'm sure women are just dying to get their hands on all those "financial assets" of yours, right?

The vast majority of marriages between people in their early-to-mid 20's neither person really *has* any serious financial assets, and post marriage if you buy a home, etc, those are not "your" (singular) assets they are "yours" plural.

You might want to actually read up on the laws you are purporting to be so "against you", because you seem to be confused. The only assets that get split in a divorce are "marital assets" (those gained during the marriage).

The last woman I dated flat out told me that if we got married (which she was against) *she* would insist on a pre-nup, because she'd been married twice and both times got screwed over (the 2nd she almost lost *her* house that she had bought herself, and had to pay off half *his* credit card debt that he had run up because legally the debt 'belonged' to both of them).


http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed81447

There are many cases where this applies. In essence, the more the property is used within the bounds of marriage (like you mentioned a home or car) and the longer the marriage has lasted, the higher the odds the judge will declare pre-marital assets to be forfeit. Notice the word "her needs" come in. Her needs? Seriously? She doesn't have needs. This is a multi-million dollar divorce. This is about greed, nothing more nothing less, and it happens all the time in community property states which, as I said before, is the main goal of MGTOW. Separate yourself from the insanity and warn others.

I certainly don't insult anyone who disagrees with this, and nor do I isolate myself from the world. I still like people in general and girls as well. The one concession I will make is that many MGTOW members seem to demonize women. I definitely don't go that far. I just look at biology and gender roles and see the scales tilted against men in what is supposed to be an equal relationship.


Of course, at 24, I'm sure women are just dying to get their hands on all those "financial assets" of yours, right?


Do you think this is exclusively about me? I have no intent to get married and even if I did, there wouldn't be much to protect, no. This really isn't about me personally at all.


The vast majority of marriages between people in their early-to-mid 20's neither person really *has* any serious financial assets, and post marriage if you buy a home, etc, those are not "your" (singular) assets they are "yours" plural.


And if you could get married with prenuptial agreements that reduce the split, or eliminate the sharing of wealth altogether, I'd really have no problem. As it stands, such prenups can easily be thrown out. That just isn't right or fair.


You might want to actually read up on the laws you are purporting to be so "against you", because you seem to be confused. The only assets that get split in a divorce are "marital assets" (those gained during the marriage).


Most of the time. There are many cases, however, where the "needs" of the woman outweigh common sense and fairness, and premarital assets are forfeit. Otherwise, prenuptial agreements would be pointless, as they don't have any effect on reducing the split of wealth shared in marriage.


The last woman I dated flat out told me that if we got married (which she was against) *she* would insist on a pre-nup, because she'd been married twice and both times got screwed over (the 2nd she almost lost *her* house that she had bought herself, and had to pay off half *his* credit card debt that he had run up because legally the debt 'belonged' to both of them).


It typically is the male who makes more and has more assets, which is why it's typically the female taking from the male. The very basic design of marriage is part of what irks me. This isn't a mistake. The 50/50 split is the point. Marry a man who has more resources, so you now have a legal claim to those resources. You've won.. you've served your biological function in finding resources for your children.

It doesn't seem right at all. This is a primitive approach to relationships in such modern times.

But it can certainly apply in reverse if the woman has more, and that's just as unsettling.


I see what you did there.

If you can't browbeat someone into giving you a proper stroking, you'll try to turn up the pressure by doing what you falsely accused me of doing, i.e., you'll start engaging in direct or indirect insults. Fuck off then and think whatever you want about my lack of civility. It's not my problem.

Do try to keep up with the actual gist of the thread instead of repeatedly trying to derail it with your personal griping, though. It's becoming very tedious.

Back on topic:


Proper stroking? No. You do not have to compliment me. You merely should be civil and respectful to people you have discourse with, even if you disagree with them. Notice how I disagree with almost everyone here but have not launched a single attack against them personally. That's petty and pointless and not at all civil.

If you insist on being disrespectful, it only serves to diminish your own image. Aren't you supposed to gain maturity as you age?


Sure they want women, but only on their terms, because they're horny and sad and self-absorbed. Meanwhile, there are NO special powers or privileges the state grants to women so they can systematically take advantage of men. Zero. How could that even happen when legislative bodies have always been overwhelmingly dominated by men? Derp. So historically, the laws have been written in a way that has consistently demonstrated the exact opposite of your ridiculous claim. It's only in my lifetime that things have more or less evened out, and yet there are significant portions of this planet where women are still treated like livestock. Think about it.


Only on fair terms.

Marry someone who has more than you, you gain legal rights to their wealth. Marry someone and have kids with them, 1 out of 6 times you gain rights to that kid. Sorry, no legal powers? Really now.

When I say that women are equal now, I am talking about most 1st world countries. There are plenty of countries left where women are still treated horribly, and that's a very real problem, absolutely.


Looks to me like the members of MGTOW are the ones who are most offended at gender roles. As for violence, males always have been -- and still are -- the perpetrators or rape and physical/emotional abuse in overwhelming numbers when compared to females. So cry me a river. Anyhoo.... why would the puerile opinions of bitter misogynists offend me? They're absurd and laughable.


Contrary to popular belief, women abuse men far, far more often than imagined. Men still abuse women slightly more (about 10%) but the most dangerous aspect of this is male shaming in public. If a man reports being abused by a women, he'll be laughed at, disrespected and completely emasculated. It's horrible. You see it all the time in the media, the women bossing around their man or even physically hitting him, and people just laugh at it. That's acceptable? If the man did this, he'd go to jail without question.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence
 bluemoon24_7
Joined: 4/18/2014
Msg: 83
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 4:56:58 PM
Dee, I did not mean to disrespect your opinion or your posts. My point with the Artic guy that I was responding to is that we could talk about injustices, lack of equality, why the feminist movement came about, the past and why it's changed for us ...but with this poster, we could talk until we are blue in the face. You and I know what we are talking about, we lived it, but he hasn't , he hasn't got a clue. So you and I are wasting our breath. Our experience means nothing to him.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 84
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 5:22:03 PM
[quot]There is none that I have seen. Women who are as skilled, educated and work as long as a man, regardless of the field, will earn the same. The idea that there is this mass discrimination against women is ludicrous, bordering on downright conspiracy.

I never said there was mass discrimination. If you really do want to see, it should take you less than 5 minutes (Google it, and steer clear of the feminist websites, my dear).
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 85
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 5:24:26 PM

A man cannot legally screw up your life. A woman can. Well, to be fair it's more about income (since men typically still earn more by choice). Any man marrying a woman who is poorer than her can be taken to the cleaners. That is the difference that irks me and has me very anxious. But I think it's wonderful if women also want to break out of these established gender roles. Do what you want, but most importantly, think for yourself and figure out who you even are first.


Sorry, but there you are 100% incorrect! The absolute, bottom line truth is that, in a divorce, the one with the most money wins, ALWAYS. You'll never convince me otherwise; I have seen it untold times, I have lived it, I know far too much about it.
 Dee4166
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 86
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 5:43:50 PM
@bluemoon...thanks for clarifying....

You SCARED me for a sec, there!!! lol

And yes, I believe that this may be a case of inexperience and youth that may or may not change with age...here's hoping it does....
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 87
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 7:09:25 PM
This:
More likely, the idea that men might not want to be ruled and controlled by women anymore scares you

Then, this:

I respectfully disagreed with her, offering logic to counter hers. How is that "poo pooing" her? Whatever that even means.

Followed by:

Age is irrelevant. Logic and facts are all that matter.


Truth is, I find you fairly respectful, or at least mindful enough to appear so. Yet, for one so young your words convey quite an old fashioned display of narrow mindedness & arrogance. Most of us choose to take them much as we accepted that our 13 yr-olds' "knew everything"; don't worry, one day you will realize that you don't, and you will be far better for that. Assumptive statements like your first above are disrespectful in their own way.

With age comes wisdom, borne of experience; never irrelevant.

You are quite incorrect in that a man can not legally screw up a woman's life; of course he can. Clearly, you have no experience with the judicial system.

As for your comment regarding "stay at home" moms, has it ever occurred to you that the decision for one parent to remain at home, to forfeit earnings, to forfeit both future earnings & retirement, is a decision made by TWO people, usually one male & one female. You speak as if it is a decision made in a vacuum, with the resulting "deficit" to fall upon one party alone. Parenting is a very difficult job with very little financial rewards. It would not be incorrect to state that the rewards of same are most often reaped by the child who had a parent available to them. I would venture a guess that were the earnings of those offspring, their "output", attributed to that parenting, you would see things in a very different light.
Never too young to think outside of the box, young man!
 forums1
Joined: 2/14/2010
Msg: 88
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 7:28:59 PM


The last woman I dated flat out told me that if we got married (which she was against) *she* would insist on a pre-nup, because she'd been married twice and both times got screwed over (the 2nd she almost lost *her* house that she had bought herself, and had to pay off half *his* credit card debt that he had run up because legally the debt 'belonged' to both of them).



It typically is the male who makes more and has more assets, which is why it's typically the female taking from the male. The very basic design of marriage is part of what irks me. This isn't a mistake. The 50/50 split is the point. Marry a man who has more resources, so you now have a legal claim to those resources. You've won.. you've served your biological function in finding resources for your children.

It doesn't seem right at all. This is a primitive approach to relationships in such modern times.

But it can certainly apply in reverse if the woman has more, and that's just as unsettling.


She *didn't* make more, in fact she made less. Far less I believe. And she still got screwed in the divorce.
 ArticLife
Joined: 2/25/2010
Msg: 89
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 8:12:29 PM
How is that possible, Forums? That sounds really messed up.



I never said there was mass discrimination. If you really do want to see, it should take you less than 5 minutes (Google it, and steer clear of the feminist websites, my dear)


Not sure what the problem is if that's the case? I fully recognize that there is a wage gap between females and males, but if it's not by discrimination, what is the issue? It's just the choices that men and women typically make that lends itself to this situation.

You could say we as a society should try to encourage women to pursue higher paying jobs. I don't really see anything wrong with that, but it's just not a huge issue. It's personal choices.




Truth is, I find you fairly respectful, or at least mindful enough to appear so. Yet, for one so young your words convey quite an old fashioned display of narrow mindedness & arrogance. Most of us choose to take them much as we accepted that our 13 yr-olds' "knew everything"; don't worry, one day you will realize that you don't, and you will be far better for that. Assumptive statements like your first above are disrespectful in their own way.

With age comes wisdom, borne of experience; never irrelevant.

You are quite incorrect in that a man can not legally screw up a woman's life; of course he can. Clearly, you have no experience with the judicial system.

As for your comment regarding "stay at home" moms, has it ever occurred to you that the decision for one parent to remain at home, to forfeit earnings, to forfeit both future earnings & retirement, is a decision made by TWO people, usually one male & one female. You speak as if it is a decision made in a vacuum, with the resulting "deficit" to fall upon one party alone. Parenting is a very difficult job with very little financial rewards. It would not be incorrect to state that the rewards of same are most often reaped by the child who had a parent available to them. I would venture a guess that were the earnings of those offspring, their "output", attributed to that parenting, you would see things in a very different light.
Never too young to think outside of the box, young man!


Being still fairly young, I find it curious how if I ever disagree with someone older than me, they always throw down the age and wisdom card. As if age guarantees intelligence. Yeah, you probably do have more experience, but wisdom is being able to process that information and apply it sensibly and, even without experience, you can read and learn from other's experiences to reach the same level.

The way you act is as if anyone who is younger than you simply cannot have intelligent opinions. It's forbidden.

I'm sorry if you think I am arrogant. I don't intend to offend anyone, that much is clear to me. I have strong opinions and I'm not particularly afraid to express them. In fact I enjoy serious discussion.

Parenting is one thing, but not what I was referring to. It's fair to be paid for your parenting role ( even beyond the provisions of shelter, food and clothing you're provided with) but I am referring to, you marry someone who earns more than you, never have kids, and keep working yourself. Come divorce time, you get a 50/50 split of both of your assets. That just doesn't seem fair.

Now keep in mind, if a man knowingly accepts this arrangement (or in the rare cases the woman) so be it. I won't ever understand that, but it's not wrong if it's absolutely clear. The problem is that many men just don't think properly when it comes to women. I've seen this so often even at just 24, I know 4 people who are already married and are my age or younger. Is that really going to last all of their lives? His income will likely increase more than hers, and he'll be left in a bad spot if they get divorced.

Ultimately I just want to make sure that people, men and women, are truly and clearly thinking about what they are entering into. Marriage is often an emotional decision.. how many people contemplate the specifics of what would happen if they get divorced? And that's the final point, few people entertain the possibility of a divorce, especially in younger marriages.
 forums1
Joined: 2/14/2010
Msg: 90
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/19/2014 9:18:43 PM

How is that possible, Forums? That sounds really messed up.


I'm old enough that I've seen "both sides of the coin" when it comes to getting screwed. And I've seen some very amicable splits. One of my ex-GF's got divorced from her hubby - he was a VP of a large company making 6-figures (this was in the late 80's) and she was making say upper $30K's back then (not bad for the time), she wanted *nothing* in the divorce but to get away from his (abusive) a** - no lawyers, the judge even offered her part of his retirement and she refused (she somewhat regretted that years later when she was injured and lost her job, but...). I respected that at the time, personally - she bought her own home and has done fairly well over the years as far as I know.

I've watched the 'vindictive' ex's try to claim abuse that never happened or other things to drag the guy through the wringer (one friend got dragged into court for months over stupid stuff, paying his lawyer $100+/hr for her nonsense, until the judge finally got sick of her unprovable BS - he was documenting everything, like her not being there when he showed to pick their son up, then claiming he never showed, etc (he got neighbors to prove he was there when he was supposed to be)). I've watched the angry father that (against my advice to get a lawyer or at least STFU in court and be calm and 'play the game' in court) blow up in front of a judge while trying to get joint custody, and basically lose any rights to see his son (watched that meltdown in person, including getting him out of the courthouse ASAP after he told the court officer (cop/security) outside the courtroom after his meltdown to "go F-yourself", probably saved him from spending the night in a cell with more charges). I've watched a guy fight the court to get a different 'child advocate' ('neutral' guardian) because the one assigned to them was going through her own bitter divorce and basically was 'bitter anti-male' at the time and obviously biased towards the mother (who lets their 14y/o daughter have guys sleep over, in her room, alone?). I watched the guy (friend of a friend) getting divorced from his wife (they had 2 kids) quit his job making $60K/yr (*damn* good money for the job in the early 90's) *quit* his job and take odd jobs for cash under the table so he could claim being unemployed and escape child support (to a degree) - FYI, in that one they'd been living in the basement apartment of *his* parents house and they kicked *him* out and let her and their grandchildren live there rent free for a year or two until they were in school and she could get something part-time at least to make enough to move out on her own.

So, quite honestly, you can claim 'statistics' and things you've read on the internet about the 'evil' women that take men for all they're worth in a divorce, but I've *seen* the reality. And, sadly, I've watched either or both parents drag their kids through a lot of ugliness in the process too. Sure, I've seen the news articles of the wife of the $millionare exec take him for 50% of everything (to the tune of $millions) to "maintain her lifestyle", and it disgusts me to a degree, but in all honesty that isn't the "norm" of most non-celebrity divorces. Most divorces end in *both* parties worse off than they were together (financially anyways).
 theforumfiend
Joined: 10/21/2007
Msg: 91
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/20/2014 12:35:42 AM

How is that possible, Forums? That sounds really messed up.


Since I am the woman he's referring to I can tell you that my 2nd husband was making almost twice what I made - different careers. When the time came to divorce he tried to get 1/2 the equity of my home. The home that I'd had for 15 yrs before meeting him. I foolishly refinanced to pay off the crippling debt I had not known he was bringing into the marriage. Btw, he didn't have children so the debt he brought in had nothing to do with child support. After my house paid off his credit cards he went and got 2 more behind my back, then one day went to pick up lunch and came home with a Camaro.

What finally made him let go of his claim against my home? My lawyer's suggestion that I go after 1/2 of the part of his retirement that I was legally entitled to (but had not wanted to pursue). Since it worth more than the equity in my house the ex dropped his claim. I never had to do more than levy the threat.

Forums1 is a terrific guy. We didn't work out because of my realizing that I am not relationship material.
 ArticLife
Joined: 2/25/2010
Msg: 92
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/20/2014 2:36:50 AM
Wow, it boils my blood that people can be so deceiving. It's all I really care about, warning people to be very cautious and think before they act. Marriage is a binding legal contract and it should not be taken lightly at all, but given it's so often an emotional experience (and rarely graduates to logical) I think that's one of the most crippling issues in our society right now, given the very high divorce rates.

Honestly, it would be so much easier if instead of a 50/50 split being the default, you actually had to legally request and sign for it when you get married. So, those who still want it and are fully aware, they can do it; but those who fear what might happen (you never really know someone until they're mad at you), those people can be safe and married too.

It's also bewildering that debt can be carried into a relationship and legally be your responsibility, without that debt first being declared to you.
 ohwhynot46
Joined: 6/28/2009
Msg: 93
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/20/2014 3:41:55 PM

Not sure what the problem is if that's the case? I fully recognize that there is a wage gap between females and males, but if it's not by discrimination, what is the issue? It's just the choices that men and women typically make that lends itself to this situation.

You could say we as a society should try to encourage women to pursue higher paying jobs. I don't really see anything wrong with that, but it's just not a huge issue. It's personal choices.


You obviously didn't do your research. It is a fact that women make less than men in the same jobs, plain & simple. The gap is closing, but it remains a fact.


I find it curious how if I ever disagree with someone older than me, they always throw down the age and wisdom card. As if age guarantees intelligence. Yeah, you probably do have more experience, but wisdom is being able to process that information and apply it sensibly and, even without experience, you can read and learn from other's experiences to reach the same level.


Age doesn't guarantee intelligence, it guarantees experience. You have wisdom all wrong, honey.
 forums1
Joined: 2/14/2010
Msg: 94
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/20/2014 5:35:53 PM
Forums1 is a terrific guy. We didn't work out because of my realizing that I am not relationship material.


Awww. Thanks forumfiend. You know I don't agree with the 2nd part of that, you have a lot of wonderful qualities... but anyways...

To make my point Artic, she probably would have been better off not refinancing to pay his debt, it would have helped protect her investment in her home. But, we all make mistakes. It had nothing to do with "who made more", and (to her credit and one of the things that I found 'honorable' in her) her first reaction was to *not* want to pursue his retirement... and she only did it (at her lawyers advice) as a 'tactic' against his claim on her house. I can easily see him (or many guys) in that situation then complaining "she tried to get 1/2 my retirement!" (in fact I've *seen* that in action) - which wasn't what she wanted, but can you blame her for 'using it' as a tool to protect herself?

You seem to have the attitude that "all" women are "out to get men", and I know for a fact that isn't true, in fact in my (albeit limited to only the few out of millions of divorces that probably happened during my life) is that most people *aren't* out to take the other person for whatever they can. All it takes is one of the two parties to want 'what they can get', or to be unwilling to compromise, and it turns into a battle, when it doesn't have to be... Forumfiend and I were/are both "forumites" on here, so we talked a lot about our views on things (often about threads that were started on here), which is how the whole marriage/pre-nup conversation came up really. I could understand when she said *she'd* want a pre-nup, based on her experience... wouldn't you?

One of the biggest problems I see when it comes to divorce is that it often involves a lot of emotion, people don't get married expecting it to not last (generally... I read an article a few years back on young professional New Yorkers getting into 'starter marriages' they didn't plan on lasting but 'gave them someone to do things with' - go figure , but certainly not the norm of why most people marry). So when the split happens, one or both aren't being 'amicable' because they're angry, hurt, feeling betrayed, etc. I think to a degree it's unfortunate, but also 'human nature' to a degree, and of course I've seen example of people divorced 10+yrs who still hold onto that angst against their ex, and in some cases 'transfer' that chip on their shoulder into 'all women' or 'all men' are just out to 'do what my ex did'. I'm not sure those people should really be dating if they can't "let go" of that, but... it is what it is? Then again, I have one divorced friend who traveled a lot for work and knew she couldn't have full-time custody, so she sat down with her ex and they agreed he had primary custody, she'd take him when she wasn't traveling, and she paid him child support (and way more than the court required). They have their personal issues between themselves, but money and care of their son were never part of that - but that's two people that could sit down and talk (somewhat ) rationally and not let their emotions towards each other poison the rest.

What worries me is you're a young guy, without the experience of having seen the many sides of how these things can go, and taking the 'worst' stories as 'the way things are'. It's not always like that, it's not always black/white, there's a lot of gray area in there depending on the people involved. I've got nothing against "going your own way" per se, as a personal choice, but what I do have an argument against is a "MGTOW movement" in effect "poisoning" young guys viewpoints about women - we're all unique individuals in our own way, and life isn't an "all or nothing" proposition. Why is it, say, that my parents have been married for 50+yrs now, and yet some marriages don't last even a year? Well, y'know, people don't always make good choices - and remember in those 'horrible divorce' marriages *both* of them made the choice to get married. Maybe it wasn't the right choice, c'est la vie, but I question when I see someone saying (in effect) "women are the problem" without also acknowledging that the *men* in those cases *also* made the choice, and both parties deal with the consequences in the end. Any relationship involves "taking a chance", but it's your choice to be 'choosy' about it (nothing wrong with that) vs. being 'afraid' of it. I worry you're gonna let fear run your life, dating doesn't mean marriage, date a bit, learn what you like, don't like, discover the things you 'missed' when you first met them (positive or negative) - and hopefully gain wisdom to make the right choice.

People are like bottles of wine - one can have a gorgeous label/bottle, and be crappy wine inside; others can look like an average bottle of cheap wine and be excellent; and yet others can be both, or neither. You don't know until you open it and try it... and everyone's tastes are different so the bottle the 'expert reviewers' say is crap might be what you like the best. It's what you like that matters, not what anyone else says, isn't it?
 ArticLife
Joined: 2/25/2010
Msg: 95
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/20/2014 6:49:53 PM

You obviously didn't do your research. It is a fact that women make less than men in the same jobs, plain & simple. The gap is closing, but it remains a fact.


If they have the same experience on the job, work the same hours, ask for raises as persistently as men do, have the same education, etc and etc... then yes, they make exactly the same as any man. Again, there isn't this widespread conspiratorial discrimination going on. Just personal choices.


Age doesn't guarantee intelligence, it guarantees experience. You have wisdom all wrong, honey.


That's what I said though. You'll have more experience, but that doesn't mean you're intelligent or wise.
 forums1
Joined: 2/14/2010
Msg: 96
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/20/2014 7:58:06 PM
That's what I said though. You'll have more experience, but that doesn't mean you're intelligent or wise.


Ohwhynot's comment reminded me of when I was your age (well, 22-23 say). I have an old HS friend who is a machinist, just starting out back then. I remember him telling me about two "old guys" he worked with (cough cough, we're almost up to their age then ourselves now ):

Now, keeping in mind a machine shop is obviously a potentially dangerous place...

Old guy#1 - missing a chunk off the end of his thumb, and one finger at the first joint from the end, numerous scars on his hands from the many 'mishaps' he's had with the machines. Lets just say probably no so high on the intelligence scale eh? And well, lots of experience (in bad ways) obviously. Wisdom - well, maybe debatable?

Old guy#2 - a few minor cut/scrape scars on his hands, but nothing major (come with the job in ways), but all his fingers intact. Lets say for comparison he probably was higher on the intelligence scale, and got his experience by watching the other guy make lots of mistakes. Wisdom - probably way more than the 1st guy right?

My friend - just starting out so 'clean' hands and all his fingers - guess which guy's "wisdom and experience" he paid more attention to? (I'm sure you can guess, and would find it the intelligent choice - at 22-23 he couldn't claim much experience, and he certainly didn't claim any more wisdom than perhaps the wisdom to know which guy's wisdom/experience he though was the more intelligent choice to pay attention to ).

... now lets make that more on this topic:

Guy#1 - married and one might guess made the wrong choice, divorced and got 'screwed over' (lets equate that to lost a few chunks of fingers here), continues to play the 'victim' of her 'wanting his stuff' (assets/house, etc) even years later and espouses never marrying again. Intelligence in marriage choice? Maybe not so much, but who knows, people change. Experience - definitely on the bad side right? Wisdom? Hmm, lets let that slide for a minute...

Guy#2 - married and maybe it was the wrong choice, divorced and both worked it out reasonably amicably (there's rarely zero conflict, but lets say fairly minimal), both of them have moved on with their lives - reasonable co-parenting if there's children involved - may not like each other much but neither claims to be a 'victim' of their bad choices. Maybe open for marrying 'the right person' in the future, or maybe not (or maybe they'll never meet one) and just wants to date and have their own life and not let the past poison their future. Intelligence? I'd say more than #1. Experience - well, divorce isn't usually 'good' but not necessarily horribly bad either. Wisdom? Again, I'm gonna let that slide right now...

Guy#3 - happily married for 20yrs and still going. Intelligence? I'll let you decide. Experience - obviously on the good side, probably some conflicts/disagreements they worked out along the way? Wisdom? Let that go again because I want *you* to decide that... (my friend, FYI, is happily married now for 20+yrs).

Ok, now, here's my question, and this this through - you're my machinist friend in this situation (as an equivalent), which one(s) of these do you think were intelligent? Which one(s) do you think have the experience that you would find the most helpful if you choose to have a relationship/marriage in the future? And which one(s) do you, in your fledgling wisdom, do you think have the wisdom and experience that you would value for the potential of a successful relationship, or at least one that doesn't end in bitter disaster and you being the 'victim' of financial/asset losses? (You can rate them in 3 levels, the one you'd pay most attention to, the next, and then the one you'd pay least attention to, on each of the 3 things - intelligence, experience, and wisdom).

... and which most describes the MGTOW movement to you?
 Hamilton12345
Joined: 3/29/2012
Msg: 97
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/21/2014 6:02:23 AM
Forum1 and others, i gave up a while ago. While in some ways artic seems like an intelligent young man, he is also like the religious zealot who knows he is right and refuses to even entertain that anything else may be true.

Doesn't really matter what we say, he knows he is right. We provide him links to stats and he says they are wrong, because the law says men and women are equal therefore it must be so. Men are going their own way because in the majority of cases, woman take everything in divorces. Doesn't matter that women and children of divorce are the ones living in poverty, they chose to be there.

Based on one of his early statements, woman chose to be poor because of the career choices they make and he want on to

He has said repeatedly that the only relationship he is interested in is with a woman who thinks like, and that is great for him. Good luck finding that.

Now artic for some of your statements.


<div class="quote">And if you could get married with prenuptial agreements that reduce the split, or eliminate the sharing of wealth altogether, I'd really have no problem. As it stands, such prenups can easily be thrown out. That just isn't right or fair/

Do you want to know why prenups most often get thrown out? There are 2 reasons, the first is that it was signed under duress as in 3-4 days before the marriage the prenup was presented and the (usually) woman was told that the wedding would not move forward unless she signs the prenup as it stands. Deemed duress. The other is when the prenup addresses waiving child support. The law had determined over and over again that no one can sign away the rights of children and yet these prenups till exists. Women sign them because they never anticipate the marriage ending and when the marriage ends and they have been left to care for the children you bet they are getting child support.
Most of the time. There are many cases, however, where the "needs" of the woman outweigh common sense and fairness, and premarital assets are forfeit. Otherwise, prenuptial agreements would be pointless, as they don't have any effect on reducing the split of wealth shared in marriage

Again I will restate what others have said, premarital assets, money inherited etc., are not calculated into the the marital assets unless there is a damn good reason. The income earned and equity built during the marriage, however, is split 50/50 between the partners. So let us say that a couple got married 20 years in Toronto and moved into the house that he bought for 250,000, 20 year later as they are getting divorced, the house is now worth 2 million. In all likelihood, she will get her share of the equity. Is it fair? I would say so because if she hadn't married him, she may well have purchased a home of her own and built equity through those years. There is also the consideration of sweat equity. She probably did 50% or more of the cleaning, painting and house maintenance which made the house worth what it is today. Again that makes he entitled to her share.

And here is where I went to MGTOW forums and pluck quotes from the the first 3 threads and posted them and the response.


<div class="quote">Those were comments by people though. It's not what MGTOW is about. The principles of MGTOW aren't misogynistic, even though some people who are part of it are

I am sorry but if MGTOW was not misogynistic at it's core, you wouldn't be seeing this kind of crap on their forums. It makes me sick just as going to to militant feminist sites makes me sick.


<div class="quote">Exactly, it shouldn't be based on the man's income. It's income to support the child, not the wife's accustomed lifestyle. She isn't with him anymore, she shouldn't get the benefits and perks that come with being with him. He doesn't get the perks of being with her. The only thing the man must do, morally, is help to take care of his kid. Not her.

Half of all costs directly related to the child, yes I can agree with that.

Now you do realize that at the end of that little quote, you just agreed that in the majority of cases, men should pay more child support?


<div class="quote">
You misunderstand. The trap is not that you're stuck with the kid, the trap is that through marriage and kids, whatever women you're with now owns you through the state, can extract all the wealth she wants from you, and can almost certainly take the kid from you

Show me some stats to back this up! Most women get nothing more than basic child support if they are lucky enough to get that. Over and over we hear this the woman walk away with every thing but nowhere do we see anyone producing anything other than: a friend of a friend of a friend had this happen to him. Or I know 10 guys that this happened to. Did 9 of those 10 guys tell you that the couple were so deep in debt that once the assets were sold that there was nothing left for anyone to get? That the while he is now living in a bachelor apartment wifey and the 3 kids are now living in a one or two-bedroom apartment? Did 3 of 10 tell you that they rarely bother to pay the child support? That they don't think they should have to pay because SHE bought herself a new purse last month, proof that she is frittering the child support money away on herself and not the kids. Did they tell you that they have ruined the ex's reputation with all their friends because the unreasonable b^tch took me to the cleaners and continues to demand that I give all my money when all they are paying is the basic government mandated child support that barely covers the cost of food, much less clothing, shelter, medical bills and all that fun stuff.

And no before you all get the idea that I am bitter and angry, I am not. I had a bad marriage. Left, got screwed, got over it. While he was busy complaining about having to pay child support, I was busy working full-time and going to university full-time so that I could make a better life for OUR kids. So now I have a good job, healthy well educated adult children with good jobs and someone who appreciates me for who I am.

You have discounted the work that women do and that perhaps they should simple do something has more value. I say there is seriously something wrong with a society that values garbage pickup and drywalling so much higher than caring for children and the elderly! Why do you think that is? Could it be because the first two are traditionally male roles and the second two traditionally female?

One last thing before I go. Artic, on this thread and others, every time someone posts a link to something that is against your argument (such as the examples from the MGTOW) forums, you say "that is one person, not what is really happening." No it is what society has apparently deemed acceptable. Go to the MGTOW forums and read the rants about feminist postings on other forums and how terrible they are, yet look at what they are doing. Maybe time the rest of us starting doing that to you?

And yes age does lead to wisdom, while I may not be anymore intelligent now than when I was 24, I am far, far wiser.

And Forums1 - you rock great to see a balanced view point here. Because even fence sitting me sometimes moves to one side.
 DragonBits
Joined: 1/6/2012
Msg: 98
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/21/2014 6:54:09 AM

You seem to have the attitude that "all" women are "out to get men", and I know for a fact that isn't true, in fact in my (albeit limited to only the few out of millions of divorces that probably happened during my life) is that most people *aren't* out to take the other person for whatever they can.


IMO that is very true, the people I have known in real life, most of them weren't bitter. For whatever reason, on average the man seemed more at fault for the relationship ending. One guy that got burned pretty bad fancied himself a real "player" while I thought he was a jerk off, and one woman a friend of my married and divorced would be what I would call a bimbo.

I liked your stories in post #104 of those you knew. I agree this relects real life.


Ohwhynot's comment reminded me of when I was your age (well, 22-23 say). I have an old HS friend who is a machinist, just starting out back then. I remember him telling me about two "old guys" he worked with (cough cough, we're almost up to their age then ourselves now

Ok, now, here's my question, and this this through - you're my machinist friend in this situation (as an equivalent)


But I don't think the machinist story is a good equivalent.

Reason being, the machinist has worked MANY different machines all his working life, having repeated opportunities to lose a part of a finger. While those who are married only have ONE wife (husband) or at most 3-4. So ONE BAD pick or ONE GOOD pick can make them think the majority are just like their experience.

Luck is much more of a factor in the marriage example while the machinist example doesn't depend on luck.
 ArticLife
Joined: 2/25/2010
Msg: 99
view profile
History
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/21/2014 6:55:31 AM
Guy #1, was he foolish in marrying someone he loved? Someone who probably did love him back too? Not really. The main issue in rating intelligence or wisdom in such circumstances, especially when compared to a mechanical and direct task like Machining, is that people in general cannot fully be known. You can completely understand the intricacies of machining though. You make a mistake, you learn from it, but it doesn't necessarily apply to people.

It's more of general blanket safeguards from dangers that may, or may not be there. I suppose you could call that a lack of wisdom and experience but there's always a random factor involved due to lack of information.

Guy #2 would definitely qualify as more intelligent in my book, mainly because, along with his ex-partner, they worked it out well enough not to try and destroy each other. You could just call that being a good person, but I have a feeling that the more vindictive people out there are also typically the less intelligent.

Guy #3 If that's his first marriage, I'd say it was intelligence in picking the right person (but remember you can't ever fully know someone) and some luck. There's always going to be some luck involved in this... if it's good or bad for you, well that's hard to say.

Wisdom is, in my opinion, the application of intellect upon experience to calculate the best choices for your future. In essence, extrapolate from your past (or other's pasts) to plan for the future.

I just want to be clear though, I'm not here to demonize women, I'm not really a part of MGTOW (in a sense I kind of am in action but I don't really follow it). I just recognize that due to the disparity of income between women and men, and women's natural tendency to nest and seek out resources (it's just biology) that marriage can be very scary and risky for men (usually). But, of course, the roles can be reversed and in those cases, I dislike the man just as much.

I really just want things to be truly fair and equal. That's all.

I would describe MGTOW as intelligent and thoughtful. But that's just on the glossary of the philosophy. The idea that men shouldn't devote themselves purely to the pursuit of women and pleasing women, but to focus on themselves more and be wary of getting married or having kids (unless the right precautions are taken and you think you've found a great girl).

Some people take the MGTOW platform to spew hatred and vitriol and I'm not keen on that.


Forum1 and others, i gave up a while ago. While in some ways artic seems like an intelligent young man, he is also like the religious zealot who knows he is right and refuses to even entertain that anything else may be true.

Doesn't really matter what we say, he knows he is right. We provide him links to stats and he says they are wrong, because the law says men and women are equal therefore it must be so. Men are going their own way because in the majority of cases, woman take everything in divorces. Doesn't matter that women and children of divorce are the ones living in poverty, they chose to be there.

Based on one of his early statements, woman chose to be poor because of the career choices they make and he want on to

He has said repeatedly that the only relationship he is interested in is with a woman who thinks like, and that is great for him. Good luck finding that.

Now artic for some of your statements.


No. The only link you provided me espouses the notion that women in legal fields are earning less than their male counterparts, but without deeper facts (how many hours worked, skill level, experience, education and so on) it's really not relevant at all. To prove discrimination is the culprit, you have to eliminate all other factors. When this is done on a broad scale across all fields, there is almost no disparity at all (a potential 2 cents per dollar cannot be explained). I'm sure there is a minor amount of discrimination, like there is still a minor amount of racism.. and this is just talking about Canada and the USA. Outside of here, women are often still treated very poorly and I find that deplorable.

Women do not choose to live in poverty. They choose professions they enjoy but those are typically less paying than the ones men will do. Often men will venture out into more strenuous and physically demanding jobs, or otherwise are just willing to devote more to it. Often, women aren't as serious about a career because they're thinking about family more. That's not wrong, it's just biology, mindset and inevitably individual choice.


Do you want to know why prenups most often get thrown out? There are 2 reasons, the first is that it was signed under duress as in 3-4 days before the marriage the prenup was presented and the (usually) woman was told that the wedding would not move forward unless she signs the prenup as it stands. Deemed duress. The other is when the prenup addresses waiving child support. The law had determined over and over again that no one can sign away the rights of children and yet these prenups till exists. Women sign them because they never anticipate the marriage ending and when the marriage ends and they have been left to care for the children you bet they are getting child support.
Most of the time. There are many cases, however, where the "needs" of the woman outweigh common sense and fairness, and premarital assets are forfeit. Otherwise, prenuptial agreements would be pointless, as they don't have any effect on reducing the split of wealth shared in marriage

Again I will restate what others have said, premarital assets, money inherited etc., are not calculated into the the marital assets unless there is a damn good reason. The income earned and equity built during the marriage, however, is split 50/50 between the partners. So let us say that a couple got married 20 years in Toronto and moved into the house that he bought for 250,000, 20 year later as they are getting divorced, the house is now worth 2 million. In all likelihood, she will get her share of the equity. Is it fair? I would say so because if she hadn't married him, she may well have purchased a home of her own and built equity through those years. There is also the consideration of sweat equity. She probably did 50% or more of the cleaning, painting and house maintenance which made the house worth what it is today. Again that makes he entitled to her share.

And here is where I went to MGTOW forums and pluck quotes from the the first 3 threads and posted them and the response.


I see nothing wrong with prenups being thrown out if signed under duress, with insufficient time, or without legal council present for both parties.

The state shouldn't have authority to decide over basic parental choices unless those parents disagree and need the courts to help resolve the dispute. If they signed a prenup, they agreed beforehand. Unless it can be proven that substantial harm is being done to the child, the state shouldn't be involved.

If the man bought the house for $250,000 in cash, with the women contributing nothing to this, and later on it was worth $2,000,000, no I don't see how it's fair at all that she gets any of that return. It was his money and his investment. Now, if she wants to share, fine. Honestly, the main issue I have is with the default of marriage being a perfect split, it's very imbalanced for most men and some women. Why do we have to split anything? Why not just keep what we earn and share what we want to share?


I am sorry but if MGTOW was not misogynistic at it's core, you wouldn't be seeing this kind of crap on their forums. It makes me sick just as going to to militant feminist sites makes me sick.


There are radical people in every movement or philosophy that exists. That doesn't invalidate the core of the philosophy or movement.


Now you do realize that at the end of that little quote, you just agreed that in the majority of cases, men should pay more child support?


If the women is awarded custody of the child, the man should definitely keep supporting the child, and costs related to that child. Direct costs. Absolutely. It really depends on income though. It should be to support the basic needs of that kid, not related to his income. If that means that poor dads have to pay more, well I don't see anything wrong. I have little empathy for fools having kids when they're broke. You're creating another life, that's your responsibility. Own up to it.



Show me some stats to back this up! Most women get nothing more than basic child support if they are lucky enough to get that. Over and over we hear this the woman walk away with every thing but nowhere do we see anyone producing anything other than: a friend of a friend of a friend had this happen to him. Or I know 10 guys that this happened to. Did 9 of those 10 guys tell you that the couple were so deep in debt that once the assets were sold that there was nothing left for anyone to get? That the while he is now living in a bachelor apartment wifey and the 3 kids are now living in a one or two-bedroom apartment? Did 3 of 10 tell you that they rarely bother to pay the child support? That they don't think they should have to pay because SHE bought herself a new purse last month, proof that she is frittering the child support money away on herself and not the kids. Did they tell you that they have ruined the ex's reputation with all their friends because the unreasonable b^tch took me to the cleaners and continues to demand that I give all my money when all they are paying is the basic government mandated child support that barely covers the cost of food, much less clothing, shelter, medical bills and all that fun stuff.


I never said that child support is on average that high. Child support isn't really the issue unless the man earns a lot of money because it's based on income, which I disagree with. Should be based on the child's needs. For instance, a man in Canada earning $100,000 has to pay $921 a month for child support. Really? There's no way any kid costs that much. Not even close.

http://www.mcdevittlaw.net/2014/08/women-have-usually-trumped-men-in-child-custody-but-more-men-may-win-custody-cases/

Women have been awarded custody more often, and men are less likely to receive child support payments if awarded custody. As the article mentions, the tides are slowly turning, so that's great news. But it's still a problem, not exactly fair. I don't recognize that by default a mother is more suited to raise a kid.


And no before you all get the idea that I am bitter and angry, I am not. I had a bad marriage. Left, got screwed, got over it. While he was busy complaining about having to pay child support, I was busy working full-time and going to university full-time so that I could make a better life for OUR kids. So now I have a good job, healthy well educated adult children with good jobs and someone who appreciates me for who I am.


I am genuinely happy for you and glad you went out and took an active role in supporting your kid.


One last thing before I go. Artic, on this thread and others, every time someone posts a link to something that is against your argument (such as the examples from the MGTOW) forums, you say "that is one person, not what is really happening." No it is what society has apparently deemed acceptable. Go to the MGTOW forums and read the rants about feminist postings on other forums and how terrible they are, yet look at what they are doing. Maybe time the rest of us starting doing that to you?


I have been to the MGTOW forums and also seen some youtube videos on it. Most of the people there just seem bitter to me, only a few are truly vile.

 forums1
Joined: 2/14/2010
Msg: 100
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)
Posted: 11/21/2014 9:24:52 AM
If the man bought the house for $250,000 in cash, with the women contributing nothing to this, and later on it was worth $2,000,000, no I don't see how it's fair at all that she gets any of that return. It was his money and his investment. Now, if she wants to share, fine. Honestly, the main issue I have is with the default of marriage being a perfect split, it's very imbalanced for most men and some women. Why do we have to split anything? Why not just keep what we earn and share what we want to share?


And again, you miss the point - lets just say for the sake of argument we're talking 20yrs of marriage (doubtful a home worth $250K is going to be worth $2mil suddenly a year later without *major* improvements, right?) ... if he bought the house for $250K and she moved in, and in 20 years never paid into the mortgage, never helped with the bills; didn't, say, choose all the cabinets 'she' wanted (or have any input) when you had the kitchen redone, wasn't part of any decision on your part for that addition, or that pool, or the gorgeous landscaping/garden that was added in the yard, etc... anything that might have helped "add value" to that house... if she had *zero* input into any of that, you *might* have an argument (though I'm not sure it'd hold up in court). But chances are that's not what happened, you were married and chances are she had a lot of input into decoration, paint colors, kitchen redesign, garden/gazebo, etc, and chances are you wouldn't have done some of those things on your own, as a guy, and the house wouldn't have been worth $2mil. Chances are she put in a lot of time, perhaps even more than you, hiring landscapers (even if "your money" paid for it), kitchen design, etc. So how much was her 'input' worth? Were you keeping track of every hour she put in over those 20 years? (Was it worth $20/hr? $40? more? less?) That's something that is hard to quantify - but apparently from your POV it's all worth 'nothing'? And, TBH, if you "allowed" her no input and nothing of herself went into making it a $2mil "home", chances are you wouldn't have been married that long or you really just "hired" her (by marriage) as a sex worker/housekeeper and maybe you should have been paying her for the sex and 'housekeeping services' (those are typically called "call girl" and "maid" instead of "wife" I believe). But then, that's not what you say you want, you *say* you want an "equal partner" right? That's your whole MGTOW thing? And as an equal partner in the decisions in said home, at least part of that $2mil (or $1.75mil gain) is due to her efforts in making said decisions, maybe even being there with the workers 'directing' things when you were working that higher paying job, right?

Or lets even say you *did* do major improvements, say a huge addition and a pool and other things, to that house to make it worth $2mil in a very short amount of time - did you do those things because perhaps she was pregnant with your kid(s) and you needed more room? You wanted a pool and deck to entertain your 'highly paid' business guests (with her organizing the entertainment perhaps)? Would you have done *any* of those things if you weren't married? Having kids 'together'? Building a "life together" with someone? Or were you just being kind enough to "share *your* house" with her (and you paid her a paycheck for catering services for 'your' guests, and whatever other little things she did right? Filed it with the IRS, withheld deductions, did she get paid health insurance with that job? Does it come with a 401K?).

Basically what you seem to be saying is you want an 'equal', but anything besides 'money' that she contributes is worth nothing. You're so focused on money, 'financial assets', it seems that you don't put any value on any other contributions. And so if while you're at your 'high paying' job she's taking time off from hers to take the kids to the doctor, or calling the plumber to fix the leaky pipes (and being there to let him in and make sure it's fixed and they're not stealing stuff - lets add 'security' to the list of jobs too), or fixing the A/C unit outside, or who knows what... all of that is 'worth less' if not 'worthless' in your eyes, right?

... because honestly, if you want an 'equal partner' then you have to value their contributions, in whatever form, as 'equal'... otherwise they aren't an equal partner, are they? And, honestly, if it's "all about money" to you, then I'd agree, do yourself a favor and *don't* get married, because what you really want is not an equal partner, go hire a call girl, a housekeeper, and a nanny for the kids if you adopt any (or all 3 in one person, but don' t be surprised if it costs you a lot of that money).

(And sorry ladies for the misogynistic stuff there, but it's impossible to pose those questions without it coming out that way in some form).
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)