If I were a man I would be mad too, and I would very definately think twice before I put my whole future in the hands of some woman who could wreck my life if I squeeze the toothpaste from the middle. It was bound to backfire!
No it's not..
We don't play identity politics, the liberals do that.
(but you already knew this.. and I agree with everything you said. )
If I were a man I would be mad too, and I would very definately think twice before I put my whole future in the hands of some woman who could wreck my life if I squeeze the toothpaste from the middle. Thank you for bringing that up. That is an aspect to this that isn't talked about much. The fear of what might happen in a divorce is real, and is certainly one reason that young men are shying away from marriage. But another aspect is the knowledge that even without a divorce, they will be sharing a house with a person who keeps a nuke next to the bed. That is not the foundation of a sharing, trusting relationship. Even though neither partner may ever mention it, both know that the woman has a nuke, in the form of a government that will step in instantly at her say-so to deprive the man of house, home, children, assets, income, and possibly even liberty. It is not a happy thing to share a home with someone who can do that at the snap of a finger. The threat is always there. Who wants to live with that? A man can't just marry a woman anymore; her government moves in with her, whether she wants it to or not. That changes the character of the relationship in some fundamental ways that could understandably turn a lot of people off. The feminists will tell us that these are all very necessary protections to keep women from being battered, but the rest of the women will have to pardon the rest of the men for not signing up for a program that treats them like criminals. |