Have Anti-Father Family Court Policies Led to a Men's Marriage Strike?

GlennSacks.com ^ | 07/05/02 | Glenn Sacks and Dianna Thompson

[Lorianne]

I agree the conversation got derailed. It just irks me when people try to strip women (and men) of their innate God-given sexual attraction to the opposite sex, and turn sex into a commodity or something shameful. So I reply to that.

On topic: I don't disagree that marriage laws are probably unfair in some ways. But they always have been. People have always gotten married despite unfair laws.

The differnce I see to day is that marriage is not expected as a social norm, so people (men and women) feel less social pressure to be married. In the past, being unmarried cast doubt on your personal desirability, you may have been considered homosexual, or asexual. You were considered "defective" in some way if you did not marry and have kids. This is not true today.

So many people who in past times may have married out of a social obligation or family pressure, do not marry today. I can only see this as a good thing. I don't really understand all the lamenting about "marriage" per se. Sure the laws should be fair, but in fact, people who want to be married, don't let that deter them, they get pre-nuptials if they have to, or go on faith.

I really don't believe very many people who want to get married don't because of marriage/custody laws, now or in the past. It is however, a convenient excuse for those who don't really want to be married, don't want to make any compromises, don't want to take any personal risks whatsoever, to use laws as an excuse.

I look at it this way, many business partnerships fail yet people continue to enter into business partnerships and deals. Some people have a degree of faith in others and a degree of optimism about the future. The ones who want a sure deal without risks, typically do not go into business for themselves or enter business partnerships with others.

Does this mean that "business" is hopelessly flawed? No, it means that some people want to take that chance and others do not. Personal choice. There is a degree of risk in everything, particularly in cooperating with others. Some people are willing to take that risk, others are not.

[Don Myers]

Women came out on the winning end of the judicial stick regarding divorce long before the current nonsense. Women got the kids and property, and the ex-hubby got alimony and child support. I can't really say that the situation has gotten worse even with the feminist influence.

Women have always held the upper hand when it came to morality. It has been up to them to tell the man no and make it stick if she wanted a permanent relationship. Man have always wanted it and so have women, but the difference now is that no one is saying no, and the sex act has become a mere biological function without the bonding between a man and woman that it once had.

Marriage involves love, trust, respect, and a desire to see life through together. There once was a time when men and women had that. They no longer do. And, the loss of these things do not stem from divorce laws. The way that men and women treat each other now stems from something much deeper, and it involves loss of things once held dear.

[Nick Danger]

many business partnerships fail yet people continue to enter into business partnerships and deals.

It is not customary when businesses fail to award what remaining assets there are to the female partners, and the debts and obligations to the male partners. I probably shouldn't say that out loud; I'm giving the feminists ideas. But today at least, people go into those deals believing that even if the worst happens, they will be treated fairly. It might be ugly, but it will be fair.

That does not happen in divorce. We all know it. If men take this into account, and so deprecate the value of marriage, I don't see why anyone should criticize them for it. It is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. The government can be as one-sided as it likes, but it cannot complain if the side it habitually disfavors stops playing the game.

Divorce often involves something business deals do not. That if your business fails they will "take your first born" is a joke. For men, it is not a joke when a marriage fails; they really do take your kids away. Only women can afford to treat this as a joke. It is extremely offensive when they do.

I really don't believe very many people who want to get married don't because of marriage/custody laws, now or in the past.

Few women do. I can't decide whether that's because the concept of losing one's children is so foreign to them that they cannot relate to it, because they assume that men don't care enough about children to really be affected by having them taken away, or because they know it must be gut-wrenching but ultimately do not care.

[Mr. K]

Yes I am appealing the decision right now. In the mean time I have to deliver my children to BE ABUSED every week...

[No Left Turn]

Thanks for pointing to 162, your apparent agreement to which confirms my speculation that people who make and listen to ill-informed blanket statements are usually rather dim. Some advice: tone down the bitterness. Otherwise, you'll never land a man.

[Don Myers]

Let me just tie into this thread with some comments about The O'reilly Factor last night. The piece was about wife-swapping clubs. O'Reilly had on a United Methodist Minister named McIlvenna, who is the head of an organization called Institute For Study of Human Sexuality.

Question 1 is how did a Methodist minister end up as the head of such an organization? But, never mind. We move on.

The "minister's" comments are revealing. This "minister" said all they do is study sexuality. They don't advise people on matters of sex. As a matter of fact, he said that he does not consider himself an adviser to people as a minister of God. He said that the Church has no right to advise people on matters like this. To me, he seems more like a peeping tom.

This minister is an example of where our Churches have gone.

But, the "minister" said that women are pushing the wife-swapping clubs to protect their turf. He said that the women, in pushing their husbands to go to wife-swapping clubs, are actually preventing their husbands from going overboard in looking for other women. He said the women don't get a kick out of sleeping with other men. And, he said these women actually enjoy more a platonic relationship with other women.

The only conclusion that I can draw from all of this is that the human race has gone crazy. The human species is truly a wacko collection of misfits and weirdos. Beam me up, Scotty.

[Search4Truth]

American men are still getting married, just not to American women.

Finding a wife in a foreign culture and country is becoming the solution of choice for men looking for women with traditional values. American men are considered highly desirable as husbands in many countries around the world. The women in those cultures seemed to be more like American women used to be. And the Internet is making it easier for these men and women to find each other.

So it will be American women who find themselves increasingly, uh ... independent, which is what they wanted.

[gogeo]

Men are basically being used as sperm banks.

More importantly, as ATMs.

[gogeo]

Sad to say, you're both correct...society can't exist long term without a commitment to children, which means marriage.

Laws have progressed to the point where a man would have to be a chump to get married or become a father.

A society which requires that half it's members be chumps to exist is doomed.

[Paul C. Jesup]

I can feel bad for Dan, to a point. Because what he's going to do now is just use women and throw them away instead of committing. Sort of a "why buy the cow when I can get the milk for free?" What Kathleen and other women need to do is stop giving it away for free.

You need to re-read the article, Dan's reasons for not getting married have little to do with sexual intercourse and lot to do with the bigotry men face in divorce courts, anti-male laws and regulations.

[gogeo]

Nick, your response is a gem.