[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..that would be men then who enter a relationship with their hearts, sheriff..because ‘most women only see dollar signs’.....not some women, not a few women or specific individual women...but ‘most women’...it’s all about the dollar, baby...

The answer is just to stay poor and then you know that whoever is with you is there for love .

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The answer is just to stay poor and then you know that whoever is with you is there for love .

Or just settling

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The answer is just to stay poor and then you know that whoever is with you is there for love .

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Or just settling

[Oliver_W]

Anyone wanna give cliffnotes? I don't really wanna sit through a half hour video of someone sperging out over a wrestler's romantic life.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

This isn't one of them.

So there have not been men who have been taken for granted for being the provider?

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Anyone wanna give cliffnotes? I don't really wanna sit through a half hour video of someone sperging out over a wrestler's romantic life.

Mostly preaching to the choir for most of the video. You can probably get away with watching the first 5 minutes.

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Or just settling

Not when you have a face like mine Marshy

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Maru

So there have not been men who have been taken for granted for being the provider?

Apparently the current stats for the US are that in dual income households, the female has the higher income 40% of the time. So I guess in the past it may have been more of a "mens issue", but these days it seems like it must be pretty close to 50/50 . Could easily be a female being taken to the cleaners.

Although apparently, men are less likely to claim alimony etc. even when entitled to it... which I guess is down to societal pressures and expectations.

[Maru]

For females, we've been taught, it's a "a man with a job" who is more valuable than someone who sits at home... and men have been taught that finances is one of their main tools not only of courtship, but the stability of the job they carry, etc, that is what sets them apart from other men in society.

On the other hand, for females, it's how attractive that woman is and how well adjusted socially they are.. (i.e. someone at least sane enough that can be brought home to the parents).

Because women are the child-bearers and are the nurturers, it's not necessarily ideal that a woman has a major career where she spends a vast majority of her time away from the family. So it's usually the man who earns more over the course of his lifetime and brings home the bacon... this isn't just true in society, but is also another reason for the gender pay gap, so is true statistically.

Relating back to the Youtube video... because these ideas of beauty as a female virtue are pounded into our skulls, we treat looks a woman's looks as "currency" in society... this is her cross to bear.

But for men, their currency is finances and ability to provide. That is their cross to bear. Men are much more likely to be taken for granted as the ATM's, because it socially acceptable for a woman to depend on a man... on the other hand, if a man does it to a woman, he's laughed at and considered a failure by his peers (granted, if he's buying up all kinds of **** and putting it up his Facebook, some may reconsider replacing that with envy ... maybe he has an idea).. .

Because of this stigma that "Men better have jobs" or "they aren't worth your time, homegurl" they are much more likely to overextend themselves on a fiscal level in a relationship.... even if they aren't particularly rich. There are a thousand more d**ks floating around in the sea, after all. I can't take care of her, then someone else will, etc... and good men do wear their hearts on the sleeve, especially when it comes to this ability to provide... so understandable why some then become embittered afterwards after putting their feelings on the line after having done all that and then some... is no different than a woman who leaves a relationship suffering from low self-esteem after not being able to keep her family together... which is a pressure women feel often ...

Though for men, I think this is all more likely to show up as bitterness... but we make fun of this, because men's are meant to "suck it up"... but for a female, we all must drop everything to hear her concerns... because she's not considered enough by men, or by society. So they say.

There's a double standard there in my opinion.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Maru

So there have not been men who have been taken for granted for being the provider?

I didn't say that did I?

You suggested this was a male only problem. News flash: it isn't.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Maru

For females, we've been taught, it's a "a man with a job" who is more valuable than someone who sits at home... and men have been taught that finances is one of their main tools not only of courtship, but the stability of the job they carry, etc, that is what sets them apart from other men in society.

On the other hand, for females, it's how attractive that woman is and how well adjusted socially they are.. (i.e. someone at least sane enough that can be brought home to the parents).

Because women are the child-bearers and are the nurturers, it's not necessarily ideal that a woman has a major career where she spends a vast majority of her time away from the family. So it's usually the man who earns more over the course of his lifetime and brings home the bacon... this isn't just true in society, but is also another reason for the gender pay gap, so is true statistically.

Relating back to the Youtube video... because these ideas of beauty as a female virtue are pounded into our skulls, we treat looks a woman's looks as "currency" in society... this is her cross to bear.

But for men, their currency is finances and ability to provide. That is their cross to bear. Men are much more likely to be taken for granted as the ATM's, because it socially acceptable for a woman to depend on a man... on the other hand, if a man does it to a woman, he's laughed at and considered a failure by his peers (granted, if he's buying up all kinds of **** and putting it up his Facebook, some may reconsider replacing that with envy ... maybe he has an idea).. .

Because of this stigma that "Men better have jobs" or "they aren't worth your time, homegurl" they are much more likely to overextend themselves on a fiscal level in a relationship.... even if they aren't particularly rich. There are a thousand more d**ks floating around in the sea, after all. I can't take care of her, then someone else will, etc... and good men do wear their hearts on the sleeve, especially when it comes to this ability to provide... so understandable why some then become embittered afterwards after putting their feelings on the line after having done all that and then some... is no different than a woman who leaves a relationship suffering from low self-esteem after not being able to keep her family together... which is a pressure women feel often ...

Though for men, I think this is all more likely to show up as bitterness... but we make fun of this, because men's are meant to "suck it up"... but for a female, we all must drop everything to hear her concerns... because she's not considered enough by men, or by society. So they say.

There's a double standard there in my opinion.

This might have been true 50 years ago. The world has moved on a lot since then.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

This might have been true 50 years ago. The world has moved on a lot since then.

Then we can agree to disagree, Marsh

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Maru

For females, we've been taught, it's a "a man with a job" who is more valuable than someone who sits at home... and men have been taught that finances is one of their main tools not only of courtship, but the stability of the job they carry, etc, that is what sets them apart from other men in society.

On the other hand, for females, it's how attractive that woman is and how well adjusted socially they are.. (i.e. someone at least sane enough that can be brought home to the parents).

Because women are the child-bearers and are the nurturers, it's not necessarily ideal that a woman has a major career where she spends a vast majority of her time away from the family. So it's usually the man who earns more over the course of his lifetime and brings home the bacon... this isn't just true in society, but is also another reason for the gender pay gap, so is true statistically.

Relating back to the Youtube video... because these ideas of beauty as a female virtue are pounded into our skulls, we treat looks a woman's looks as "currency" in society... this is her cross to bear.

But for men, their currency is finances and ability to provide. That is their cross to bear. Men are much more likely to be taken for granted as the ATM's, because it socially acceptable for a woman to depend on a man... on the other hand, if a man does it to a woman, he's laughed at and considered a failure by his peers (granted, if he's buying up all kinds of **** and putting it up his Facebook, some may reconsider replacing that with envy ... maybe he has an idea).. .

Because of this stigma that "Men better have jobs" or "they aren't worth your time, homegurl" they are much more likely to overextend themselves on a fiscal level in a relationship.... even if they aren't particularly rich. There are a thousand more d**ks floating around in the sea, after all. I can't take care of her, then someone else will, etc... and good men do wear their hearts on the sleeve, especially when it comes to this ability to provide... so understandable why some then become embittered afterwards after putting their feelings on the line after having done all that and then some... is no different than a woman who leaves a relationship suffering from low self-esteem after not being able to keep her family together... which is a pressure women feel often ...

Though for men, I think this is all more likely to show up as bitterness... but we make fun of this, because men's are meant to "suck it up"... but for a female, we all must drop everything to hear her concerns... because she's not considered enough by men, or by society. So they say.

There's a double standard there in my opinion.

TBH in my opinion, if anyone is in a relationship as shallow as the ones you're describing here I'd say they'd be better off not in a relationship at all . What a completely hollow level of human interaction... you've gone 'n' depressed me now Maru .

[Marsh.]

Sounds more like a Jane Austen novel

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Apparently the current stats for the US are that in dual income households, the female has the higher income 40% of the time. So I guess in the past it may have been more of a "mens issue", but these days it seems like it must be pretty close to 50/50 . Could easily be a female being taken to the cleaners.

Although apparently, men are less likely to claim alimony etc. even when entitled to it... which I guess is down to societal pressures and expectations.

I look at this particular issue as more of a courting/relationship issue than a divorce issue... anybody can be done poorly in a divorce when those go badly, for any variety of reasons, because of the prominence of things like private investigators, etc. We had a family member who was the one who reared the children (but also dependent themselves) who ended up losing custody and alimony because the husband hired a PI and found out men were sleeping over at her house at night while the children were home. This was in South Carolina iirc.

But I think if someone is together for 20 years and there are a lot of assets to divide up, etc, then it should be divided fairly. And perhaps a pre-nup can only mean so much after a point depending on the circumstances and how well it is crafted (Probably a reason for the 75-page ness of this particular contract).

For example, if there are major changes, such as one of the parties becomes disabled and can no longer provide for themselves... then that may change the situation if there's nothing in the pre-nup that handles those specific circumstances.

Other things that have to be considered, the fact that most of their retirement savings is in one person's name because they have a pension and opted out of the 401K because of what happened during the recession... so that may need specific care... or if they have any other long-term savings, college funds, etc, then it may make sense for some of that to go with the one whose is doing the childbearing... as their ability to sustain a livelihood is going to be more limited due to that being their primary responsibility.

When it comes to the short-term, there is a lot that happens in courtship that can go wrong and men are more likely to be taken advantage of in this front, because of the [eacock feather stigma surrounding men and finances... it can seem innocent at first, because oh this is a woman who expects to be taken care of (I.e. she respects herself)... that can be an attraction to a point... so men have to do things I think to test the relationship more... but then there is the stigma that can come from that of them "being cheap"... and yes, this is really a thing spoken about among women.

One example, I had a friend who had just started dating a girl (who he later married) who we had some candid conversations when it was just ourselves... she told me outright, she was too pretty to work to have to work too hard in her opinion... I asked her why she thought this, she said that various people had told her this. I didn't question it, because I'd heard it as well... anyway, because she heard this, she had become convinced in this. This was when I lived in MD, in quite a progressive area... so yes, imagine my surprise to hear that even there. But it is common here...

Anyway, the conversation got a bit darker after that, as she started to ask me questions about his ability to provide, how to get his act together, ways to get him to drop hobbies she thinks are not productive, etc... it became obvious she was plotting to try to manipulate him to make certain changes so that she would have it easier later. This was before they were engaged, and she was convinced she could get him to engage to her so she could have an easy life. And this was a good man, a very principled man.. but when I told him this, he didn't believe it, because he couldn't believe that about people in general.

When working in retail, some of the girls would say "Damn, he better be willing to pay..."... if a date wanted the time of their day, for example. I don't think they were gold-diggers, but they bought into the expectation that a man had to be financially well-off or show his capability to spend, if he even wanted to be given an interview sort of thing...

I remember one time when I told my husband had bought me something as a gift. (then he was my fiance). I was given a female peer-group approved kind of high five... "Oh he brings in the dough doesn't he??"... o_O they'd made that assumption on the basis of the gift.

There is bigotry in low expectations when it comes to women... and this is something I've been aware of on a personal level, and these are conversations I avoid with other women .. and this stigma is very much still there. Perhaps it is changing the more liberal society has become, but I do think it is still there to a large degree because of the biological differences between men and women, and because the expectations of both groups is still divided on many issues... it does make it very difficult to eliminate this type of ingrained sexism.

Anyway, I think there is sexism towards women, but I also think there is sexism towards men... and this sort of fits that bill for me.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

TBH in my opinion, if anyone is in a relationship as shallow as the ones you're describing here I'd say they'd be better off not in a relationship at all . What a completely hollow level of human interaction... you've gone 'n' depressed me now Maru .

Well, we are talking about a stigma... not individuals