A Lesson For Men From John Cena
 

Pahaahahaha

Nikki Bella :love:

The misogyny in the comments is ****ing unbelievable.

I feel sorry for these sadsacks who have clearly gotten into relationships with people who have screwed them over, and left them feeling so bitter towards all women. That's all really. When I see this guy sat there ranting about "women getting peoples houses boohoo make them sign a contract"... that's honestly all I think :shrug:. "What a sad, sad little man".

When this happens, invariably any outside observer could have seen it coming; one partner in it for looks, the other for money. Both pretty hollow reasons to be with someone. And these days, it can just as easily be a woman with the cash and a gym-ripped younger guy. Either way, they bring it on themselves to be honest.

Well it's youtube so... not really unbelievable.

yeah youtube comments are horrible when it comes to women/gays/etc.

just toxic as ****

True.

Funny though because most of the time you imagine the men bleating in the comments are the ones who will never have this problem because they have nothing to offer a woman in the slightest. :fan:

oh

the truth's keeping busy I see

Now Cena is single, it's back to the five knuckle shuffle for him.

at least no distraction for John, so he can focus on the wrestling

It makes sense from a man's point of view to want to create a contract when entering into a living situation with someone else. Especially from someone who is rich and especially famous...

Though I laughed pretty hard at 75 page contract. That is pretty awesome.

That's just it. It makes sense from a rich and famous persons point of view if they allow such untrustworthy people into their life.

Got bugger all to do with gender however. That side of it is just misogynist rubbish imo. A famous woman is just as likely to get bottom feeders lurking around her too.

I sympathize from both points of view.

I can sympathize with Cena for doing something like that, after seeing what happened to Hulk Hogan.

But I can see that it wouldn't make her feel very wanted or trusted, which is a bad kick off to a relationship.

It's sexist (not you, Marsh) to think that there aren't specific issues for men when it comes to dating, relationships and moving in together. Men face very specific pressures that aren't usually an issue for women.

I do think that contracts should be the norm for more people, because there is no one-size-fits all relationship model anymore... people have even stranger financial arrangements now. There are people who also share bank accounts, credit cards and finances/living expenses just to make it easier... and if they're not married, then a contract should be drafted in place of a marital contract... because otherwise, if it does end up in court, that's very difficult to clear up and it becomes a case of hearsay and he said/she said... and if prejudices are to get involved in the courts or the court of public opinion, then it sort of defends against that from ever becoming much of a problem.

I also notice that if someone is rich, particularly a man, as soon as they announce a major break up or divorce from a long-term relationship, mags and tabloids are like... "Oh, she's gonna clean up house"...

If they have a pre-nup, it tends to nip in that kind of bull**** in the bud. So all the articles of "Oh, she's gonna clean him out..."... they can't get away with writing that, and it does give trolls at one less reason to target the woman on social media... which I think, as far as the extremeness of it,is a bigger problem for females.

Yeah, Hulk Hogan was put through the wringer. He did however manage to get Gawker put out of businessafter the fact... and they were pretty terrible for doxing people and enabling cyber abuse imo. So +1 for Hulk Hogan there... and I think preemptive for Cena to learn vicariously from that predicament.

...’most women only see dollar signs’...if that’s what is felt about women then don’t have the relationship...if that’s the low opinion that’s held...’if a woman stays with you even for one night, charge her for the stay’...if that’s what is felt then don’t have a women stay then...there is a choice in that ...why would you have someone stay if some kind of ‘contract’ was felt necessary for ‘protection’...if protection of money is the forefront when you meet someone who you feel you could have a meaningful relationship with...then don’t have the relationship...


...I only watched the first half of the vid as it was such a downer on women, showed a really low opinion of females...I don’t know anything about this couple../...don’t follow celebrities or wrestling...but they had a 6 year relationship and they had intended to marry...she gave their relationship 6 years of her life, as he did...that surely isn’t a ‘using’ relationship...but genuine feelings that just haven’t worked out for whatever reasons...these things happen...but the view of her in this is just awful...that she’s some kind of ‘taker’ because he’s wealthy...it’s very unbalanced, the vid ...and just feels like a ‘woman hating’ thing...’make sure she cannot take anything from me when she goes, she was just a guest’...etc etc...well don’t have her in your life in the first place then if that’s how you feel, there is a choice in that...the choice to believe in someone and your mutual feelings...(...and didn’t she sign it anyway, so why the ‘women are awful’ rants....

....anyways, I agree with Marsh...this seems like a mo’ money, mo’ problems specific type thing...(..fitting in with the thread from TS..)...not a male specific thing...it could be a wealthy female just as easily...I just think, consider relationships more carefully if you feel such protection is needed for your wealth when entering that relationship...

I think if some one was rich before you met you have no right to their money or property,
If you then have long term relationship in which you live together and you helped them incresas their wealth or had a child or children with them you should get some money based on that time together should you split up.

Men tend to rip woman off by lying and scamming

Depending on the individual but for most of the time we enter into a relationship with our hearts it only when things go bad do we think with our heads.

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

It's madonna,s fault with her song material girl.

This isn't one of them.

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

Or just settling :sad:

:laugh2:

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.

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

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

Not when you have a face like mine Marshy :joker:

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 :shrug:. 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.

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 :laugh:... 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.

I didn't say that did I?

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

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

Then we can agree to disagree, Marsh

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 :shrug:. What a completely hollow level of human interaction... you've gone 'n' depressed me now Maru :fist:.

Sounds more like a Jane Austen novel

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. :laugh: 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 :laugh: .. 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.