Marriage Contracts

[LJP07]

I think divorce is one of the most perverse things in the world.

 

Why would it be perverse..? :lol:

 

If two people realise they wouldn't be as happy living their life, surely it's understandable. :eek2:

[Cedars]

Is marriage as we know it today out-dated, because of these "changes in society? Should the marriage contract be changed? Should it be a binding contract for a specified period of time, five years, ten years, etc.?

Are men treated fairly with respect to marriages?

 

You really didnt mean 'fairly with respect to marriages' did you? You do mean with respect to divorce, correct? If not, please point out the 'unfair' part of the marriage you mean.

 

That said/asked:

 

One only needs to look back a bit (you dont have to go far) to see that what is occuring IS the change in the marriage contract, specifically it is being applied more equally than ever before.

 

In 1965 a pregnant woman could not file for divorce. In 1965 the man got everything in the divorce cuz, well he was the working party and 'paid' for it. Child support would sometimes be granted but there was no method of ensuring the parent who was to pay this stipend would. Legal aide for women seeking divorce did not exist. There was no equal pay laws (which leave some to be desired even to this day). In 1965 you would not be able to rent a place to live with your girlfriend in most (if not all) states.

 

Things began to turn around in the 70s with changes in laws regarding community property/equal pay/divorce laws. Guess what was discovered?

 

For a man to get all the items a woman who stayed home to raise their children was a remarkable deal when compared to the cost the open market would draw. Just the daycare alone for one child (look it up if you dont believe me) was a substancial monetary benefit for daddy. Add in the cost to have your laundry done, house cleaned, phone calls made, errands run on your behalf during working hours, food cooked, shopping for the childs clothes, medical/dental appointments made and kept, etc., well simply put you probably cant afford to purchace these things on the market. And if your job takes you out of town overnight or has alot of overtime .... whoa the costs add up fast!

 

So the only reason you were able to have a home/kids/dog/workshop in the garage/boat AND advance your own career was because of the value the little woman provided in the marriage.

 

Now there are more working moms who still do a greater share of all of the above AND hold down a job too. The luxury the average american family enjoys is unparalled in history. Two working people have mo' money to buy homes, cars, video games, computers, tools, dogs, [insert stuff you want/do here].

 

Can anyone name one human culture where women give birth and abandon the youth to their fathers for raising? Kinda goes against nature, that there question. Seems to me to be a pretty reasonable approach for the courts and social services to take on the general level especially if you compound this with the norm of the male making more money than the female even in this day. Reality is this, taking money from the person who makes the most provides more for the children than taking money from the lower wage earner.

 

What exactly is it that makes anyone think its unfair that women get custody (generally) unless she is an unfit parent? I mean all things being equal....

 

Start Rant (yeah, I am just starting)

 

Yeppers guys had it great back in the 50s/60s and for HUNDREDS of years before that. Bummer for guys reality caught up with the delusion of what is right/mine/hers/equal/best for the children, etc.

 

So if the price of marriage is potentially too high, you* have options. Do your own laundry. Adopt. Spend your hard earned cash courting a potential good time, or in the red light district of wherever. You do not have 'get married'. But if you do and the contract doesnt work, your paying for alot more than your childrens future, your paying your ex back for all the stuff you didnt have to pay for before. You should be pleased enough that out of the millions of potential mates she could have picked from, she allowed you to spread your genes with her help. :lol:

 

For those who are paying support to a woman you didnt marry (but ended up spreading your genes around) all I have to say is, well, bummer for you. 'Tis the risk you take when having a good time at what you perceive will be no additional responsiblity. Maybe you really arent the player you thought you were.

 

/Rant

 

*you is generic for anyone, and not directed at any one member, its for anyone who thinks guys are 'oh so ripped off' during a divorce.

[cwes99_03]

Why would it be perverse..? :lol:

 

If two people realise they wouldn't be as happy living their life, surely it's understandable. :eek2:

 

That's not it at all. When one enters into a marriage agreement it is supposed to be for life (hence the till death do us part.) So unless you are willing to kill your spouse so that you can end the marriage, then you better learn to get along. If you do kill your spouse, well then you are up for the death sentence.

Of course back then extra-marital affairs were also punishable by death. In fact an affair was the only thing that warranted a divorce, but why would you need a divorce if you killed the people involved in the affair.

 

The marriage contract is not taken seriously, which is a perversion of what it was originally meant to be.

 

As far as the whole equal pay thing Cedars "ranted" about above, I'm not denying things were wrongly done back then either. What I did say was if everyone were treated properly in the relationship then it wouldn't be necessary.

I have said similar things on the earlier discussions of abortion. Marriage is not something to be entered into lightly, but neither is sexual intercourse. It is only because of the latter becoming popular outside of the marrital arrangement that marriage itself has become meaningless to the majority of people.

[Celeste]

I have to agree with Cedars on the rant. For many years, I kept something similiar to the following on my refridgerator. Even now, with my child on her own, and working 40 hours a week, I still handle almost all of the household responsiblities. From taking care of OUR 4 pets (our kids), to all of our laundry, cooking, cleaning, errand running, bill paying, vacation planning, yard work, grocery shopping, etc. As a women, I've often felt resentful about my 'assumed role' in a (marriage) relationship.

 

I do believe however, that men get the shaft quite often in a divorce. For instance, when my brother filed for divorce (they've since reconciliated) she would have gotten the home, a chunk of his business, the (paid for) 80,000.00 vehicle, 2800.00 month in alimony, 2800.00 a month in child support, half the furnishings, etc.,... while he received visitation rights on the weekends.

 

 

The Stay-at-Home Mom's Salary

Mom Job Title Mom's Work Week (hours) Mom's Salary

(dollars)

 

Housekeeper 22.1 $10,980

Day Care Center/ Teacher 15.7 $10,817

Cook 13.6 $10,862

Computer Operator 9.1 $7,151

Laundry Machine Operator 6.7 $3,133

Janitor 6.3 $3,713

Facilities manager 5.8 $11,508

Van Driver/Errand runner 4.2 $3,334

Household CEO 4.2 $35,971

Psychologist 3.9 $7,176

 

Total Hours 91.6 $104,646

 

Mom Base Pay 40 $45,697

Mom Overtime Hours 51.6 $88,424

 

Total Mom Salary 91.6 $134,121

 

Average Hours of Sleep per night 6.7

[cwes99_03]

Wow, I'm sorry but I find those figures to be way off. Expecially considering that at least half of those hours a mom is actually doing for herself as well as any other, and the inflated sense of worth is way off too.

 

I do my own laundry, clean my own house, cook my own food, oeprate my own computer, do my own bills, manage my own facilities, drive my own car, take care of my own psychological problems, etc. and I get paid nothing for it.

 

Not to mention on that list you have housekeeper, laundry operator, janitor, facilities manager, and household CEO which are all the same position. I'd like to be paid 5 times for doing the same job.

 

But I'm not devaluing the role a stay at home mom plays in the family. It is extremely valuable. If a husband who works 90 plus hours a week is never home to help out but brings in a fabulous income then I'd say he matches anything you are reporting (though inflating) here.

If a man only works 40 hours a week, but does nothing in maintaining the house or taking care of the kids, then I'd say he is not fulfilling his part of the contract.

[HydrogenBond]

In lasting stay home wife relationships, the women takes care of things inside the house and the men take care of things outside the house, such as yard work, etc. This is true even with major buying; the wife picks the furniture and guy the tools. If the wife is stay at home and does not work, all that she does is also for her and her children, including her biggest man-child, which is her husband. The guy works, brings home the money and gives it to his wife to spend and save.

 

The man may have to work until he is 65. The young woman can have fun with her sisters, mother and friends, until the children come along. Then she works much harder than her husband. The work load drops somethat when the children enter school. When the children leave the nest, she gets to retire sometimes before the age of 40. She still has her husband to worry about, but by then he often needs more time to relax, sort of retiring a little himself. The woman wants to talk and share because she is bored and wants to be with her best friend.

 

When the husband does fully retire, the best of friends get on each others nerves. But they forget all their differences, when they are apart. Finally, the man gets worn out first, often requiring his wife to care for him. Over the 50-60 years of a full and happy marriage, things add up in the end.

[InfiniteNow]

In lasting stay home wife relationships, the women takes care of things inside the house and the men take care of things outside the house, such as yard work, etc. This is true even with major buying; the wife picks the furniture and guy the tools. ... The young woman can have fun with her sisters, mother and friends, until the children come along.

Wow. I just realized that you're about 4 or 5 decades older than I thought you were. :)

[Celeste]

Originally Posted by cwes99_03

Wow, I'm sorry but I find those figures to be way off. Expecially considering that at least half of those hours a mom is actually doing for herself as well as any other, and the inflated sense of worth is way off too.

 

I whole heartedly agree cwes. But...I feel the (often forgotten) monetary value of a womens (mothers) 'extra' tasks was the center point of the authors intentions.

 

For instance...My fiance works alot of hours Mon thru Thurs, but when he comes home each evening, his work day is over.

Mine is not. Grocery shopping, meal preparation and clean-up, animal care, laundry, vacuaaming, watering gardens, etc. are still left to be done after my 8 to 10 hours at the office, and I don't have kids at home.

 

I'm sure it's different in some family homes, but I haven't had the pleasure of meeting any of these households....yet.

[cwes99_03]

That's too bad, but don't forget some of that might be choice, after all I really enjoy the gardening aspect and actually get upset when someone else gets into my garden and does the work before I have a chance.

 

But this was my point. My definition of the marriage contract is completely different from that of someone else's. Further definition may be needed when one refers to the current definition, and the prime place to do that would be on the definitions of thread, started by yours truly :cup: .

But you (the author of this thread) may have to wait until our discussion of the definition of the word theory is done. Maybe it wasn't such a grand idea if multiple definitions need to be discussed at the same time.

[TheBigDog]

While nearly 50% of marriages may end in divorce, the majority of individuals in marriages stay married. There is a group of people who marry and divorce multiple times, skewing the statistic. The highest demographic of individuals who had been married and divorced does not exceed 41%. So in the worst demographic, 59% of the individuals were in successful lasting marriages.

 

Bill

[infamous]

 

I'm sure it's different in some family homes, but I haven't had the pleasure of meeting any of these households....yet.

Actually Celeste, my household is one of those where male and female roles have changed places. My wife is considerably younger than myself and is still occupied in the work place. As for myself, I'm retired and now take on the duties of household maintenance, preparing meals, washing dishes, vacuuming the carpets....ect. I can now appreciate the responsibility women face dealing with these tasks and for the first time in my adult life have learned why so many women feel a little put upon by their significient other. I don't think many men quite understand why so many women feel frustrated because of this inequity. Not until they themselves experience the same situation will they probably ever have a clue..........................Infy

[Rebiu]

Sounds like you have a good relationship. If you lived in MA your relationship would not be considered a marriage here. If you came from another state that sanctions "common law" marriages MA would recognize it. Marriage is legally sanctioned and binding by the state. Dissolution of a marriage can only be done through legal means, separation and divorce. Under special circumstances the state can annul a marriage, meaning it never existed. I am glad that we all can have our own style of relationship recognized under the law.

Common Law was dissolve a few years ago here in Kansas. Marriage as a concept predates any sanctioning body. It may not be legally binding but if participants have integrity then it is binding is more profound ways.

[Rebiu]

Actually Celeste, my household is one of those where male and female roles have changed places. My wife is considerably younger than myself and is still occupied in the work place. As for myself, I'm retired and now take on the duties of household maintenance, preparing meals, washing dishes, vacuuming the carpets....ect. I can now appreciate the responsibility women face dealing with these tasks and for the first time in my adult life have learned why so many women feel a little put upon by their significient other. I don't think many men quite understand why so many women feel frustrated because of this inequity. Not until they themselves experience the same situation will they probably ever have a clue..........................Infy

Sounds like you are robbing the cradle a bit there. I see why you call yourself infamous. Perhaps you should review my old pedophilia posts.

[Rebiu]

While nearly 50% of marriages may end in divorce, the majority of individuals in marriages stay married. There is a group of people who marry and divorce multiple times, skewing the statistic. The highest demographic of individuals who had been married and divorced does not exceed 41%. So in the worst demographic, 59% of the individuals were in successful lasting marriages.

 

Bill

When you add us never-marrieds, separated and those whose spouse died very young I suspect the stay marrieds are a minority.

[cwes99_03]

If by minority you mean slightly less than 50% then I might agree.

 

I don't know the exact statistics but if even 25% are ever divorced, that is way too many for me. But for a quick Hypography unofficial poll for all those readers. How many of your friends have parents that have been divorced at one time, and how many of your current friends?

 

I can say at least 35% of the kids I knew growing up had divorced parents (some remarried) while I don't have a lot of friends who are married for more than 3 years, I do have two who were divorced (maybe 2% of all my friends who are married) but then I come from a culture of people who don't divorce, or cheat on their spouses, or cause them to feel unwelcome in their own home.

[infamous]

Sounds like you are robbing the cradle a bit there. I see why you call yourself infamous. Perhaps you should review my old pedophilia posts.

Actually Rebiu, when my wife and I were married, she was 29 years of age and I was 42. Not really what one could refer to as pedophilia IMHO...........................Infy

[Cedars]

Wow, I'm sorry but I find those figures to be way off. Expecially considering that at least half of those hours a mom is actually doing for herself as well as any other, and the inflated sense of worth is way off too.

 

I do my own laundry, clean my own house, cook my own food, oeprate my own computer, do my own bills, manage my own facilities, drive my own car, take care of my own psychological problems, etc. and I get paid nothing for it.

 

Yeah, I read those numbers too and found them to be light. A friend explored having a housekeeper come in once a week last summer to help out after surgery. $20 an hour. This housekeeper still had to clean her own house after working, but that did not lower the value of what she was doing for others. After recovering from surgery my friend contemplated taking a job (different company) which involved cleaning. Starting pay $17 an hour. The value comes in because the wife is providing a service to others (the children, the husband, the household).

 

 

Not to mention on that list you have housekeeper, laundry operator, janitor, facilities manager, and household CEO which are all the same position. I'd like to be paid 5 times for doing the same job.

 

I do not know what you do for a living but in every job I have ever held, the above were seperate positions for the most part. There are the cases where persons are starting their own business and hold a few of the above positions themselves and its alot of work with little time for self and yet most do not succeed. As soon as possible they hire additional help (or get married) which then puts the above into seperate positions.

 

If a husband who works 90 plus hours a week is never home to help out but brings in a fabulous income then I'd say he matches anything you are reporting (though inflating) here.

If a man only works 40 hours a week, but does nothing in maintaining the house or taking care of the kids, then I'd say he is not fulfilling his part of the contract.

He would not be able to work 90 plus hours a week if there were kids at home and no wife. Thereby his fabulous income would be reduced greatly. It is the value the wife gives him which allows for the 90 hours a week.