What's the point of getting married?

[ILoveBlackAmericanWomen]

To make and raise children. I noticed many American men don't like marriage while foreign men have good views on it. That's another reason why I like foreign men.

You can raise children without being married. Marriage is just a stupid piece of paper. 2 people can love each other for life without this fraudulent document signed.

Well it should be obvious why most American men don't want marriage! Look at how many men get screwed because of it!

I believe marriage should not involve the government you're right I don't need to sign a paper to love and commit to someone. 'Legal marriage' I guess..gives people security for example if two people love each other and live together for twenty years then if things go bad and one walks out with everything there is nothing the other can do about it but if they are legally married they both leave the marriage with something. I do believe there are places abroad that marriage doesn't require a document. It's no surprise North America does require one. My definition of marriage is a man and woman who are in love who commit to each other, live together and raise thier children with the same beliefs then they are married with or without a contract.

What is important is men and women should commit to each other before having sex because when they don't unwanted children happen dysfunctional families occur. Finding a good woman (not just a beautiful one) commiting to her, living together and building a family is the right way to go. Children being raised in two parent household with good and sound teaching is why it is important to not have commitmentless sex.

If you didn't buy the house, if you didnt' buy the car, if you didn't buy the property, if you didn't buy etc. then you do NOT get to leave with it. That is how it works in China. So now girls who marry and then try to steal money through divorce are crying. HAHAHAHAHAHA

This is how it should be. Whoever bought the thing and paid for it OWNS it and the other person does NOT get to take "half" of it when they divorce. f**k that shit.

Men are not always the one who own cars and houses women buy things too and men can be golddiggers also. What about all the couples who go half on the car,house etc yet they can't agree who should stay and who should leave and who should keep the car??? That is where the legal part comes in. What if the women is the breadwinner yet had no problem being the one who buys the cars house etc then ten years later she gets tired of him and tries to kick him out of the house onto the street? The man who is legally married won't have to be on the street he can have some things too by law even if she paid for it. If a couple agree one becomes the homemaker the other the moneymaker then when the relationship fails if the moneymaker tries to leave the homemaker homeless they are at fault because they had a mutual agreement. That is where the law comes in for situations like that.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

Men are duped into marriage due to the cumulative force of peer pressure, family pressure, female pressure, and the media which persists in fooling men into believing it is "wonderful" and in the best interests of men.

Government also promotes marriage because married people buy new houses, furniture, extra cars, extra clothes, insurance, toys, and other expensive knick knacks that fuel the economy.

Marriage, at least in the USA, is a prescription for wage slavery to the wife and/or debt slavery to the ex-wife via child support.

You have been warned. If you marry, you deserve the fate that awaits you.

[Andrewww]

I believe marriage should not involve the government you're right I don't need to sign a paper to love and commit to someone. 'Legal marriage' I guess..gives people security for example if two people love each other and live together for twenty years then if things go bad and one walks out with everything there is nothing the other can do about it but if they are legally married they both leave the marriage with something. I do believe there are places abroad that marriage doesn't require a document. It's no surprise North America does require one. My definition of marriage is a man and woman who are in love who commit to each other, live together and raise thier children with the same beliefs then they are married with or without a contract.

What is important is men and women should commit to each other before having sex because when they don't unwanted children happen dysfunctional families occur. Finding a good woman (not just a beautiful one) commiting to her, living together and building a family is the right way to go. Children being raised in two parent household with good and sound teaching is why it is important to not have commitmentless sex.

I'm not sure about America but in Canada if you've lived together for a few years and you have children it's considered marriage even if you don't have a legal document.

[abcdavid01]

To make and raise children. I noticed many American men don't like marriage while foreign men have good views on it. That's another reason why I like foreign men.

You can raise children without being married. Marriage is just a stupid piece of paper. 2 people can love each other for life without this fraudulent document signed.

Well it should be obvious why most American men don't want marriage! Look at how many men get screwed because of it!

I believe marriage should not involve the government you're right I don't need to sign a paper to love and commit to someone. 'Legal marriage' I guess..gives people security for example if two people love each other and live together for twenty years then if things go bad and one walks out with everything there is nothing the other can do about it but if they are legally married they both leave the marriage with something. I do believe there are places abroad that marriage doesn't require a document. It's no surprise North America does require one. My definition of marriage is a man and woman who are in love who commit to each other, live together and raise thier children with the same beliefs then they are married with or without a contract.

What is important is men and women should commit to each other before having sex because when they don't unwanted children happen dysfunctional families occur. Finding a good woman (not just a beautiful one) commiting to her, living together and building a family is the right way to go. Children being raised in two parent household with good and sound teaching is why it is important to not have commitmentless sex.

If you didn't buy the house, if you didnt' buy the car, if you didn't buy the property, if you didn't buy etc. then you do NOT get to leave with it. That is how it works in China. So now girls who marry and then try to steal money through divorce are crying. HAHAHAHAHAHA

This is how it should be. Whoever bought the thing and paid for it OWNS it and the other person does NOT get to take "half" of it when they divorce. f**k that shit.

Men are not always the one who own cars and houses women buy things too and men can be golddiggers also. What about all the couples who go half on the car,house etc yet they can't agree who should stay and who should leave and who should keep the car??? That is where the legal part comes in. What if the women is the breadwinner yet had no problem being the one who buys the cars house etc then ten years later she gets tired of him and tries to kick him out of the house onto the street? The man who is legally married won't have to be on the street he can have some things too by law even if she paid for it. If a couple agree one becomes the homemaker the other the moneymaker then when the relationship fails if the moneymaker tries to leave the homemaker homeless they are at fault because they had a mutual agreement. That is where the law comes in for situations like that.

Come on, I can't be the only one who thinks she's a troll.

[ILoveBlackAmericanWomen]

You can raise children without being married. Marriage is just a stupid piece of paper. 2 people can love each other for life without this fraudulent document signed.

Well it should be obvious why most American men don't want marriage! Look at how many men get screwed because of it!

I believe marriage should not involve the government you're right I don't need to sign a paper to love and commit to someone. 'Legal marriage' I guess..gives people security for example if two people love each other and live together for twenty years then if things go bad and one walks out with everything there is nothing the other can do about it but if they are legally married they both leave the marriage with something. I do believe there are places abroad that marriage doesn't require a document. It's no surprise North America does require one. My definition of marriage is a man and woman who are in love who commit to each other, live together and raise thier children with the same beliefs then they are married with or without a contract.

What is important is men and women should commit to each other before having sex because when they don't unwanted children happen dysfunctional families occur. Finding a good woman (not just a beautiful one) commiting to her, living together and building a family is the right way to go. Children being raised in two parent household with good and sound teaching is why it is important to not have commitmentless sex.

If you didn't buy the house, if you didnt' buy the car, if you didn't buy the property, if you didn't buy etc. then you do NOT get to leave with it. That is how it works in China. So now girls who marry and then try to steal money through divorce are crying. HAHAHAHAHAHA

This is how it should be. Whoever bought the thing and paid for it OWNS it and the other person does NOT get to take "half" of it when they divorce. f**k that shit.

Men are not always the one who own cars and houses women buy things too and men can be golddiggers also. What about all the couples who go half on the car,house etc yet they can't agree who should stay and who should leave and who should keep the car??? That is where the legal part comes in. What if the women is the breadwinner yet had no problem being the one who buys the cars house etc then ten years later she gets tired of him and tries to kick him out of the house onto the street? The man who is legally married won't have to be on the street he can have some things too by law even if she paid for it. If a couple agree one becomes the homemaker the other the moneymaker then when the relationship fails if the moneymaker tries to leave the homemaker homeless they are at fault because they had a mutual agreement. That is where the law comes in for situations like that.

Come on, I can't be the only one who thinks she's a troll.

And I can't be the only one who doesn't give a crap what you think about me. You think you're getting brownie points from the older guys by picking on a woman? All I see is you worrying about me. Drink a cup of eggnog and chill out.

[Teal Lantern]

Government also promotes marriage because married people buy new houses, furniture, extra cars, extra clothes, insurance, toys, and other expensive knick knacks that fuel the economy.

Exactly. Entire industries depend on shmucks pulling that plow.

I'm not sure about America but in Canada if you've lived together for a few years and you have children it's considered marriage even if you don't have a legal document.

In America, there are also "co-habitation" laws that make it hard to kick her out your place, your name on the deed/lease be-damned. Just receiving mail at your place for a few months can mean she legally lives there.

In some states, you have to go through formal eviction hoops to get her out, especially if she has kids (whether or not YOU are the father). She can do plenty of damage to you or your home in the time it takes that to go through court. She can also get you arrested and barred FROM YOUR OWN HOME by claiming abuse.
You're still on the hook for the rent/mortgage & utility payments, naturally.

[abcdavid01]

What are you guys talking about government promoting marriage? BO won because of single people. Married couples voted Romney by over 10%. The Feminists are the ones causing the declining marriage rate, birth rate, single motherhood, all these issues. They think marriage is bondage because "til death do us part" isn't far off from property ownership. As I said, marriage is a good thing. It meant Alphas couldn't hog all the women. Feminists have just changed the laws to make it a poor investment. Go get married. That's what Feminists don't want. Just make sure you marry abroad or the woman isn't a Feminist.

[Teal Lantern]

What are you guys talking about government promoting marriage? BO won because of single people. Married couples voted Romney by over 10%. The Feminists are the ones causing the declining marriage rate, birth rate, single motherhood, all these issues. They think marriage is bondage because "til death do us part" isn't far off from property ownership. As I said, marriage is a good thing. It meant Alphas couldn't hog all the women. Feminists have just changed the laws to make it a poor investment. Go get married. That's what Feminists don't want. Just make sure you marry abroad or the woman isn't a Feminist.

You might be surprised by the number of feminists (e.g. Hanna Rosin, Gloria Steinem) who are/were married. They are not anti-marriage any more than a fox is anti-hen house. They ARE in competition against more attractive foxes. To that end, they want to make the chickens seem less tasty.

The alphas can't hog all the women unless the women want to be "hogged", right? I'm ok with that, with the condition that I don't have to finance -- via taxes/welfare/higher crime rates -- their loser children. Hog away.

It works out well for everyone. Each guy that drops out of the domestic dating market saves money for other endeavors. He marginally lowers competition for the women the "alphas" pass around, and is one less man she has to wade past to get to the alphas -- who she really wants, anyway.
Win-win-win.

[abcdavid01]

What you're describing about Feminist leaders getting married is really the hypocrisy of the intellectual class. It's like, the liberal elites will get married and live in the suburbs and send theirs kids to private schools all the while their fellow working class liberals are told it's okay to do the exact opposite.

[S_Parc]

What you're describing about Feminist leaders getting married is really the hypocrisy of the intellectual class. It's like, the liberal elites will get married and live in the suburbs and send theirs kids to private schools all the while their fellow working class liberals are told it's okay to do the exact opposite.

It's also known as having your cake and eating it. Realize, marriage is re-written as indentured servitude to a Feminazi spouse, in modern American suburbia. If you recall the movie, 'American Beauty', Kevin Spacey was exactly that, until he decided to wake up and stop supporting his wife's dictatorship. Well, the end result, if his closet gay Marine neighbor didn't shoot him, would have been his wife doing the same exact thing. In the end, his fate was sealed from the day he said 'I Do' to Annette Benning.

[Obormot]

Once a marriage fails both parties want a clean start.
Sometimes it's possible, sometimes it's not.

I don't see why one has to support the other unless there's a prior agreement.
It's actually valid not only for divorced couples. I don't see why one has to feed off another even when they are married. Unless there's a prior mutual agreement, of course.
Clean start is possible when both parties are self-sufficient, which should be their goal during their lives. Housewives just like staying-at-home dads should try harder in their lives and be able to support themselves at least.

If a couple has kids, there will be no more clean start for any of them until kids start living on their own. That's fair.
In the old times, most men tried to keep kids with their mother and to start a new family. As a result, justice responded with an idea of child support. As I said above, I believe it's fair as long as the involvement of both parties is fair too. That's where the problem lies these days and it's more complicated as it may seem. Sometimes women abuse it, but in many cases expenditures go up. For instance, parties have to live separately and buy or rent 2 properties instead of one.

Fortunately, for rich people child support is not a problem. Main problem is the alimony, which should not exist at all.

[Maker55]

To make and raise children. I noticed many American men don't like marriage while foreign men have good views on it. That's another reason why I like foreign men.

You can raise children without being married. Marriage is just a stupid piece of paper. 2 people can love each other for life without this fraudulent document signed.

Well it should be obvious why most American men don't want marriage! Look at how many men get screwed because of it!

I believe marriage should not involve the government you're right I don't need to sign a paper to love and commit to someone. 'Legal marriage' I guess..gives people security for example if two people love each other and live together for twenty years then if things go bad and one walks out with everything there is nothing the other can do about it but if they are legally married they both leave the marriage with something. I do believe there are places abroad that marriage doesn't require a document. It's no surprise North America does require one. My definition of marriage is a man and woman who are in love who commit to each other, live together and raise thier children with the same beliefs then they are married with or without a contract.

What is important is men and women should commit to each other before having sex because when they don't unwanted children happen dysfunctional families occur. Finding a good woman (not just a beautiful one) commiting to her, living together and building a family is the right way to go. Children being raised in two parent household with good and sound teaching is why it is important to not have commitmentless sex.

If you didn't buy the house, if you didnt' buy the car, if you didn't buy the property, if you didn't buy etc. then you do NOT get to leave with it. That is how it works in China. So now girls who marry and then try to steal money through divorce are crying. HAHAHAHAHAHA

This is how it should be. Whoever bought the thing and paid for it OWNS it and the other person does NOT get to take "half" of it when they divorce. f**k that shit.

Men are not always the one who own cars and houses women buy things too and men can be golddiggers also. What about all the couples who go half on the car,house etc yet they can't agree who should stay and who should leave and who should keep the car??? That is where the legal part comes in. What if the women is the breadwinner yet had no problem being the one who buys the cars house etc then ten years later she gets tired of him and tries to kick him out of the house onto the street? The man who is legally married won't have to be on the street he can have some things too by law even if she paid for it. If a couple agree one becomes the homemaker the other the moneymaker then when the relationship fails if the moneymaker tries to leave the homemaker homeless they are at fault because they had a mutual agreement. That is where the law comes in for situations like that.

The problem is that even if a man and woman live together they aren't married, the man will have to pay palimony if they're together long enough.

While there are a few cases in which the woman earns more than the man, if most marriages, the man earns the most and is killed in the divorce courts.

He will not only have to split everything but he will have to pay alimony depending on how long they were married.

[ILoveBlackAmericanWomen]

You can raise children without being married. Marriage is just a stupid piece of paper. 2 people can love each other for life without this fraudulent document signed.

Well it should be obvious why most American men don't want marriage! Look at how many men get screwed because of it!

I believe marriage should not involve the government you're right I don't need to sign a paper to love and commit to someone. 'Legal marriage' I guess..gives people security for example if two people love each other and live together for twenty years then if things go bad and one walks out with everything there is nothing the other can do about it but if they are legally married they both leave the marriage with something. I do believe there are places abroad that marriage doesn't require a document. It's no surprise North America does require one. My definition of marriage is a man and woman who are in love who commit to each other, live together and raise thier children with the same beliefs then they are married with or without a contract.

What is important is men and women should commit to each other before having sex because when they don't unwanted children happen dysfunctional families occur. Finding a good woman (not just a beautiful one) commiting to her, living together and building a family is the right way to go. Children being raised in two parent household with good and sound teaching is why it is important to not have commitmentless sex.

If you didn't buy the house, if you didnt' buy the car, if you didn't buy the property, if you didn't buy etc. then you do NOT get to leave with it. That is how it works in China. So now girls who marry and then try to steal money through divorce are crying. HAHAHAHAHAHA

This is how it should be. Whoever bought the thing and paid for it OWNS it and the other person does NOT get to take "half" of it when they divorce. f**k that shit.

Men are not always the one who own cars and houses women buy things too and men can be golddiggers also. What about all the couples who go half on the car,house etc yet they can't agree who should stay and who should leave and who should keep the car??? That is where the legal part comes in. What if the women is the breadwinner yet had no problem being the one who buys the cars house etc then ten years later she gets tired of him and tries to kick him out of the house onto the street? The man who is legally married won't have to be on the street he can have some things too by law even if she paid for it. If a couple agree one becomes the homemaker the other the moneymaker then when the relationship fails if the moneymaker tries to leave the homemaker homeless they are at fault because they had a mutual agreement. That is where the law comes in for situations like that.

The problem is that even if a man and woman live together they aren't married, the man will have to pay palimony if they're together long enough.

While there are a few cases in which the woman earns more than the man, if most marriages, the man earns the most and is killed in the divorce courts.

He will not only have to split everything but he will have to pay alimony depending on how long they were married.

Yes that's bad.

[marklambo]

Once a marriage fails both parties want a clean start.
Sometimes it's possible, sometimes it's not.

I don't see why one has to support the other unless there's a prior agreement.
It's actually valid not only for divorced couples. I don't see why one has to feed off another even when they are married. Unless there's a prior mutual agreement, of course.
Clean start is possible when both parties are self-sufficient, which should be their goal during their lives. Housewives just like staying-at-home dads should try harder in their lives and be able to support themselves at least.

If a couple has kids, there will be no more clean start for any of them until kids start living on their own. That's fair.
In the old times, most men tried to keep kids with their mother and to start a new family. As a result, justice responded with an idea of child support. As I said above, I believe it's fair as long as the involvement of both parties is fair too. That's where the problem lies these days and it's more complicated as it may seem. Sometimes women abuse it, but in many cases expenditures go up. For instance, parties have to live separately and buy or rent 2 properties instead of one.

Fortunately, for rich people child support is not a problem. Main problem is the alimony, which should not exist at all.

There should also be a cap on these things. I don't see justification or any reasoning to pay child support of $20,000+ a month if a man is rich. No child requires this much money for support, its ridiculous. I agree with alimony and it should not exist at all. Women can easily go find another man to support them or get a job. If a man is screwed with alimony, he's pretty much screwed for a very long time. If he is out of work, or ends up having to take a less paying job, he's screwed. While all this is happening, the woman is raking in all the free money. What really pisses me off is the fact that these feminists fight for this so called "equality". If it's so equal, then there should not be alimony. They can go out on their own and get a job like everyone else. There is no such thing as "equality" between man and woman here in the US. It's at the point where woman have most of the rights than men. It's time that us men fight for our rights for true equality. Marriage in the US is bs, plain and simple.

[Teal Lantern]

There should also be a cap on these things. I don't see justification or any reasoning to pay child support of $20,000+ a month if a man is rich. No child requires this much money for support, its ridiculous. I agree with alimony and it should not exist at all. Women can easily go find another man to support them or get a job. If a man is screwed with alimony, he's pretty much screwed for a very long time. If he is out of work, or ends up having to take a less paying job, he's screwed. While all this is happening, the woman is raking in all the free money. What really pisses me off is the fact that these feminists fight for this so called "equality". If it's so equal, then there should not be alimony. They can go out on their own and get a job like everyone else. There is no such thing as "equality" between man and woman here in the US. It's at the point where woman have most of the rights than men. It's time that us men fight for our rights for true equality. Marriage in the US is bs, plain and simple.

The PUA guys who are at the top in the dating game are going to join in that crusade because ...?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma

MGTOW and men who have no intention of getting married (either at all, or at least not in the U.S.) are going to expend the energy to join in because ...?