Are most married couples unhappy?

king bast

Kingfisher
Are any of those with the canned anti-marriage answers actually married themselves? Ive been married for almost 10 years, and the answer to the question "are you happy" would not have been the same throughout that time, but right now the answer is absolutely yes.

In this political and spiritual climate, I cant imagine what would keep me going if not my family. Family has given men purpose from time immemorial, so if youre one of the "never getting married, never having kids" crowd, good luck to you all finding something else, but I'd advise you not to try to reinvent the wheel. Your nihilistic, defeatist attitudes will make your unhappiness a self-fulfilling prophecy.
 

abt

Pigeon
Gold Member
Most self-made billionaires are married, when they obviously don't have to be.

Elon Musk has said he likes marriage because he likes the idea of having someone sleep next to him.

So if the guy is rich, yes. Especially since he can afford a divorce.

If the guy is not rich, maybe / maybe not.
 

SilentOne

Woodpecker
king bast said:
Are any of those with the canned anti-marriage answers actually married themselves? Ive been married for almost 10 years, and the answer to the question "are you happy" would not have been the same throughout that time, but right now the answer is absolutely yes.

In this political and spiritual climate, I cant imagine what would keep me going if not my family. Family has given men purpose from time immemorial, so if youre one of the "never getting married, never having kids" crowd, good luck to you all finding something else, but I'd advise you not to try to reinvent the wheel. Your nihilistic, defeatist attitudes will make your unhappiness a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The problem here is that you think you have to be married to have a family. You don't! If you want to have a family, just have one. There is absolutely no need to get into a risky marriage based on the hope strategy that it works out against the odds. There are no benefits to marriage in these current climates. If you live in states like California and married over 10 years, you're toast.

I know some of you guys are just stuck in your old ways. Understand we are in a new era. Women today are banking on you men falling in love with them. Trust me, while you think with your heart, you are a meal ticket to her. It's a reason why they are pushing for marriage far more than men do. Marriage is actually a benefit to women before, during, and even after the marriage ends. When it ends and it will, you're still paying for a broad you no longer even see.

And no I'm not married. Not now or ever under these ridiculous rules. There's so much hidden rules under that contract you don't even know about, you guys just sign it only using love and hope. The state wins, the women wins, you lose.
 

wwtl

Kingfisher
SilentOne, marriage with no-fault divorce is a bad deal for men. But common law marriage is an even worse deal. Depending on the state you live in you might find a loophole here and there. But for many jurisdictions your advice is bollocks.

In many Western countries you can't have a family without marriage. Instead you get the divorce deal immediately when your child is born. You pay the mother and the child while being a bachelor legally with no rights to your own offspring. You don't even appear on the birth certificate. The "family" is mother + children then. You don't exist except as a bank account.

So having a child out of wedlock is the most stupid thing for a man to do. Why are you advising men to do this?
 
king bast said:
Are any of those with the canned anti-marriage answers actually married themselves? Ive been married for almost 10 years, and the answer to the question "are you happy" would not have been the same throughout that time, but right now the answer is absolutely yes.

I've been married for 40 years
1st wife in the west, happy 3 years, unhappy 27 years, suicidal (divorce) 6 months.
2nd wife in SEA, happy 10 years.

1st wife took most of my assets (around $1M), all my home, children, dog, savings and half my pension (I really miss that dog).
2nd wife has no entitlement to anything I own (not that there's much left after No. 1).
 
wwtl said:
SilentOne, marriage with no-fault divorce is a bad deal for men. But common law marriage is an even worse deal. Depending on the state you live in you might find a loophole here and there. But for many jurisdictions your advice is bollocks.

In many Western countries you can't have a family without marriage. Instead you get the divorce deal immediately when your child is born. You pay the mother and the child while being a bachelor legally with no rights to your own offspring. You don't even appear on the birth certificate. The "family" is mother + children then. You don't exist except as a bank account.

So having a child out of wedlock is the most stupid thing for a man to do. Why are you advising men to do this?

Disagree,
You have no (enforcable) rights to ever see your children again if you're married either. It's always up to the woman, was divorced 10 years back, never saw my 4 children again. Essentially she can just claim you are threatening/stalking her or abusing/mistreating the kids or she can relocate to the other side of the country.

I've learned to just walk away at the end of a relationship and forget the kids, she taught them to hate me, no point in seeing them again.
It's easy enough to start a new relationship and make more kids.
 

wwtl

Kingfisher
John Dodds said:
wwtl said:
SilentOne, marriage with no-fault divorce is a bad deal for men. But common law marriage is an even worse deal. Depending on the state you live in you might find a loophole here and there. But for many jurisdictions your advice is bollocks.

In many Western countries you can't have a family without marriage. Instead you get the divorce deal immediately when your child is born. You pay the mother and the child while being a bachelor legally with no rights to your own offspring. You don't even appear on the birth certificate. The "family" is mother + children then. You don't exist except as a bank account.

So having a child out of wedlock is the most stupid thing for a man to do. Why are you advising men to do this?

Disagree,
You have no (enforcable) rights to ever see your children again if you're married either. It's always up to the woman, was divorced 10 years back, never saw my 4 children again. Essentially she can just claim you are threatening/stalking her or abusing/mistreating the kids or she can relocate to the other side of the country.

I've learned to just walk away at the end of a relationship and forget the kids, she taught them to hate me, no point in seeing them again.
It's easy enough to start a new relationship and make more kids.

My post wasn't about right of contact and access and behavior of women. That has always been fucked everywhere, with a few exceptions like Denmark.

In most countries marriage is a legal construct making the difference between "your children" and "her children". You simply don't have any children without marriage. You just pay some women "damages" for impregnating her out of wedlock. Again the "advantage" of just cohabiting with a girl is specific to a few US states, it's not applicable globally. And the loopholes in the US will be closed as well, that's just a matter of time.

So you can have a pretend family, but legally and factually you are single causing "damages" to a woman. The state will retaliate, once the relationship goes south. If your faux wife marries someone else "your" children become his. The details may vary slightly from place to place, but that's how most of the world rolls.
 

SilentOne

Woodpecker
wwtl said:
SilentOne, marriage with no-fault divorce is a bad deal for men. But common law marriage is an even worse deal. Depending on the state you live in you might find a loophole here and there. But for many jurisdictions your advice is bollocks.

In many Western countries you can't have a family without marriage. Instead you get the divorce deal immediately when your child is born. You pay the mother and the child while being a bachelor legally with no rights to your own offspring. You don't even appear on the birth certificate. The "family" is mother + children then. You don't exist except as a bank account.

So having a child out of wedlock is the most stupid thing for a man to do. Why are you advising men to do this?

No the stupidest thing a man can do is sign a marriage certificate. It is the only contract you will sign of such magnitude that doesn't have any consequences for breaking it, at least for the women.

I don't live where that common law nonsense is at. If I did, I wouldn't ever be living with a women. Everything else you said pretty much rest my case on why you should never marry in the West. I know you blue pilled guys will ignore me.

Now if you live in one of these states that do common law marriages... There is a new rule. Don't get married and don't cohabitate. There you go. The game has changed. Don't live with them at all.

For the ones that want kids, well you're kinda screwed. I get you want a family but odds are you won't be raising them up through their childhood. At some point she will take the kids and flee out of state or she will get you kicked out of the house and still force you to pay child support. Why would she do it? Simply because she has the power to do so without repercussions. Just look at techlead. Yea he was a bit soft, but what she did to him was criminal.

wwtl just reinforced why you should just be a bachelor without kids. Maybe you can have a child through surrogacy to avoid the baby mama drama with the state. The current environment isn't looking good to raise a family properly. It sucks...
 

wwtl

Kingfisher
SilentOne said:
wwtl said:
SilentOne, marriage with no-fault divorce is a bad deal for men. But common law marriage is an even worse deal. Depending on the state you live in you might find a loophole here and there. But for many jurisdictions your advice is bollocks.

In many Western countries you can't have a family without marriage. Instead you get the divorce deal immediately when your child is born. You pay the mother and the child while being a bachelor legally with no rights to your own offspring. You don't even appear on the birth certificate. The "family" is mother + children then. You don't exist except as a bank account.

So having a child out of wedlock is the most stupid thing for a man to do. Why are you advising men to do this?

No the stupidest thing a man can do is sign a marriage certificate. It is the only contract you will sign of such magnitude that doesn't have any consequences for breaking it, at least for the women.

I don't live where that common law nonsense is at. If I did, I wouldn't ever be living with a women. Everything else you said pretty much rest my case on why you should never marry in the West. I know you blue pilled guys will ignore me.

Now if you live in one of these states that do common law marriages... There is a new rule. Don't get married and don't cohabitate. There you go. The game has changed. Don't live with them at all.

For the ones that want kids, well you're kinda screwed. I get you want a family but odds are you won't be raising them up through their childhood. At some point she will take the kids and flee out of state or she will get you kicked out of the house and still force you to pay child support. Why would she do it? Simply because she has the power to do so without repercussions. Just look at techlead. Yea he was a bit soft, but what she did to him was criminal.

wwtl just reinforced why you should just be a bachelor without kids. Maybe you can have a child through surrogacy to avoid the baby mama drama with the state. The current environment isn't looking good to raise a family properly. It sucks...

You proposed that one somehow can "have a family without marriage". Surrogates are illegal in many countries. You're still discussing MGTOW niche solutions, which might work in certain specific conditions for people with certain specific citizenships, while in other places the state simply seizes such a child from you and make you pay for it without you ever seeing it again.

Then your universal solution is essentially stay voluntarily celibate to avoid damage to your material belongings. But what's the point of having all these belongings then? What purpose of life do you imagine?

*

The key is to let go. You are going to die and lose everything you have. That's a given. Just accept it. Your genetic legacy lives on only when you give up everything for it. Once your first child is born, you're permanently broke.

The only mistake you can make is trying to pretend that it won't happen to you if you choose to reproduce with a woman. You might work out the perfect workaround solution, then the state changes a law and you're fucked retroactively. Or you marry and naively believe that your marriage wild hold. Just enjoy it while it lasts and prepare for the inevitable.
 

SilentOne

Woodpecker
wwtl said:
Then your universal solution is essentially stay voluntarily celibate to avoid damage to your material belongings. But what's the point of having all these belongings then? What purpose of life do you imagine?

Now you just making stuff up. When did I ever say be celebate? :-/
 

Papaya

Peacock
Gold Member
questor70 said:
Kungfu said:
Women hate beta providers.

Distinction. Women don't hate beta providers. That's like saying you hate an ATM. They just aren't turned on by them.

...which leads to disdain, resentment, disrespect, etc. Semantics but close enough to "hate" that the net result is the same
 

SilentOne

Woodpecker
I actually do not get the necessity of having to get married. It's nothing but a bad business deal period.

The only marriage i can see people do that isn't so stupid, is an arranged marriage. That makes far more sense then a marriage out of love. Each party has a part to play and live up to. It's a straight up business deal like it's meant to be. Not this "I'm going to love you forever" contract most people sign nowadays. Its nothing but verbal nonsense you don't even have to follow through with.

I'm just here to bring logic when it comes to marriage. I know some of you don't like logic, but prefer using love and hope. That's fine. People are free to do whatever they want like I always stated. I'm just stating odds are against you that you will suffer far more in a marriage than being legally single. Don't get mad at the world when you eventually get dragged around by the balls in family court. You were warned but some of you just have to learn the hard way.
 

ilostabet

Pelican
Orthodox Inquirer
I wonder how many of the guys bitching about marriage and women being so bad are actually married.

and of those that are, or were, maybe you should consider that to have a good woman who will be submissive, you need to be the kind of man that is worth submitting to.
 

Dilated

Woodpecker
Would love to have children without getting married (ideal) but it seems the only women up for that are ghetto trash. Or have an accident. And children out of wedlock gives the state, and by proxy women, even more license to fuck you over.
 

Montrose

Kingfisher
cohabitation has all the characteristics of marriage except one : you don't have to support your partner after separation.

Therefore I think cohabitation is always a superior option for men and that is what I will recommend to my sons. The only caveat is that some quality girls will not accept cohabitation but they are rare (in Europe where I live)

Source: I've been happily married for 20 years
 

Papaya

Peacock
Gold Member
ilostabet said:
I wonder how many of the guys bitching about marriage and women being so bad are actually married.

and of those that are, or were, maybe you should consider that to have a good woman who will be submissive, you need to be the kind of man that is worth submitting to.

^ Like almost everything in life the real solutions are most often found by simply thoroughly searching in the mirror
 

Kentemo

Robin
Gold Member
What's the disadvantage of getting married? To me it seems like fun, although most people don't take it too serious.
For me it's 100% unnecessary, but If I ever find that unicorn girl, you better believe I won't be able to keep her if marriage is off the table.

For a girl it's 1000x more special than for a guy. I think's it all bs and consumerism plays a role in it as well, but it's her special day. Why take that away from her?
I spend the majority of my time in Latin America and there it's even more ''special''.

There are contracts for shared wealth between partners after divorce, and other types of contracts. Just make sure it's all figured out.
Children might be an issue, usually it's the woman that gets advantage. But that can be figured out as well, if you really want too.

Edit: Married couples can be happy. Happiness is hard to define. A simple and happy girl that is happy with her life at the present, and not always pursuing ''the next big thing'', is definitely a requirement. There will be boring moments in every relationship.
 
Top