Do the benefits of marriage in England and America offset the risk of divorce and its consequences for a Man ?

Question

The reason I ask is that a lot of English (americans too ?) prefer to cohabit so I was like what gives ?

well I dont care about Skandinavia and I dont care about cooking because there are restaurants for that. Beats what most women can cook up and it is cheaper in the long run. Same goes for sex.
I read an Articel about change taking place in a country that used to be VERY marriage oriented. What has Skandinavia to do with everything ? And what has divorce to do with it ? I was talking about coupels doing away with marriage not getting married in the first place.

Speaking of defeaning silence. Not one good thing to say about marriage ? Anyone ? Huhu ??

Baby Yaga you referred to my details when you said we need to look at the divorce rates. I however referred to coupels who did not marry at all choosing to cohabit. So it is you who needs to pull her head out of her @ss and finally engage in conversation instead of getting desperate about not beeing abel to shame somebody. You have serious issues you thrive on conflict making you unabel to hold a relationship and you do not want to face the problem since you consider everybody else the problem.
You should seek professional help.

Answer 1

Hey Phil#3 (answerer above), practically all those statements go both ways. My personal favorite is: "He may marry with the promise that the wife will also work or stay home with the children only to find it neither happen. His only recourse is to divorce."

What's your point? That it is intolerable for a man when a woman changes her mind about something? That a man must be in total control of the marriage, otherwise his "only recourse is divorce"? Do you think that maybe mature married people can maybe work out an arrangement? Do you think that you could be any more patronizing or misogynistic?

Answer 2

NO.
A husband and father can be removed from the home he paid for by uncorroborated accusation of the wife.
He can be divorced against his will and through no fault of his own by means of feministic "no-fault" divorce.
He will likely be required to pay his ex-wife a monthly "salary" commensurate with the length of the marriage.
He will be required to pay child support to the ex, with no guarantee it will be used for the children's benefit. His child support bill will be based on his income so the harder he worked for the betterment of his family in marriage results in an extravagant award that must be met, regardless.
He will become a "visitor" to his children without the ability to direct their lives or control their danger. He will be told when and under what conditions he may contact his children.
He may be falsely accused of sexually abusing his own children without recourse.
He can be accused of raping his wife without evidence other than "she said so".
He may marry with the promise that the wife will also work or stay home with the children only to find it neither happen. His only recourse is to divorce.
He may be killed by his wife who may then claim innocence for "abuse" that happened months or years back or simply from fear he *may* be abusive.
His wife my become pregnant with another man's child, get divorced and when she marries the bio-father, pay child support for their children.

'Nuff? There's more.

EDIT: No, MarianneM, it does NOT work both ways, ever.
A man can divorce an ungrateful, hateful or lazy wife but the other problems I mentioned, remain his.
Fact is, marriage is a win/win for women and and win/lose for men. The ONLY time it can be considered a win situation for men is for those few who manage to stay married for life.
You'll have to prove your cases with substantiated facts instead of rehashing what some feminazi said somewhere on some anti-male blog.
Keep in mind which incentives are provided for which in divorce. Something like 85% of all divorces are instigated by the wife over the objections of the husband, usually for "feeling" reasons such as not being understood or some such faldaleral. If things are even nearly equal in divorce, why are men so much more reluctant to end marriage? Why are wives so quick to do so?
It does not matter how much the one being divorced wants to "work it out", it only takes one to end a marriage, which is virtually always the wife.

EDIT: I've been thinking about this and wondering what the benefits are to being married. All I can come up with that is tangible is tax breaks, but not too much in that area. If a man is very lucky and finds a good, honest woman, he has hit the jackpot but the likelihood is remote in the US, in my opinion.

Answer 3

No, the advantages do not outweigh the prospect of divorce. If i substitute right into a guy i may be an entire bachelor too many astounding women giving the milk for loose. stable element for prenups not greater loose rides.

Answer 4

Giggly, of course, and the right to nullify that at any point the wife in England or America feels that she would rather collect child support and/or alimony is sacrosanct according to feminists and the government.

What were the benefits again? Greater access to "a challenge" or something?

Answer 5

A man can get in the same trouble by co-habitating with a woman, as he can in a marriage with one. I think every man in the USA should get a prenup and refuse to marry any woman who makes a big deal out of signing one. I dont really have much respect for people who trash talk marriage, because I feel they are trying to dodge responsibility and they are basically saying they dont have enough respect for the person they are with to make it official.

Answer 6

Marriage is a Sacrament.

"Better or Worse ... Sickness & Health ... Richer or Poorer" ... sound familiare?