50 Percent of Women Are Now Living Without Spouse

Kudos to Michael Medved!

just to clear things up a bit further, my former attorney spouse is doing very well on her own. That and with the help of the over 500k dollars of undeserved and dissipated income extracted from me by all those oh-so-caring officers of the court who have become de-facto pimps extracting extorted tribute from decent dudes for whatever pitiful access to those tender mercies that may have gone before. Before anyone claim anything else such as exploitation on the part of men in a committed relationship, please reflect on the liklyhood of putting up with the whole x-chromasome poisoning thing should those tender mercies not exist…

okay. and…shaken and not stirred.

I’m a dude, dude.
If I drank martinis, I’d like them dry as well…

“….it remains the province of gals as to how we should ‘feel’ about them and what worth we assign to these wonders.”

You have an inflated view of the value to men of how “you feel” and how this defines the worth of male enterprise. It will come as a shock to you that many if not most men have a natural drive to build, create, invent, understand…..it is a male passion and is part of what it means to be a male. No man that I have ever known is looking to a woman to tell him what the fruits of his labor are worth. But what I do know is that all progress in the world, the creation of civilization itself…is due to the male drive to provide for his family. Not female validation. When the immense energy of millions of men working, creating, etc. to provide for themselves and their families is unleashed and is channeled, society goes forward. When men no longer have a stake in society and when they are marginalised from it and their families society suffers. This condition is not sustainable, and if not corrected, will result in the collapse of the society itself one day. I have started a business from scratch and I can tell you that my passion has nothing to do with the approval of American women at all. Your feelings do not matter much to anyone other than yourselves. The house you live in was built by men and your’s and other women’s feelings have nothing to do with it’s existence. The electrical clock that wakes you up, invented by men, and the electrical grid supplying electricity to your house, invented and maintained by men, are there regardless of your feelings…or any woman’s feelings. The car you drive in to work, and the road you drive on, again, invented and maintained by men….your feelings and those of other women-irrelevant. You display the very American-female (or Western-female) trait of having an exaggerated view of your own importance to men.

while its true that men are most likely often those that produced earthly mechanical and intellectual wonders, it remains the province of gals as to how we should ‘feel’ about them and what worth we assign to these wonders. I contend that it is mankinds desire to impress one gal or another (or a whole buncha them) with some new wonder and resultant status and gain access in this fashion that has pulled civilization up from the ooze. If one pays attention to the underlying efforts in my responses it’s mostly about remaining true to definitions and understanding when an effort in redefinition is being made for political purposes and for purposes of evaluation. Thus is the issue with gay marriage, where the redefinition attempted is to suggest marriage is about a relationship where they can expect *unbrideled* happiness with their choice in a partner. If this is to be the case then in actual fact very few of any of us breeders have actually ever been married either…

Denis, don’t forget Heddy Lamarr. (Don’t have me whacked. Its a joke)

“The new found freedom women are finding never means freedom from men’s money, just freedom from men’s control.”

Everything handed to women has been handed to them by men.

When women were given the right to vote it was males in Congress and a male President who made it happen. (It used to be only wealthy land owners, primarily men, who could vote-as not all men could vote either) before women were put in the Constitution.

It was largely male politicians who designated women as a minority, even though they are not a minority, so that they would receive unfair advantage over men via quotas. White middle class women were and are, the biggest beneficiaries. Black women are the next beneficiaries, but are very small in comparison to white middle class women. Black men were not beneficiaries to any significant extent. White men paid the price.

It was largely male politicians who passed the one-sided VAWA.

It was largely males politicians who passed the myriad of one-sided Family Court legislation.

It was laregly male politicians who passed the one-sided sexual harassment legislation.

It was largely male politicians who required males only to go in harms way in times of war.

Men built virtually everything in society and that included the very important role of being half of the necessary contribution to propagate human life:

Euclidean geometry. Parabolic geometry. Hyperbolic geometry. Projective geometry. Differential geometry. Algebra. Limits, continuity, differentiation, integration. Physical chemistry. Organic chemistry. Biochemistry. Classical mechanics. The indeterminacy principle. The wave equation. The Parthenon. The Anabasis. Air conditioning. Number theory. Romanesque architecture. Gothic architecture. Information theory. Entropy. Enthalpy. Every symphony ever written. Pierre Auguste Renoir. The twelve-tone scale. The mathematics behind it, twelfth root of two and all that. S-p hybrid bonding orbitals. The Bohr-Sommerfeld atom. The purine-pyrimidine structure of the DNA ladder. Single-sideband radio. All other radio. Dentistry. The internal-combustion engine. Turbojets. Turbofans. Doppler beam-sharpening. Penicillin. Airplanes. Surgery. The mammogram. The Pill. The condom. The penis. Polio vaccine. The integrated circuit. The computer. Football. Computational fluid dynamics. Tensors. The Constitution. Euripides, Sophocles, Aristophanes, Aeschylus, Homer, Hesiod. Glass. Rubber. Nylon. Roads. Buildings. Elvis. Silicone. The automobile. Really weird stuff, like clathrates, Buckyballs, and rotaxanes. The Bible. Bug spray. Diffie-Hellman, public-key cryptography, and RSA. Et cetera.

That’s just scratching the surface.

It will be up to the men to decide whether or not they will remind the women as to just how much they need us, and how quickly their privileged lives could change should we decide to do something about it…and how little we need them.

If MM is right it changes nothing about my comments. It only confirms my suspicion that NYT and other old media are full of old liars, and bungling new products of a deficient public school system, who are incapable of determining if they are telling the truth or not. Nothing I write is in any way based on facts or lies printed by the NYT. My comments are based on the painful experiences and observations of a lifetime.

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Journalistic Malpractice in “Marriage is Dead” Report

By: Michael Medved

On Tuesday, January 16th, 2007, the American people awoke to startling and disturbing news: for the first time ever, the majority of women in the country were living without a husband.

All the TV networks, radio news broadcasts, pundits, talk show hosts and leading newspapers reported on the devastating milestone, and saw it as yet another indication of the ongoing collapse of the traditional family. Some commentators hailed this development as an encouraging sign of newfound freedom, while others decried it as a reflection of decadence and dysfunction.

With all the debate and pontification about the new minority status of married women, it’s just too bad that no significant media outlet (beyond this writer, on my nationally syndicated radio show) made the single most important and salient observation about the big news—

That is, it’s not true.

to continue go to:

http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/5b095191-e485-4b69-83c4-9887d6c46d99

New law….After 10 years marriage she divorces you, so when she starts collecting SS benefits you get to stop by coupla times a week and tap the old well, you know, conjugal stuff, benefits flowing both ways, all that rot. Tha’s stop it.

North Korans have No Dongs

Psychos

If you end up with women who don’t think similarly, don’t just blame the women, blame yourselves for not choosing wisely. That’s part of the problem I see with a lot of the men who post here: Lack of personal responsibility.

Amy,

This argument would imply that the “wisest” thing for a man to do would be to avoid women like you because anything nasty a woman does to him is his fault.

It’s nice that you support yourself but this is something the vast majority of men have been doing since time immemorial. They don’t treat women badly and then argue that it’s the woman’s “responsibility” for choosing them. Your boyfriend is living on borrowed time by your own admission. You could snap at any moment.

Yes, some women go instantaneously psycho at some point. Very few.

Backpedaling. You blame men for being naive fools if they don’t treat all women as possible psychos and paranoid nuts if they do.

Typically, I believe, the signs were there all along that they were selfish, conniving, nuts, and all that…but the men they were with were too lazy or otherwise unwilling to take a hard look at what they were getting into.

Maybe if you were a lesbian, you might see that most women have signs that they are selfish, conniving, nuts, and all that.

If most women supported themselves and were logical, rational human beings this whole forum wouldn’t exist in the first place.

P.S. Living together isn’t such a hot idea either. Kills your sex life. And any woman who can’t be comfortable alone is probably a woman who’s going to be a misery to be with.

I sincerely don’t see how you’re in a position to lecture to men about relationship advice like this when you indicate that women are not to be trusted. Why should we trust YOU?

To borrow from Erich Fromm, you want a woman who needs you because she loves you, and not one who “loves” you because she needs you.

You apparently have never met Bill Gates.

Human beings are needy creatures. We need food, water, shelter, etc. We want sex, personal status, fun things to do. But that doesn’t mean we can’t be dignified and honorable about it. You’ve all but admitted that the moment it suits you, your boyfriend is toast. That the only thing holding you back from betraying him is a lack of a need to do so. Poor bastard.

I really don’t understand why anyone gets married. I’ve been supporting myself all my life — don’t need anybody else to do that. I’m with my boyfriend because I love him, and I can’t think of a person I’d rather spend an hour with. I always look good for him, and I’ve never said a cruel word to him. He doesn’t deserve it, number one, and you get the relationship you create.

If you end up with women who don’t think similarly, don’t just blame the women, blame yourselves for not choosing wisely. That’s part of the problem I see with a lot of the men who post here: Lack of personal responsibility. Yes, some women go instantaneously psycho at some point. Very few. Typically, I believe, the signs were there all along that they were selfish, conniving, nuts, and all that…but the men they were with were too lazy or otherwise unwilling to take a hard look at what they were getting into.

P.S. Living together isn’t such a hot idea either. Kills your sex life. And any woman who can’t be comfortable alone is probably a woman who’s going to be a misery to be with. To borrow from Erich Fromm, you want a woman who needs you because she loves you, and not one who “loves” you because she needs you.

I was wondering why the concept of Groom Magazine or groom attire for GI Joes never seemed to catch on.

I suspect if you analyzed the data you would see that very few divorces occur in years 7, 8, and 9 of marriages. A whole lot of divorces occur in years 11, 12, and 13. Why do I say this?

You have to be married to a man for 10 years to collect under his social security. I think women know exactly what they are doing and they don’t often make the mistake of divorcing just before 10 years. Marriage is a wealth builder for women. Men are being “used.” The man may be a fun toy, but his primary purpose is to support the woman not just while the fund lasts but for many years after (child support and alimony) and even during retirement years (social security).

Needless, to say, this debases marriage.

Of course, marriage always had economic components, but at least there was generally a quid pro quo. Now, after divorce which is of course very common, the benefits go one way while no benefit at all flows the other way. Raw deal.

what they didnt mention was how many of these previously married women were actually living off of an income or benefits that are being provided by their former spouse.

this is the data. it is what it is.

this is yet another reason to completely overhaul the redistribution of wealth that occurs at divorce. women or men should not be entitled to a dime of the other persons income. period.

if it is a temperary phase of life, then why is she entitled to my social security benefits??