anti-marriage article . what are ur thoughts?

Exactly. But I'm not religious, don't want to trap her, and don't want the state trying to interfere in the relationship so I refuse to get married - at least in the traditional sense.

 

No one needs to be married. It's just a bureaucratic government. In germany you can have an alternative provision(hope it's the right word for it ). A civil partnership, same tax benefits so far I know.

 

in the future i want a marriage. i think one must be ready for many many compromises to do this step.

i have different examples around me - in some the man is dominating the marriage in some the woman.

i am 36 years old. i was never married - i will try it only once. if that does not work i will perish in the porn-and-hookers-swamp! (just kidding)

 

If my dad wanted grandkids he shouldn't have tried to emasculate me. I've made enough compromises already, It's time I learned to be selfish.

 

This only applies in the West where the women have been ruined by feminism.

 

no marriage looks great when you are young(like me)but a time comes when you become 40 sth or 50 sth and you are alone and your friends and siblings are married but you are not and you will die alone.
Plus it's not just that,after a certain age,It's weird to be unmarried and not have a wife.Although not marrying is easier still but you will regret it.I'm not married by the way.

 

I'm not sure whether or not I'll be married. I'm open to the possibility, but it's possible I might just be single, or enter the monastic life. I can see all options as valid possibilities which would be good in their own ways.

 

Worth a look.

http://www.henrymakow.com/the-value-of-marriage.html

 

From the article, sentence one:
"Marriage breakdown is the greatest cause of poverty in Canada."

Where to begin. This sort of thing grinds my gears so much.

The correlation is there for anyone who can crunch numbers to see.
The causation is reversed. This fact is only apparent to those who are willing to observe that the poor are human beings, and actually listen to the sociologists and anthropologists who study their decision making in depth.

Poverty is the cause of marriage breakdown. Chronic stress destroys relationships. It is easy to give up on someone when they're not bringing home what you need, and when your commitment to them is standing in the way of finding someone else who will help you survive.
Poverty is often the cause of out of wedlock births. Lack of hope for the future leads to girls being ambivalent about getting pregnant in the first place. Spotty access to health care (and the most reliable forms of birth control) leads to higher than average numbers of accidental pregnancies.
Poverty prevents marriage. When you're poor, and all of the people in your neighborhood are also poor, you are not able to find an eligible partner however much want to marry and start a stable nuclear family together. No money plus no money equals no money, and generally, it's a big ask to request your new spouse to move into your childhood bedroom with you and mooch off mom's cooking. So the norm becomes not to marry.

"Oh, if only these poor people would just get an education and a job, their good job would pull them out of poverty and they wouldn't be a statistic anymore!" Okay, yeah, that happens every day, to some who work hard and get lucky both. But do you know what the difference is between being POOR and being merely BROKE? Lack of access to high quality education. Lack of access to jobs that pay enough to survive on. Lack of connections and opportunities to strive for something better.

These recommendations, finish school, work full time, marry before having children. These are for people who aren't poor yet but could easily become poor through the result of their own bad choices. They're really not helpful when dealing with entrenched generational poverty, or really with anyone's poverty that already exists. Blaming a culture that undervalues marriage, when, in practical terms, there is no one around who can afford to marry and no benefit to being married, that's just willfully obtuse.

 

If you're single and loaded you'll have freedom to move about, you can be generous and fun-loving with your nieces and nephews, take them on vacations buy them stuff their parents can't afford, and a long time later, guess whose elderly butt the family always makes time for? Yours!

 

I blame a culture that has willfully undermined marriage itself.

 

Lol now there is a loaded statement sure to shock and horrify!Unfortunately it`s also true.If we must point fingers at the reason for the dramatic decline in traditional families (and of coarse traditional family values),then you need look no further than the far left/liberal/fem-nazis who have taken it upon themselves to wreck western civilization in a few short generations.They have finally created the degenerate hell hole Lenin always envisioned.

"The nuclear family must be destroyed , and people must find better ways of living together. ... Whatever it's ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process. ... "Families have supported oppression by separating people into small, isolated units, unable to join together to fight for common interests. ..." - Functions of the Family, Linda Gordon, WOMEN: A Journal of Liberation, Fall, 1969.

"We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage. " -- [Robin Morgan, "Sisterhood Is Powerful," (ed), 1970, p. 537]

"The care of children ...is infinitely better left to the best trained practitioners of both sexes who have chosen it as a vocation...[This] would further undermine family structure while contributing to the freedom of women." - Kate Millet, Sexual Politics 178-179

"In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them." -- Dr. Mary Jo Bane, feminist and assistant professor of education at Wellesley College and associate director of the school's Centre for Research on Woman

"Who cares how men feel or what they do or whether they suffer? They have had over 2000 years to dominate and made a complete hash of it. Now it is our turn. My only comment to men is, if you don't like it, bad luck - and if you get in my way I'll run you down." - Letter to the Editor: Women's Turn to Dominate, Signed: Liberated Women, Boronia; Herald-Sun, Melbourne, Australia, February 9, 1996

"How will the family unit be destroyed? ... the demand alone will throw the whole ideology of the family into question, so that women can begin establishing a community of work with each other and we can fight collectively. Women will feel freer to leave their husbands and become economically independent, either through a job or welfare."- Female Liberation , by Roxanne Dunbar.

"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." - Robin Morgan, (editor of MS magazine)

"It is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men... All of history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go back to ancient female religions like witchcraft" - The Declaration of Feminism , November 1971.

"God is going to change. We women... will change the world so much that He won't fit any-more." - Naomi Goldenberg, Changing of the Gods: Feminism and the End of Traditional Religions (Quoted at beginning of From Father God to Mother Earth)

 

Wow, femi-nazi's are more powerful than I thought. These dozen or so extremists spoke, and within a generation the world economy fell in line. Stable factory jobs moved overseas, mechanization replaced most of the manual labor jobs remaining in the first world, corporations became bigger and bigger and more removed from the ethical human element of their businesses, and all because a few lezzies experimented with covens and communes. Every historical change from World War 2 to the eradication of polio fit like puzzle pieces into their plot. You would think that somebody would have taken an interest in stopping them. Some large powerful group. Some group who controls most of the seats in congress and almost all of the money flowing through big business and high finance. Some group known for their upper body strength and "superior" rationality... hmm... is it the Rothschild's?

 

I'm really skeptical of anyone saying non western women are any better. The managerial class loves the idea of tiger parenting because it creates a bunch interchangeable peons with bowl cuts and docile personalities. Then there's india where your mariage potential is based on how good your resume looks. I'd rather take my chances with "hypergamous western whores," thanks.

 

of course they are better - you can beat them when they make trouble.