"Why Great Husbands Are Being Abandoned"

[Harmony Blue]

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rediscovering-love/201408/why-great-husbands-are-being-abandoned-0

"Not so many years ago, married men had the freedom to live by one set of rules away from home, and a different set at the hearth. Because they held the power to distribute resources however they wished, they could decide what and when to share them. As women have become legitimate wage earners with more powerful voices, they have challenged their chosen partners to participate in a whole new kind of connection that does not accept automatic hierarchy."

"Well, guess again. Fifty percent of marriages are still ending in divorce, and women continue to be the gender that initiates those endings. In the past, their reasons for leaving most often had to do with infidelity, neglect, or abuse. Now they’re dumping men who are faithful, attentive, and respectful, the very men they said they have always wanted. Why would women who have accomplished the female dream suddenly not be satisfied with it? Why are they leaving these ideal guys, and for what reasons?"

[bravenak]

1. People fall out of love.

Better to divorce a 'good man' you cannot stand, than to stay and be miserable for the rest of your life. However long you have left.
Men used to basically own us. Now we can leave. And we do.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

3. Yup.

I'd never marry someone I hadn't lived with for any real length of time, or been intimate with. You need to know upfront what you're getting into, whether or not the other person have any habits that completely drive you up the wall, whether or not you actually enjoy spending regular, every-day days with them. Marrying someone simply out of 'love' is a good way to wind up divorced.

[bravenak]

7. Lots of folks rush things too much.

And then once the glow wears off, it's over. So we do it over and over like crackheads trying to get that first high feeling back. Humans.

[JustAnotherGen]

15. We didn't live together prior to getting engaged

I had been there, done that in my 20's as had my husband (in his early 30's).

We did date for 14 months prior to getting engaged and knew we shared the same value system, approach towards money, and approach towards family prior to getting engaged.

Fighting over who gets to sleep on which side of the bed is silly. Take turns.

Fighting over whether to save money or not is huge. As is sex.

We moved in together 2 months after we got engaged and got married the following April.

So far, so good.

But we both knew at 36 and 40 (when we met) exactly WHAT our non negotiables were. The money thing was very eerie - how in alignment we are on that. As was our spirituality, what we value (art and experience over things) and our gender roles were very much in alignment.

I posted down thread - the needy touchy feely guy was not for me. But I knew that as I started counting 'first dates' in my early 20's and I've had (I have to check the precise number) between 260 and 270 (its in that area). They drop off radically at the second date level. Even more radically at the third date level.

4th dates I've only dated 7 men.

Long term relationships - 5.

I was a scamp Erich - a true scaaaaaaaaaaaaaamp! Hey - first date is just a cocktail. Second date - it's just dinner. It's the 4th dates when you get to the good part!

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

20. You certainly dated a lot more than me.

I was in the socially inept crowd. If I dated 2 dozen people tops between 6th grade and 4.5 decades of age, I'd be surprised.

And more than half of those were probably 1-2 night stands with online folks where we arranged to hook up for some... exercise. Before my only really long-term arrangement, I think there were maybe two than lasted more than a week or two. I had a lot of trouble with the whole 'commitment' thing. Not from the stereotypical tv/movie angle of 'omg, only gonna be with one person for life' angle, but from the 'I really don't want to get tied down in one place' angle.

And then I bought a house, got some dogs, and was stuck in one place, so it didn't really matter anymore.

[JustAnotherGen]

23. I never

dated online. *hides head in paperbag* - I've heard too many horror stories from women about men claiming to be fifty and divorced that were actually 65 and still married.


And then I bought a house, got some dogs, and was stuck in one place, so it didn't really matter anymore.



For me - it was 40 staring me down the barrel. I mean - I look good - but I didn't want to be single and have to take my bra off down the road with a man. My husband - he's going to grow droopy with me! Like - they are going to sneak up on him.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

30. It was back in the day...

I was on the internet right from the start, so I as was making friends online in the late 80s/early 90s, back when the height of 'multiplayer gaming' was text-based games that could only handle a couple dozen players at a time. Most of us were college kids at that point, since 'the internet' was largely limited to colleges. We didn't even have 'web pages' or 'web sites'. Just bulletin boards or ftp or telnet logins. So pretty much anybody you met was a college student, a professor, a darpa government type, or a hacker.

Nowadays, I'm more interested in sticking together for economic reasons than sweaty ones. Even platonically, we've got two sets of parents who help us out financially, and better chances that at least one of us will be employed, even if not both...

[liberalhistorian]

85. Hubby and I met online. He was divorced,

I'd never been married (which was a strike against me in much of singles-land once I reached forty, lemme tell ya; I was nearly 43 when we married). In fact, we met on a very well-known site. You might just be familiar with it. It's called Democratic Underground.

[hifiguy]

95. That is a cool story!

to you and hubby!

[JustAnotherGen]

116. Are you kidding me!

Squeeeeeee! This is a common interest site - not plenty of freaks as my single friends call it. I wonder if there are more DUers once two now one?

I love love!

[liberalhistorian]

125. I do believe there are several

DU couples, although some no longer post on the site for various reasons (I've been here since '03 and hubby and I met in '05). Hubby still posts here once in awhile, although not nearly as much as me; I'm on here a lot more.

We actually met at a DU meet-up in South Dakota in 2005; he was a lifelong resident of the state and I'd just moved there.

[JustAnotherGen]

140. That is so cool!

Love it!

[VanillaRhapsody]

129. I have been single after 16 yrs of marriage for nearly as long (HEY I married young!!!)

I've had relationships along the way...some were for years.....but none of them were someone I wanted to hitch my wagon that closely to theirs....

It's my interest in politics that does seem to get in my way for another reason.....hard to find someone as interested in it as I am...and I am a geek on top of that....so....I try to just enjoy my life....Que sera!

[BainsBane]

123. Your husband's a lucky man

He chose well.

[liberalhistorian]

126. Aww, geez, you're making

me blush now, lol! I consider myself to be the lucky one, he really is a great guy and a wonderful husband. It was well worth the wait.

[Bettie]

135. DH and I are planning

when they get to the right age, to tell our boys, that they should never ever marry someone they have not been intimate with and lived with.

You really don't know a person until you've shared living space.

DH and I feel like we made the right choice. He is my best friend and I'm his. We honestly enjoy spending time with each other more than anything else. He makes me nuts some days, but then, I'm not exactly a walk in the park 24/7 either.

Of course, we've only been married 25 years.

[Kurska]

13. And they fall out of love at different times.

One of the hardest thing I ever had to do was break it off with a guy who was still madly in love with me. I felt awful about it, but stringing him on would of been worse.

I don't buy the OP, I think the only gender role that changed is that it became acceptable for women to WANT to leave. Which is their right, men have been doing it for ages.

[bravenak]

33. That is so hard to leave somebody that you like, not love.

I have been there, we cried together. It just could not work. Genetically incompatible.

I don't buy the op so much myself. But it's a welcome distraction right now.

[blueamy66]

61. I divorced my husband for the same reason.

I fell out of love.

He deserved a wife that adored him.

$50....court date....UHaul....done.

[SammyWinstonJack]

71. ...

Better to divorce a good man you cannot stand, than to stay miserable for the rest of your life. However long you have left.


This is where I am.


I used to think that the worst thing is life would be to end up all alone, it's not. The worst thing in life is to end up with people who make you feel all alone.

I wish I had the means and courage to leave and have some happiness, but I have don't.

And even if I did, I have obligations that would prohibit me from doing so.

[bravenak]

76. Aww, i'm feeling you.

Lives get so meshed together that it's hard to separate, sometimes impossible.
I hope you find many ways to make yourself happier. Responsibility is killing me slowly.
One day you may just wake up and decide to do it. Marriage shouldn't be a prison.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

83. Passionate romantic love doesn't last

At least that's been my experience. People are very naive if they think that they can maintain that euphoria, especially when they start slowing down and growing old. I think there's something very noble about staying together for friendship, even if there's no heart-racing love left. Of course if there's no love at all left and not even respect, then it's tine to let go. If you know you are a flighty person where your heart is concerned, then it's probably better not to marry at all, especially if you plan to have children. Men and women can move on but children can suffer horribly for the rest of their lives if two loving parents break up the family.

[Warpy]

142. Also, other men are very poor judges of how their friends treat the women in their lives.

While Good Old Joe might be a pillar of the local lodge, root for all the right teams, and pay his football pool debt on time, he can also be a complete rotter behind closed doors.

The writer in the OP seems to want women poor and powerless so that men can do as they will without any fear of being abandoned.

The world doesn't work that way, guys. If you treat her like crap, she will leave as soon as she can, even if it's to a cardboard carton under a bridge.

[Orrex]

2. Please tell me that this article is a reprint and originally ran in 1958

[bravenak]

4. Nope!!

He finds all the 'good' stuff all by himself.

[joeglow3]

47. She

[bravenak]

48. I though he was a grasseater.

Men.

[seaglass]

75. You are correct.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024218601#post4

Harmony Blue (3,840 posts)
4. No

I am herbivore man.

I live a peaceful existence. It does perplex people this type of lifestyle but I don't judge what others do or try to shame them IMO.

[bravenak]

77. Thank you.

I knew i had read that, I just couldn't find it.

[joeglow3]

166. The author of the article was a female

[seaglass]

178. Yes I know. And the OP is male. n/t

[redqueen]

53. Notice that the verb in that sentence is "finds". nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

161. Seek and Ye Shall Find ....

whatever it is you are looking for

[betsuni]

148. It's from Psychology Yesterday

[JustAnotherGen]

5. The section that nails it

It must be a parallel path. Both men and women must separately find their own individual balance between their need for independence and their desire for ongoing commitment, not balance their proclivities on the other end of their partner. As integrated individuals in their own right, they would then have the capacity to create a relationship that is more than the exchange or sum of the parts. Committed partners who are willing to fight for that innovative solution will find the way.

She goes on to give bits about reconciling couples and how the 'alpha male' the women left them for wasn't what they imagined he would be.

In my case - I married an alpha a few years ago. I needed one because I have an extremely strong will and personality and was financially successful on my own. The touchy feely man was not for me at all.

And that's the beauty of getting married at 39 (met my husband when I was 36) as opposed to 22, 23, 24.

Lots of dating experience without financial commitment or children means you can really learn WHO is going to work with you.

[WinkyDink]

12. I got married at 23 and it lasted 'til death did us part this year. I'm 64. Thus endeth the lesson

on generalizations.

[JustAnotherGen]

17. You are like my mom

She met my dad - and then he passed away three years ago on Wednesday. She seriously doesn't know how to be an adult without him - but we are really trying to bring her up to speed. And my condolences to you - watching her and my father in law (my mother in law passed away last summer after 50+ years) - it is such a huge adjustment.

[joeglow3]

49. Exactly my thoughts

Come hell or high water, she will convince us how much better she is than anyone who took a path different from hers.

[JustAnotherGen]

58. No - I won't

Read below. This is personal. It had NOTHING to do with winkydink.

[JustAnotherGen]

51. I'm sure winkydink IS an adult

You totally got offended over a very personal issue.

Where did I say that about winkydink. Are you kidding me?

I don't know jack shit about her or anyone else here -

But I DO know myyyyyyyyyyyyy mother was soooo paralyzed by grief and loss she couldn't manage to hire a snow plow guy on her own.

I'm glad you are so awesome and great and just would blink and move on if your spouse would die. My parents were a mixed race couple long before it was 'fashionable' and they ONLY had each other for many many years.

Forgive the fuck out of me for sharing what sometimes happens when two people meet, fall in love, remain in love - and they lose the love of their lives.

It's devastating.

And she's (my mother) the FIRST to state - I went from my father's house, to my dorm, to officer's quarters.

Now keep being offended. Because NOTHING I wrote towards a du'er was insulting.

Here we go again - second verse same as the first - I'll get alerted for defending my statement.

Go ahead - do it. But you'll be hard pressed to find a personal attack here - just me pointing out how very wrong you were and took my words and twisted a personal experience into an insult against another member. That NEVER happend.


The only thing you owe me is an apology. But you'll alert - so go ahead.


I get snotty - I give it back - WITHIN TOS of course. N/T

[JustAnotherGen]

60. It was the married at 23

And 40 + years marriage.

Now where is my apology - because you were dead wrong.

Oh that's right - but now you will beat ME over the head with how your way was right.

Snorty laugh. Chortle.

[joeglow3]

167. That is BS and you know it

I went back and re read just to be sure. It is clear what the point of your post was.

[JustAnotherGen]

172. No it was not

Bullshit right back. Again - I hope if you have to watch a parent lose their life mate the survivor blinks and goes on like it never happened. It will be easier for them if they don't have a heart. Trust me - I've seen first hand what happens when they do.

Now stop the snotty and go inflict you outrage on someone who will take it. I won't. I don't lick heels.

[Harmony Blue]

155. It is a well balanced article

Anyways, most are asking for data but I can see why the author is reluctant to discuss specific data pertaining to her own clients for obvious reasons. The data on divorce rates, and initiation for divorce and for what reasons that lead to that point are well known and available to the public for some time. What is new information to me is that rate of divorce is so high even for Millennials.

[djean111]

6. I think labeling anyone you don't live with and don't really know and are not in a relationship with

as "great" is kind of ridiculous. And the implication that you must share your home, your bed, your life, and your body with someone just because they have been deemed "faithful, attentive, and respectful" makes marriage into some sort of transaction.
Too many generalizations, for me.

[WinkyDink]

8. "they’re dumping men who are faithful, attentive, and respectful"---Who says? Not to mention there

are plenty of reasons for "dumping men who are faithful, attentive, and respectful". Maybe the guy became a slob; maybe he became a nutcase Tea-Partier; maybe he differed on the topic of children; et cetera.

[redqueen]

59. Who is "we"? nt

[liberalhistorian]

88. Well, goody gum drops for you!

That might be YOUR personal preference, but you have no right to demand that others follow that same path. Especially not women who may feel trapped because they've been fed the line that they're selfish if they think of themselves at all in a marriage.

I just love self-righteous sanctimonious "I do it this way, therefore so should everyone else" posters.

[mimi85]

109. You didn't.

I think someone was reading into your statement something that wasn't there. You don't even have to "defend your position."

[a la izquierda]

176. Thank you.

The selfish part is such a burden for women.

[Mosby]

122. she is talking about clients who use her services.

[bettyellen]

9. LOL- " donning armor to fight the dangers that threaten his family and place in the world?"

We want aggression and paranoia in men? Fucking brilliant.

[JustAnotherGen]

26. You are the best!

Glad to see you back!

[bettyellen]

27. Thanks darling!

Just getting some good lulz in before the weekend!

[ismnotwasm]

10. LOL

[el_bryanto]

11. This seems to describe people who have an unrealistic view of what sort of partner they want. nt

[winter is coming]

16. It would actually be a stronger article if it were about people marrying without

having a realistic view of themselves, their partner, or marriage in general. Instead, it's a mishmash of sweeping generalizations about what women want.

[el_bryanto]

24. Yes - that's better said.

I mean in it is the idea of unrealistic expectations -but it has a thick layer of assumptions about woman on top of it, in the middle of it and below it.

Bryant

[winter is coming]

28. But it's not only women who have unrealistic expectations.

And sometimes, "unrealistic" simply means that you and your partner don't have expectations that mesh. There is no one-size-fits-all marriage. It's not about finding a partner who meets some psychologist's idea of what you should or shouldn't want from marriage. It's about finding someone else who fits your idea of what a partner should be, and you being what they want. And potential partners not going into a relationship unaware of what they want or of what the other person is or believing they can change their partner.

[liberalhistorian]

89. Psychology Today is good at that

kind of shit, especially where women are concerned. My social science professors had that magazine pegged even thirty years ago, when I was in college. It's always been conservative and reactionary.

[WinkyDink]

14. "the female dream"???!!! I don't need to read the article for more bilgewater.

[seaglass]

18. Truly this article is so much bullshit. Insulting to both men and women. Because my husband is a

good father who enjoys spending time with the family - he is less masculine? WTF.

And this: "The veritable saint with balls is as elusive as ever" is disgusting.

[fishwax]

146. I agree n/t

[d_r]

169. yep

shallow view of people as one dimensional

[Mr Dixon]

19. Yawn

Oh well have at it ladies, life is hard enough without have someone constantly searching for greener pastures….Deuces

[cyberswede]

32. ...or no pastures at all.

Maybe some of these women "abandoning" their great husbands simply don't want to be married any more.

[Mr Dixon]

39. sounds good

Too each his or her own this is not the 60’s people don’t have to marry, however if you do seek marriage then realistic expectations should apply. I Have come across countless women seek the perfect mate when there is no such thing shear Madness IMO.

[cyberswede]

40. There's no such thing for the countless men seeking the perfect mate, either. nt

[Mr Dixon]

42. Really

I thought this was about women ditching men not men ditching women? Did I miss something?

[cyberswede]

43. No. I was merely providing the yin to your yang.

[Mr Dixon]

54. LOL

Thank you

[liberalhistorian]

90. Hate to burst your fairy-tale

sexist bubble, but plenty of men do the same thing, demand perfection in mates, it's not just women. But go ahead and put it all on the woman, you certainly wouldn't be the first around here to do that.

[stevenleser]

21. Had the potential to be an interesting article.

The problem is there are far too many superficial generalizations and to top it off, the author hasn't provided any statistics that suggests that what she describes is really happening in any significant numbers.

So we are left with choosing to agree with her just on her say so or not.

[Tikki]

22. I cringe when I hear a woman say she just wants a man to protect her...

I don't understand how that can be the litmus test for a relationship.

Now, I can understand how a relationship might be smothering to some whether
they are married to a bad boy/girl or a nice guy/good girl.

Some men and women start to wilt under commitment.


Tikki

[Squinch]

25. What a load of nonsense off the top of someone's head. Someone not all that bright.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

29. LOL = Psychology Today has jumped the shark with this. Thanks for the chuckles. n/t

[kcr]

36. I wasn't even surprised to see this garbage from PT

Clickbait nonsense

[Tuesday Afternoon]

50. I haven't looked at PT in years. Looks like I haven't been missing much. Maybe, a laugh or two

here or there.

[liberalhistorian]

92. PT jumped the shark

thirty fucking years ago, frankly. My social science profs warned us about it even then, and it's not gotten any better at all. It's like it's stuck in a perpetual time warp or something.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

162. I haven't seen one in years.

Doesn't look like I've missed much.

[cyberswede]

31. "abandoned"

This article is embarrassing...for the author.

[tridim]

34. Sometimes great people are abondoned because they have no intention of marrying.

Which BTW isn't the same thing as having no intention of commitment.

That's what bugs me. Marriage is a 50-50 gamble, and I don't gamble even if the odds are 99-1.

[haele]

37. Define "Great Husband". Is that what someone else thinks he is?

Look, he's a Great Husband (tm). He loves kids, buys you all sorts of gifts on a whim, has a college degree and a good job. He's active. He's clean, well-groomed, and speaks well. He drinks in moderation, doesn't smoke, and he grills every Saturday so you don't have to cook and goes to church with you on Sunday without complaint. And he just adores you, puts you up on a pedestal...
And all he wants you to do is know the script and play your part in the relationship. After all, he's a great guy - you gotta love him, right?

The image of the Great Husband is just that, an image. Same with the Great Wife. Neither are real people, with their own desires, motivations, beliefs, personal boundaries... And too many young people can't seem to think of their potential partner much past the image they like when they're considering what they want; they think that the personality "quirks" or weaknesses they don't like don't matter much in the beginning - or worse, they think the other person will somehow "change" because that's what they want that person to do to make it a perfect relationship.
Of course, the person imagining that Great Husband or Wive doesn't have to change themselves to make a relationship work...

And certainly, they don't have to listen to the older people who tell them to think about it a bit, or "you know you can't change him/her - you have to hope that the good habits you like in that person is more important to him/her than the bad habits you don't like."


Haele

[alp227]

93. YES! Best post here.

Madison Avenue loves to glamorize this Norman Rockwell ideal of the family, and as a result people expect nothing less and are instantly disappointed when reality contradicts fashion.

[dawg]

38. The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence ...

because it's fertilized with bullshit.

In the past, many married women didn't have the option of leaving their husbands. Whether he was a good man or a jerk, they were economically dependent on him.

Now, with better options, some women are able to get out of bad relationships they would otherwise be stuck in forever. Other women are able to leave good men in search of the elusive "bad boy with a heart of gold". Whether the decision is a good one or a bad one, it is now theirs to make.

Women are not inherently better or less selfish and superficial then men. There are good and bad people of both sexes.

[johnlucas]

84. Exactly. Men have to stop the Damsel fantasies

The whole sugar & spice fallacy.
Women can be just as scummy as men can be.
THAT is equality! Hahahahahahaha!

But many men can't break that mythology & look for relationships with women to complete them, to have someone to worship.
They look at the women they get into relationships with & see their woman as their personal angel that saved them.
But every single one can be a devil in disguise & that man finds it out too late.
Then he becomes broken because he put too much of himself into that woman & goes crazy if she leaves him for whatever reason.
He became too dependent & seemingly can't function without that woman.
That's how you got all these broken men out here who sometimes end up like Bill Dauterive from King of the Hill & others who become homicidal or suicidal.

If a man keeps a strong sense of self, he will understand not to give a woman that much command over his life.
So IF she leaves, he can function without a hitch.
He'll have a Que Sera Sera attitude & get on with his life.

There ain't no damsels out there, guys.
Always make sure to leave room for YOURSELF because YOU are the only one you can ultimately count on.
John Lucas

[cyberswede]

96. What?

"Broken" men are the result of women not living up to some angel fantasy?

Look: women and men are human beings, all of whom can be nice, or nasty, or boring, or kind, or whatever combination of flavors people come in. If one person (man or woman) doesn't live up to their partner's expectations, that doesn't make them a "devil in disguise" - especially if the expectations are unattainable in the first place (the "personal angel" you mention).

[johnlucas]

111. I'm talking about in the context of a relationship, cyberswede

And you didn't disagree with a thing I said.
At the top of my post I said women can be just as scummy as men can be.

There are men out here who worship women, who worship relationships with women, who pin their whole lives & importance on how they please their woman IN that relationship.
They see women as "the fairer sex". They buy into the fairy tale "sugar & spice & everything nice".
You heard of that saying "I will drink her bathwater", right?
Countless love songs for decades out here with men kissing a woman's ass in melody.
They see their girl as their angel, their true blue, their ride or die chick.
They LIVE to fight anyone who disrespected their woman's honor.

Then when reality hits, these guys don't know what the hell to do.
They forget how to function on their own.
Sometimes the effects are mild with a depressed Bill Dauterive type.
Sometimes these guys go psycho with the "If I can't have you, no one will" insanity.

Yes that happens & you know it.

Men have to let go that mythology.
There are differences between men & women, it's true, but at the root women ain't no different than men.
Stop looking for damsels, stop looking for your personal angel, your personal muse.
Women are adults & have all the positives AND negatives that come with that status.

Don't base your life on the outcome of a relationship.
I say this to men AND women. Straight AND Gay.
Don't expect much out of these things & you won't be disappointed.
You'll get better results from a dog than a human being if you're looking for loyalty.
John Lucas

[A-Schwarzenegger]

124. How did you learn all that?!

yipes!?

[johnlucas]

173. My eyes & ears. Observation.

You learn from experiences in your own life & you learn from experiences in other people's lives.
People expect too much out of relationships & put too much of their life's value behind relationships.
They don't leave anything for themselves & when the relationship ends, they become broken people.

Keep expectations low with something as fickle as a "romantic" relationship.
I have no idea how a war-mongering tribe called the Romans got associated with loving relationships.
Romantic? Gladiator love? Centurion love? Caesar love? Ha.

John Lucas

[avaistheone1]

41. Here come of the flames...I liked the article.

I'll give it another read later to see if I missed something.

[cyberswede]

45. If by "flames," you mean critical replies, then they arrived along before your post #41.

[sibelian]

74. They aren't critical of the article, as far as I can see.

They seem to be critical of the headline.

[cyberswede]

78. I see several critical of the article.

Please tell me that this article is a reprint and originally ran in 1958

"they’re dumping men who are faithful, attentive, and respectful"---Who says? Not to mention there

LOL- " donning armor to fight the dangers that threaten his family and place in the world?"

It would actually be a stronger article if it were about people marrying without

Truly this article is so much bullshit. Insulting to both men and women. Because my husband is a

Had the potential to be an interesting article.

What a load of nonsense off the top of someone's head. Someone not all that bright.

LOL = Psychology Today has jumped the shark with this. Thanks for the chuckles. n/t

[La Lioness Priyanka]

44. does she give any empirical evidence to this? or is it a case of truthiness?

[winter is coming]

63. The number of emotionally laden descriptors says "truthiness". n/t

[La Lioness Priyanka]

66. yeah. i had a feeling.

[fishwax]

136. mostly truthiness, with a healthy dose of codswallop

Such as the assumption that taking care of the children for a whole morning or actually cooking a meal saps a man of his masculinity. Who knew!

[redqueen]

46. OMG what utter bullshit!

Then things started to go awry. Perhaps these androgynous couples over-valued adopting the same behaviors in their relationship. Maybe the men got too nice and the women a little too challenging. Oddly, the androgynous men seemed to like their new-found emotional availability, while the women began to feel more unfulfilled. Her “perfect” partner, in the process of reclaiming his full emotional expressiveness, somehow ended up paying an unfair price; he was no longer able to command the hierarchical respect from her that was once his inalienable right.

How can a man be a caretaker and a warrior at the same time? How can he serve his woman’s need for a partner who is vulnerable, open, and intimate, while donning armor to fight the dangers that threaten his family and place in the world? How can he stand up and be a man amongst men, loyal to the hunting band that covers his back, while taking the night feeding, while not appearing less than a man? Did he blend his male energy with his female side, or did he learn to be more like a female at the price of his innate masculinity?

And "holy" crap does she "love" "unnecessary" "quotes"!

[dawg]

57. Just my opinion ...

I don't think this caveman alpha-male shit has anything at all to do with it.

Throughout history, people have cheated-on and abandoned good partners. If women are doing it more often than they did in the past, it's only because they now have sufficient economic freedom to do so.

To be honest, I'm not even sure which kind of guy I am. But I'm definitely not the kind of guy who would want to waste his time with a woman who thought the sight of me taking care of my child's night feeding made me look like something less than a man.

[Warren DeMontague]

134. Paula Cole over there wants to know where all the cowboys have gone.

[Luminous Animal]

137. "Perhaps these androgynous couples..." And perhaps and perhaps... too fucking stupid.

[MineralMan]

55. Why do I suspect a man wrote that?

Not all marriages last. The reasons for that are varied. The second paragraph is whiny, at a minimum.

On edit: I see that my suspicions were incorrect.

[redqueen]

65. No, just an older woman whose views haven't changed much with the times. nt

[MineralMan]

68. So it certainly seems.

The second quoted paragraph really, really looked like a man's point of view to me. I was surprised when I clicked through to the link. I recently wrote the content for a psychologist/psychoanalyst. We spent a couple of hours discussing the page on marriage therapy. Her views certainly didn't match those of that PT author, that's for sure.

[redqueen]

70. Most women are still invested in maintaining the patriarchy.

Its sad that we've made so little progress on this issue. Most people just don't seem to want to deal with it.

[MineralMan]

72. I suppose. Not most of the women I know, but

you could be right. My circle of acquaintances is rather small, really.

[YoungDemCA]

64. I'm curious, OP, as to what your motivations for posting this here are

Do tell.

[mercuryblues]

138. seeing as

he has not made a comment in the op or a reply in the entire thread, I suspect his motivation was to see if he could start a flame war and alert.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

160. He was also the first to Rec his own thread. Mind you, I have been the fifth to Rec on some of my

own threads but, first ... ?

[BainsBane]

67. How does this argument coincide with the grasseater lifestyle?

I'm confused as to why guys who opt to go their own way worry so much about divorce and women? Isn't the advantage of going one's own way not to have to deal with that angst?

[redqueen]

73. Why is it called the "grasseater" lifestyle?

[BainsBane]

81. Wikipedia

This is for the Japanese version. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore_men

The OP has identified himself as a grass eater. He posted a thread on it sometime back, and he explains it there.

My sense, from reading his posts, is that the American version differers. It is a variant of Men Going their Own Way, which relates to that group of men who exist but for some reason take exception to their alleged affiliation being mentioned.

[redqueen]

86. Yeah, it seems ro have different meanings. Seems to me the MGTOW should stick with that term.

Last edited Fri Aug 15, 2014, 05:06 PM - Edit history (1)

Since the original one sounds like a truly nice guy who is interested in romance and relationships

http://www.lifestudies.org/specialreport04.html


The name interests me because I inferred it derived meaning from it's opposite - not just 'carnivore', but predatory men.

[leftstreet]

69. She assumes the 'female dream' is to have a 'great husband'

What a patriarchal pantload of propaganda

[wryter2000]

79. Horsepucky

"I am currently dealing with several of these great husbands."

N = "several"

She has no data. She's talking out of her ass. You can't explain a phenomenon without proving it exists.

[Glassunion]

80. "Female Dream"

Lol...

[johnlucas]

82. And that's why Marriage is Dead. If you want someone to count on, get a dog

Don't make your whole life dependent on one human being.
No matter if you're male or female. Straight or gay.

All relationships are temporary even the lifetime ones.
Everybody eventually dies, right? So there's a time limit there too.

End the fairytales & don't make your life dependent on relationships.
People are fickle & no matter how good you try to be to them, they have no obligation to return the favor.
Just look at relationships as roller coaster rides.
You're on them for a little while, you had fun, & now the ride's over so return to your car.

The only one you can count on the most is YOURSELF (and even THAT person can throw you for a loop sometimes!).
You'll have more success counting on a dog than a human being overall.
That's why I believe marriage should be legally changed to the renewal cycle of every year, every 3 years, every 5 years.
It was ALWAYS illogical with this supposed "Lifetime For Better Or Worse" nonsense.
People change & will often find themselves not on the same page over time so have mutual renewal periods for marriage if you're gonna have marriage.

I have heard the notion that society was built upon the marriage of man & woman.
To that I say "NO WONDER the world's so dysfucntional!"
Building society on such a shaky foundation.

Have fun in a relationship whether marriage or not but don't count on it.
Just look at it as a fun ride & you'll keep things in perspective.
John Lucas

[sendero]

87. I could tell you why...

.... but I don't feel like dealing with the abuse that would ensue.

Every guy has to figure it out for himself.

[liberalhistorian]

94. Yes, because no man has ever left

a "great wife", and certainly not for a younger, prettier model. No sirree, never, ever happened and never will happen.

[Blue_Roses]

120. lol...

[redqueen]

100. lol

[BainsBane]

103. I can't help but notice

How many people interpret disagreement as abuse. Merely asking questions of an OP is described as insulting.
If I took that view, I'd never post an OP.

[redqueen]

110. I've noticed that too.

And same here, I definitely wouldn't have posted that one criticizing porn.

[BainsBane]

97. Marriage has evolved considerably over the centuries

Last edited Fri Aug 15, 2014, 05:29 PM - Edit history (1)

Modern-day expectations of marriage are exceedingly high. People expect to find a soul mate, best friend, life partner, and someone who can share financial burdens with them. Add to that idealized notions of romantic euphoria and intense passion and sexual fulfillment, it's a very high bar to reach and maintain.

Marriage has not simply evolved from the Ozzie and Harriet days that some of the MRA types long for. Rather it has evolved dramatically over centuries. Prior to the 18th-19th century (and of course the time-frame varies from place to place), marriages were practical arrangements. Families arranged marriages based on mutual interest, which varied according to status in society. European and Euro-American families of social standing were expected to pay sizable dowries to the groom's family. Arrangements were expected to advantage both families, wealth for the groom's and social standing and connections for the bride's. Many of our Founding Fathers wealth came from marriages to the daughters of wealthy families, and that was standard for men of the upper-class.


The notion that people married for romantic love, as opposed to alliances between families or economic arrangements, began to arise in the 18th century. Marriage records in Spanish and Portuguese America, for example, show increasing petitions to Crown and Church where supplicants sought to avoid marriages their parents had arranged or parents sought to prevent children from entering matches based on love but harmful to family honor. Over the course of the 18th and into the early to mid-19th century, ideas that love formed the basis for marriage became increasingly common.

We are now in an era where the idea that people marry for anything other than love is seen as unacceptable. Social relations and gender relations evolve and have continued to evolve over the centuries. The mythical ideal that some have of constant, steady gender norms (based largely, it seems, on Hollywood and TV images of the 1950s) is false. Gender norms like all social relations evolve across time. As the economy changes--whether through colonial trade, manufacturing, industrialization, or technological innovation--so do social relations and with them marriage.

Here we are in an era where marriage is no longer exclusively defined as between a man and a woman. Most of us here think that a good thing. Why then should anyone hearken back to a time when that was inconceivable?

[Starry Messenger]

98. Because they rec their own threads.

[redqueen]

99. Ha, that reminds me of the one time I did that...

And was pilloried for it by the men's group regulars. I've noticed how much they don't care when others do it.

Strange, that.

[BainsBane]

101. You aren't suggesting anyone else might be a hypocrite, are you?

I've been told repeatedly that HOF members are the hypocrites for, among other things, not alerting on posts in our own group. Considering the source, the irony is something else.

[redqueen]

105. Heavens, no!

[Starry Messenger]

102. Yeah, quiet in this thread today, isn't it?

Maybe they're all getting the grill ready for tomorrow.

[redqueen]

106. Glad no one was around when I read that...

I usually just giggle, but that had me lol'ing nice and loud

[NYC_SKP]

113. Results of your Jury Service.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
On Fri Aug 15, 2014, 02:36 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Ha, that reminds me of the one time I did that...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5392356

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Calling out a group of DUers, for no other reason than to stir the shit pot.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Aug 15, 2014, 02:45 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Lame alert.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Seriously, FUCK these miserable stalking alerters. Fuck you and fuck the jurors who back up their hatred.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with the alert. This calling out of a group of random DUers is what makes DU suck. It's not right if the HOF is called out, nor is it right when redqueen does it. Vote to hide.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Beyond that, I don't dare say what I feel for fear of having my post alerted and hidden.

[redqueen]

114. Holy shit, juror 4...

[NYC_SKP]

118. ...

[liberalhistorian]

154. Good gravy, someone

actually alerted on that post? WTF for? I love it that the MRA types think they can say anything they want with impunity, but anyone else, especially a woman, who tries to do the same, or who tries to call them out on it, gets alerted.

And I LOVE LOVE LOVE juror #4 and agree completely!

[Warren DeMontague]

104. They're like Detroit!

[MadrasT]

107. "Female dream"

[riqster]

108. Well, I doubt that I am a great husband,

But the women who have left me did so because they grew and changed, and wanted something else.

Sad, but hardly earthshattering news.

[redqueen]

112. I can't help it, I have to laugh some more at this shitfest...

They get it that it’s sexy to help make a meal or take the kids away on a Sunday morning so their wives can sleep in. They are the androgynous guys that their women have asked them to become.

I love how the writer is so stuck in the 50's that not only does she think that minimal effort at domestic duties is something super special and "sexy"... but she's characterizing the men doing them as "androgynous"! Because they occasionally perform domestic duties / parent their own fucking kids!

[seaglass]

131. I am still trying to get past "The veritable saint with balls is as elusive as ever." I need to

tell my husband that I chose him because he's a saint with balls. He will totally love that.

[Warren DeMontague]

133. Saint Balls is my favorite saint.

[d_r]

170. I went to that island

on vacation one year

[bullwinkle428]

151. I am TOTALLY changing my online dating user name to that!

[merrily]

115. From a member of the group that brought you the diagnosis of nymphomania.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

117. People are trading in their cell phones on a monthly basis

Till death do us part? Hardly.

[loyalsister]

119. Serial monogamy

seems to be the common pattern in the US. Until women had greater access to resources, etc. it benefitted men most. In today's world women also have an evolutionary advantage. They can be more selective in mates and ensure that children will have male role models following following death or divorce.

Monogamy is a cultural construct that has been thought to be driven by women. But, there have been cultural changes that have provided women with more options and it is pretty natural that they would take advantage of an opportunity to diversify their offspring.

As for male benefits, it allows men to have more offspring.

In that context "women leaving good men" seems to me to be a pretty natural step in human evolution.

[Blue_Roses]

121. I'm still trying to piece together just exactly

what this author is trying to convey.

My options seem to be:

1) Women "outgrow" their husband when they become sensitive, considerate, and "in-tune" with her.

2) Women want their husbands to be the alpha male or asshole.

3) Husbands become "weak" when they help with the kids and chores.

4) All of the above.

5) None of the above.



What I'm inclined to really believe makes a marriage work is never get lost in your mate's identity or the "image" they seem to want. And of course respect.

[tabasco]

127. Marriage is an outdated, counterproductive institution

and should be eliminated.

[DonCoquixote]

128. Sigh

Like many males, I get frustrated at times figuring women out, but that does not mean I start thinking I am entitled to them. There are many women who give so much to the husband that they get called "ideal wives", and lo and behold, when the men becomes middle aged and "finds himself" they get tossed out, usually for some "soulmate" that just happens to be barely old enough to buy beer. The difference is, women can play that game too, especially since much of what marriage is sold as is not a partnership, but ownership, or to quote Ambrose Bierce, Marriage gets defined as a master, a mistress, and two slaves, total people; TWO.

The sad fact is, it is possible to work in good faith, to make sincere efforts to do the right things, to burn every reserve of mental courage and tolerance you have, and still find that the "partnership" just will not work. No husband or wife should be demonized because they tried to make things work, and just ran into the brick wall of destiny.

And this whole article stinks of a false priviledge that if you do the right things, you will get what you want, including your "ideal wife."

[Skittles]

130. "the female dream"

hoo boy

[seaglass]

132. Is a saint with balls apparently. :-) n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

145. Santo De Juevos

It's like, one of the lesser known of Father Juniper Serra's missions, but by far the most architecturally interesting.

[treestar]

139. That article is just dumb

The writer has no proof there is any such trend.

[stevenleser]

143. Yep, VERY dumb. Surprisingly devoid of anything resembling data. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

144. I only mind when they're left out on the front lawn to rust on cinder blocks.

Fucks up property values, that does.

[LeftyMom]

147. Is there a reason you posted this MRA fapfiction on DU? nt

[Harmony Blue]

153. This is actually originally from the

Huffington post.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/randi-gunther/marriage-advice_b_5666990.html

If you have an issue with the article take it up with Arianna Huffington.

[DonCoquixote]

157. gladly

That woman still has to earn the cred she lost by bering on of the right wings main axe-women, and no, telling Hillary she should go hard right does NOT cut it!

[LeftyMom]

177. So why are you using clickbait from the sideboobpost? You still haven't said.

What's so interesting or valuable about this piece?

[Chimeradog]

149. "ideal marriage"-is subjective

the economy.

My ex lost the house after he lost the job after he was diagnosed with cancer and after the lovely medical system in a red state decided NO one is entitled to help. The man worked 35 years.

Yep, decimation of middle class as per Reagan corp law.

People can only take so much- I worked 70 hrs a week to keep house and kids going.

America is in a bad state

[A-Schwarzenegger]

150. Why Great Thread Is Being Abandoned

by OP?

[abelenkpe]

152. I call BS on this entire article. Nt

[Zorra]

156. Heck I just smacks my wimmen around and rolls 'em over at night, and they don't give me no problums.

[chrisa]

158. This article is basically "nice guy whining" repackaged into a crumby psychology hack-job.

"Nnn! Why does no one respect men who are moody, annoying, and passive? It's so unfair that these *perfect* men are being left for bad-ass 'alpha' jerks! Nnn!"

And, of course, it's all womens' fault. Yep.

[winter is coming]

159. It makes me think this woman is seriously enmeshed with her male patients.

If they exist.

[liberalmuse]

163. I have a few friends married to "good" men...

Their husbands work 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, come home and chill. Sometimes they'll fix things on the weekend or mow the lawn once every few weeks after being nagged to death. The women I know work 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, leave work, go grocery shopping, make dinner (and breakfast), take the kids shopping for clothes and to practice, feed the pets and take them to the vet, do all the housecleaning, pay the bills (two of the hubbies don't like paying bills) and do a myriad other things. I can't imagine why any woman would leave this situation. Every single married woman I've met so far has said at some point they wouldn't do it again. Maybe I'll run across someone who tells me differently one day. I suppose many men leave good women, so seeing the reverse isn't so surprising.

[akbacchus_BC]

164. Why are you asking this? It is so not true!

Are you a victim whose husband walked away?

For the most part, couples try to save their marriages and even seek counseling!

Some marriages just cannot be saved due to a lot of circumstances.

[LloydS of New London]

165. I divorced my first wife. I initiated the proceedings.

She shot me in the chest and neck, and I damn near died. Thus, I felt justified in ending the marriage. You may disagree, but, 22 years later, I still consider my decision to be the right one.

[Separation]

168. It's the "I want it now" generation.

Unless it's an abusive relationship, infidelity, drug use, etc. I think people are just taking the easy way out.

My wife and I have been married for 20 years. Have an amazing daughter who turned 18 yesterday, an autistic son who is 16, a 20 year military career moving the family all over the country, long deployments, hospital stays, etc.

We seperated for 7 months in 2001. Mostly because I was an asshole at the time. I married her when I was just 19 and she was 22. A PFC in the Marine Corps. 2 kids by the time I was 21. I became a total asshole and she left me while I was deployed. I was devastated. We had the 2 kids so we always put the kids first. My wife needed time to decide on whether or not the marriage could be fixed. 9/11 happened and we got back together a week later.

We still have had many ups and waaaay downs. I was severely injured and unable to walk for almost a year. I turned into another asshole because "I was no longer a man." I wasn't able to give out son the proper attention he needed. Being autistic, everyone but me is the enemy. I'm the only person that he has ever connected to. Due to hospital stays, pain, PT, I felt that I was neglecting him as well. I wasn't able to make love to my wife.

Many more ups and downs, but the one constant that my wife and I hold true. Is that I made a promise to my wife and she to I. We loved and still love each other now, and when the going gets tough we try to build on that original love we shared. It's easy to get a divorce.

[Warren DeMontague]

171. Um..... so WHICH generation, precisely, is that?

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303544604576430341393583056

[Separation]

179. Ill be the first to admit when I am wrong.

[Warren DeMontague]

181. Right on.

Personally I watched my parents' generation- I suppose they might be considered the "Mad Men" generation, a bit too old to be hippies or boomers--- en masse they hit the 1970s and probably half if not more of the families divorced. My folks split up on the early end, and when it happened it was still this sort of shocking thing said in hushed tones "divorce"?

5 years later everybody and their bastard brother bob had parents who had split up.

I don't say this as, woe is me or even to criticize-- I suspect what happened was a lot of people who got married too early or for spurious reasons in a sort of lingering 1950s cultural atmosphere, and then by the 70s the whole world had changed-- and there was a ton of re-evaluation.

One thing I think has happened; or I hope- is that at since then more people wait to get married (needless to say, I think 'abstinence only' sorts of approaches that tell people they need to marry the first person they have sex with, are inane) and take the decision seriously, and do it for the right reasons. Not everyone should be married, nor do they need to be.

[clyrc]

174. My "great husband" divorced me

It was for the best. We grew away from the people we were when we married in our twenties. I've made peace with the fact that it's one of those things that happen.

[Laelth]

175. This is interesting and important. k&r for exposure.

I am quite dissatisfied with the author's alleged "explanation" for the phenomenon she describes, but I welcome further conversation on this issue.

-Laelth

[Lydia Leftcoast]

180. Who are all these women who are dumping great husbands, and why am I not

finding their rejects among the singles?

What I've found is that quite often the faithful, attentive, respectful ex-husbands are boring. And by "boring" I don't mean non-abusive. I mean that they have no interests but work and sports and are disinclined to explore anything outside their familiar rut. I've dated a couple of them. They want me to go to their activities (golf, target shooting, football games), but they absolutely reject going to my activities (concerts, theater, ethnic restaurants).

[mnhtnbb]

182. I not only dumped the first husband (after 7 years of marriage)

but his second wife--and mother of his two children--also dumped him.

I left him because he was a greedy, not sharing, kind of guy. Financially. Emotionally.


And, interestingly enough I learned (because of the second wife being friends with
friends of mine) the 2nd wife also dumped him because he was not willing
to share financially.

[nilesobek]

183. I'm not sure I'm a "great," husband,

but I haven't been abandoned yet. Ironically, my wife and I were just living together for 7 years with 4 children together when we suddenly decided to get married out of fear of our landlord who was going to evict us for "living in sin." Fast forward 29 years and I realize we never needed that marriage document. Its just a document. It has its uses and legal protections but it wasn't necessary for a commitment from either of us.