I was in no way implying that ALL wives divorcing their husbands were gold-diggers...

And I am certainly already well aware that there are husbands who dump wives in a most cruel way.

But the article we were discussing is specifically about women who dump husbands, without giving any previous indication that there was anything wrong, and then extorting huge support sums. This is a growing trend that deserves attention.

The article wasn't exactly about women who dump husbands without giving any previous indication there was anything wrong.

It was about women who dump husbands without the husbands being aware of any indication there was anything wrong.

That's a not-so-subtle difference.

I saw no prior indication my wife wanted to divorce me. I thought things were getting better. But, once I became aware of her feelings, and of marriage dynamics in general, I was able to look back and see all the signs were there in plain sight... if I'd had eyes to see.

Same thing with these men in the article. The first guy might have caught on to his wife's withdrawal, if he'd known what to look for. He might have caught on before her attitude hardened and crystallized into the contempt she eventually showed him during their divorce.

If he'd known what the warning signs were.

I don't think that gender has anything to do with it. Like many of the laws in this country, divorce laws encourage....the lawyers.


Very well said by star*fish.

The article referenced is by no means *the* definitive article on divorce; it doesn't even attempt a balanced reporting job, preferring to dwell on the lurid and the sensational.

For every man destroyed mentally, emotionally and financially in a divorce, there is a woman equally destroyed, and probably 2.5 children as well. I'm simply not going to accept the premise that one sex gets shafted in divorce while the other skates and the law promotes this. I've seen both situations.

As a child I lived it and found out that the repercussions last a lifetime.

PK

This article really reminds of another article.

This one is entitled: "Sudden Divorce Syndrome" and it's about how men can avoid being blindsided by divorce....because if they don't...there can be horrible consequences financially, socially and emotionally. I have no doubt that's very true.

But when you strip away all the sensational stories....the purpose of the article is to encourage men to be more aware and intervene before it's too late. The meat of the article is right here:


Statistically....women have always filed for divorce more often than men....so that isn't a new trend. It's not new that men don't see it coming either. Dr. Harley has an article that says almost the same thing as this one. It's called: Why Women Leave Men.

Fine. The MB principles do, in general, fit "all" successful marriages---although the mindless application and ala carte methodology of applying them that I sometimes see here can do much more harm than good. That's why I'm back.

If you're not interested in MB methodologies, why are you here? I assume that you're not a 'troll' (you're not eating billy-goats, are you?).


Again, why are you here? Actually, the MB principles (the ones related to Care, Protection, Honesty, Time, POJA)---are way more valuable to newlyweds. It's a operators manual for a successful marriage. Unfortunately, few find this site that way---they find it by googling 'affair'. I also find it interesting that you seem to feel you have much more experience here---we're the same age, and the only difference that I see is I've successfully made it through a marriage recovery, and you're still in that very painful process.


That seems to be an interesting cheap shot, pal. I'm a world-recognized expert in my field. Well-respected in the community. I have three beautiful children around me who haven't been touched by this ugliness. I love God, and do this work here in His service. But---I will settle for less. I saw a nice bumpersticker the other day. Don't pray for God to lighten your load---pray for a strong back.


I believe you were the one who brought up my being naivety, having not seen that many of these situations. I daresay I've probably helped recover more of these situations that you've seen in your time here. And what's really important about that---and why I'm even bothering to refute you---is that many people are helped here who NEVER post. So when you post here, you ought to think about the hundreds of people you're going to touch. Are you going to help them? Or discourage them? With regard to flexibility---I might agree with you. The MB principles ALWAYS hold, but the application is situation-specific. If you're not counseling with Steve Harley (or Jenn), try it. You'll figure that out quickly enough. Actually, the worse posting I tend to see on these boards is by those who don't understand the material very well, or those who misunderstand the material and slap a "MB-approved" tone on it.



I'm not sure what your definition of marital success is, so I can't say. My marriage is certainly more successful than not. It's also nowhere near perfect. But I also believe in a marriage for life (religious and deep personal conviction---I think it's called integrity). I can't speak for you, but to assume that I have a lower criteria for marriage, or would accept less---it might speak to some issues you bring to your marriage (disrespectful judgements?)

K,

Its obvious that we are two very different personality types, and as such, it will be difficult for us to debate issues in a non-personal atmosphere such as an internet message board. You make points assuming positions that I've never taken, and my guess is you probably feel the same about my posts to you.

However, to illustrate a real difference of opinion, I've saved the above quote. From a base line perspective, we are at polar opposite ends of the marriage for life spectrum. I'm a firm believer that not all marriages should be saved at all costs, and your statement has very little to do with "integrity". A BH can have just as much if not more intergrity by kicking a WW to the curb that has disrespected and humiliated him beyond his tolerance level. He can have just as firm of a commitment to his core values of self-respect and honesty as you have for the sanctity of marriage at all costs.

Also, and this is not meant to inflame but to illustrate further differences, but you bring a strong religious belief system into your advice, while I will readily admit to being a non-believer, which undoubtedly gives me a much different perspective on these infidelity issues.

Therefore, I think its best to give multiple perspectives to those seeking guideance, because you never know initially just where that person is coming from and what beliefs and values they bring into the marriage.

Its really about accepting the differnces in individuals and their differing tolerance levels for betrayal, humiliation and recovery.

Agreed. We have a much different viewpoint. But then, I'd respectfully suggest that you not post at MarriageBuilders---because you're a 'troll'. The advice I'm seeing out of you is antithetical with the Harley's work, at least with dealing with affairs, and you're not doing newcomers any good with the stuff you're spouting. You'd be much happier on a men's support board or a divorce board.

Wow, now I'm a troll. Y'know, some people you just can't be nice to and open up to them without them getting judgmental. So anyone that you don't agree with is a "troll" in MB land???

However, more than likely you will get your wish, because other than a few BH threads that I'm keeping up with, this board is providing less and less every day, and I think I am looking forward to the day where this whole A thing is not on my mind as much and I can leave this place in the rearview mirror.

IMHO, there is something sorely missing in the lives of the long term posters who stay in such a depressing environment. When you look into many of their own stories, you see disfunction and denial at a level much worse than many they are advising.

You judge and look down your nose at me, probably because I admit to being a non-believer, while you have settled for a situation that I can't begin to understand to accept for the rest of my life, much less attempt to justify ... so see, you can be judged harshly, and maybe unfairly, also.

So, I'll disregard your advice of where I should spend my time, and will stay here as long as I still get some benefit or understanding of my situation from my interaction with others. I'm a firm believer in the use of the "ignore" feature of this board for those that I simply choose NOT to interact with.

Hi MyR:

I see what you both are trying 2 say here. And I do agree that what K did was express his highest sense of integrity by choosing 2 do recovery the way he did. But I disagree with your example about kicking a WW 2 the curb as being an expression of integrity. The specific example you give is one of an ego protecting itself by trying 2 inflict "similar" harm.

If a BH were 2 exercise real integrity in a si2ation like that, the metaphor would likely be more like escorting the WW 2 the sidewalk and holding the door 2 the taxi for her, then wishing her a happy fu2re in the life she's chosen.




I'm not religious, and so I can see how other non-religious people might take issue at first with statements made by religious people that seem 2 suggest that concepts like integrity and morality are only associated with believers. I don't think even most religious people believe that's the case.

-ol' 2long

you couldn't be more wrong.

since men are usually the ones facing the very unfair uphill battle for custody, it is NOT an equal opportunity destroyer. Not even close. Children always suffer in a divorce...but when it comes down to husbands/father's and wives/moms...men are given the short end of the stick, financially and with the MOST IMPORTANT issue, their children.

To suggest otherwise is just naive.

medc,

I really understand your point.....about the custody issues. You're absolutely right about the fact that men have a disadvantage there....although there is a growing trend that is more favorable for fathers....there is still a long way to go. However, there's alot of studies that don't support the idea that men suffer more financially than women. It just depends on the study. I know men who have been taken to the cleaners. And I know women who have been left impoverished. It's hard to know which studies are the most accurate....but I think that in general divorce is a financial disaster and harms alot of both husbands and wives. In terms of health....the research I've seen shows alot of immediate problems for men....but also long term health problems for women. Apparently divorce is unhealthy for everybody.

So yeah....I hear you about the custody issues, and I hope that the newer legislation being supported by fathers can help create more equitable treatment for both parents.

Wow, now I'm a troll. Y'know, some people you just can't be nice to and open up to them without them getting judgmental. So anyone that you don't agree with is a "troll" in MB land???

*********************************

i think you are totally missing the point.
K is not being judgmental OR saying that anyone who disagrees w/ him is a troll......he is simply saying that you (and quite a few others on this forum) do NOT follow the MB program and therefore your advice is not helpful to those who truly WANT to save their marriage....which is really who this forum is for....people who WANT to save their marriage.

Here is another point to consider. What are the total costs in our economy that are incurred due to divorce and/or infidelity. I wager that the price tag is enourmous and without any productive end. Billions of dollars washing through the economic system that are literally burned; except the attys fees.

The sad thing of course, is the reduction of individual family unit wealth when it has to be liqudated and divided up. The children of the marriage pay this cost as their own stake in the family wealth is dissapated. They didn't get to vote and sure didn't asked to be born. What a shame.

So tougher or more targeted divorce laws would benefit society as a whole, the nation's economy and family wealth - not sure why a politician wouldn't jump on it. I forgot - the family lawyers would not benefit. This is not to blame lawyers - afterall they are providing a service that people are asking for.

SF, thanks for your reply...Men pay 11.2 BILLION of child support each year. Women pay 0.7 billion. Men on average pay twice as much in support per child than a woman....women are less likely to be ordered to pay when they are non custodial...women are less likely to meet their obligations when they are ordered to pay.

add it all up and it spells men being taken advantage of financially.

And many, many, many woman sit on their rumps after divorce collecting child support and other financial "benefits" rather than going out and improving their position in the work force. All of them...NO...but a heck of a lot do.

Take a look at a site like match.com..... look at the % of women on there that only are interested in men that make x amount of money. Then look at men's profiles...I would bet that less than 5% of men put a minimum salary for their match while in excess of 50% of women do.

great point rwinger.

Nia wrote:


Quoted Nia just in case MyRevelation missed it.

Thank you Nia.

Jo

I was thinking of bringing this up in it's own thread, but this seems to be a valid place. Is it just me or does it seem that that there are many more men on this forum looking for advice than women?

Admittedly, we all love our DW's very much or we wouldn't be here. At least some of our desicion to fight for our marriage was based on the uphill battle we would have faced had we choose not to though. For me, I have been a SAHD for 2 1/2 years, and the thought of not seeing my 2 boys everyday seemed to be a fate worse than death. There is a definate inequality where the court is concerned when it comes to issues of custody. The mother is given custody unless she can be proven to be unfit. This causes a whole new set of problems for men because it forces them into a bitter custody dispute trying to gain custody and the only real losers are the children both parents are supposed to be protecting. The laws need to be changed it's as simple as that. In any case, where abuse can be proven, all bets should be off. It shouldn't matter whether the abuse was mental, physical or in our cases infidelity. Especially if infidelity can be proven. The WS should lose all claim to anything they think they are supposedly owed and each party should be seen as equal if not a little in the BS's favor. That's not to say however, that if the WS can prove there was reason for the infidelity things shouldn't shift back to their favor.

p.s.Sorry ladies. I mean no disrepect in what I have posted.

Any thoughts?

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's not to say however, that if the WS can prove there was reason for the infidelity things shouldn't shift back to their favor.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I was kind of with you until this part of your post. There is always a reason for infidelity and I mean always.

A woman may lose her sex drive and gain weight. She always has headaches. Her husband then gets frustrated and well horny. He then sees someone at work and she gives him the OK and boom the affair is on. Now he could have talked to his wife and said look you could lose me if things don't change and then if they don't change he could divorce her.

Now like in my case I was doing some traveling for a job. I lost my job but I did get a severance package where I was earning 8 months of salary. I got an offer to work on the east coast and fly back home and my wife wanted me to take it so I did. She started her affair before this and she did not work since she talked me into quitting her job and I agreed so she could be with the kids.

So I was being paid for 2 jobs and making good money. After a month of all the travel I told her I was going to quit since I was still being paid for my other job and she freaked out. Right then and there I assumed she was having an affair since she did not want me around the house. I was so stunned by our conversation I asked her if she was sleeping with someone? She freaked and said no and I told her it seemed like she did not want me around anymore. She again said she was just worried for our family. I told her then that if she is screwing another guy she better enjoy it because our marriage would end and I would cut back n what I do. She assured me nothing was going on.

When I busted her affair she had plenty of good reasons.
1. I was gone all of the time traveling for my job.
2. I didn't give her enough attention.

Both of these were true I guess. But she started cheating before I started traveling and she withheld sex all the time to punish me. The kicker was her friend had slept with the OM first and told her of the great sex with him. He was very well endowed so she raved about how great it was and my wife I guess realized she was missing out and so when she had the opportunity she took it.

My point in this whole thread is when a man cheats I don't think he thinks that if he dumps his wife he will get the house and kids and child support and alimony. Women believe this and unless the man is vigorous in his defense gets screwed.

My wife had it in her head she would get the kids, house and alimony and her stud muffin. Now I cannot fathom in my wildest dreams as a man where I could play out my fantasy life as follows.

I get a busty beautiful nympho that only loves me (remember it is my fantasy) <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I get my kids and house and my wife pays me to be with my new busty nympho? Where do I sign up??

My point is that when I hear women talk they all seem to think that they can get there fantasy. Their friends are telling them they can and worst of all many do believe it. My wife was I am sure talking to him like I would be replaced and he could be the dad and I would pay for everything even after the divorce.

Now I had nothing as a kid. Every penny I earned and accumulated was from my hard work. Due to the divorce laws and what her friends were telling her she thought it could happen. She could take from me everything I had worked for and in her head she thought that was fair.

Now would she have had an affair if she knew what ultimately happened I don't know? But I do know that her perception of what she could get did contribute to her decision.

I think women would think twice about divorce since they file far more than men if they stood only a 50/50 chance of getting the kids.

I have no doubt that if men were sent the message that they could get the kids the house and there ex-wife would have to pay for this then they would sigh up for more divorces. I don't want that to happen but I would like a more fair way where women didn't feel so confident that they could screw over their husband with impunity.

I had to endure so many years of divorce threats from my ex-wife. She said I will get the kids and the house and I will take everything from you. I had to endure that for almost 20 years because I knew there was a chance she might be right. I know that if the laws were fairer she would have never threatened me like she did. I did file on her because after all I have went through in my life to succeed she took away my dignity.

I filed on her though because I decided I would not take it anymore. I am sure that we would have had a better marriage if she had contemplated that she could lose everything that she held dear to her especially her dignity. But I don’t think that ever crossed her mind and for that I do feel sadness.

medc,

I thought the article you posted was interesting, but it wasn't a "woman-bashing " article....which is kinda where the discussion went after that. It really does remind me of the article by Dr. Harley that talks about the same phenomenon....how men often get caught unaware by divorce because they don't intervene early enough....with tragic consequences.

The statistic you quoted about child support is just one of many many statistics about the financial effects of divorce. It's a very strong statistic, but without putting it in context with all the rest of the statistics....I don't know if it really tells the whole story about the financial effects of divorce.

Here is a really well balanced article on long term research at Ohio State on the financial effects of divorce. It paints a distinctly different picture than statistics that are weighted in the favor of either sex. Don't you think that sites supporting either mothers or fathers have a tendency to site statisitics that lean one way or another? And news articles are often sensational. I don't know.....I see alot of financial disaster on both sides. Anyway....this is scholarly article, instead of a news article.....and I think it's really fair and based on long term research. Let me know what you think.

****************************

http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/divwlth.htm

[color:"blue"]DIVORCE DROPS A PERSON'S WEALTH BY 77 PERCENT, STUDY FINDS

COLUMBUS , Ohio – A new nationwide study provides some of the best evidence to date of the devastating financial toll divorce can wreak on a person's wealth.

The study of about 9,000 people found that divorce reduces a person's wealth by about three-quarters (77 percent) compared to that of a single person, while being married almost doubles comparative wealth (93 percent). And people who get divorced see their wealth begin to drop long before the decree becomes final.

“Divorce causes a decrease in wealth that is larger than just splitting a couple's assets in half,” said Jay Zagorsky, author of the study and a research scientist at Ohio State University 's Center for Human Resource Research.

By the same token, married people see an increase in wealth that is more than just adding the assets of two single people.
People who remained single had a steady, but slow growth in wealth – from less than $2,000 at the start of the surveys up to an average of about $11,000 after 15 years, according to the study. People who got married and stayed married showed a sharp increase in wealth accumulation after marriage, growing to an average of about $43,000 by the 10th year of marriage.

“If you really want to increase your wealth, get married and stay married. On the other hand, divorce can devastate your wealth,” Zagorsky said.

Contrary to popular belief, the results showed that the wealth status of divorced women wasn't significantly worse than that of divorced men, in terms of real money.

The findings appear in the current issue of the Journal of Sociology.

The study used data involving 9,055 people who participated in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, which is funded primarily by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The NLSY is a nationally representative survey of people nationwide conducted by Ohio State 's Center for Human Resource Research.

The same people are interviewed repeatedly over time, giving Zagorsky the opportunity to see how wealth changes as a result of marriage and divorce. Zagorsky used data from 13 NLSY surveys conducted between 1985 and 2000. All the respondents were between 21 and 28 years old in 1985.

People who remained single had a steady, but slow growth in wealth – from less than $2,000 at the start of the surveys up to an average of about $11,000 after 15 years, according to the study.

People who got married and stayed married showed a sharp increase in wealth accumulation after marriage, growing to an average of about $43,000 by the 10th year of marriage.

In fact, married people increased their wealth about 4 percent each year just as a result of being married, with all other factors held constant, Zagorsky said.

For people who married and then divorced, there was a slow build-up of wealth during the early years of marriage and then a steady decline beginning about four years before divorce. Total wealth bottomed out the year prior to divorce, to an average of about $3,500.

“Many of these people may have separated before the divorce became official, which would help explain why wealth starts falling so early,” Zagorsky said. “Some people may also be working less and not trying as hard to build wealth as they have marriage troubles. Divorce is often a long and messy process, and you can see this in the four-year decline in wealth.”

Wealth begins climbing again in the year of the divorce, but not by much. “Even a decade after divorce, the median wealth stays below $10,000,” he said.

The results also cast doubt on the common assumption that divorce is significantly harder financially on women than on men.

After divorce, the typical man held 2.5 times the amount of wealth held by the typical woman. While this seems large in percentage terms, the difference in absolute dollars is relatively small – about $5,100.

The data in this study can't say why marriage is so helpful in building wealth, and why divorce so devastating, Zagorsky said. But sociological research offers some potential clues: Married people can benefit because two people can live more cheaply than they could separately. In addition, because two spouses can share household responsibilities, they can each produce more than if they were single.

Divorced people have a variety of costs associated with the divorce, which increases how much they spend and decreases how much they can save, he said.

“We can't tell from these data the reasons why divorced people have so much less wealth than those who are married, but the results are clear, Zagorsky said.[/color]

************************

I can't remember, but do you have custody of your son? Do you have to pay child support to your exgf?

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />
it NEVER went to woman bashing...it went to facts SF. And of note..the strongest comments here were made by women.