Marital toxicity


——————————————————-

16 January 2007

From trophy wife to toxic wife

An article from the Daily Telegraph that deserves to be quoted in full. I dare any feminist to read through it and still insist marriage is “slavery” for women.

Decadent stay-at-home wives who take their rich husbands for a ride have finally been rumbled, says Tara Winter Wilson

Once upon a time, there was a truth, universally acknowledged, that a man with a powerful job and a beautiful house must be in want of a wife – preferably of the trophy variety. Domesticated, docile yet dazzling, she was the perfect finishing touch.

Not any more. According to research to be published in the journal Labour Economics, the earnings gap between married couples is narrowing. While in the 1980s it was the case that the higher a professional man’s salary the fewer paid hours his wife would put in, men today are more likely to want a dynamic high-flier, an equal who wows him as much in the boardroom as in the bedroom.

‘It is like a perversion of the evolution theory: they have evolved into creatures whose function is simply to get the most for doing the least,’ says one husband.

A victory for feminism? Sadly not. The reason for this change, sisters, is nothing to be proud of.

Rich men, I believe, have finally cottoned on to the sinister side of the stay-at-home wife: unless you marry an equal who’s going to pay her own way, you will end up with a lazy, indulgent, over-pampered slug. For the transition from trophy wife to toxic wife is as fast as the end result is furious.

I should know: many men of my age and acquaintance have become deeply bitter and disappointed about how their wives have changed since they hung up their working wardrobes. I am talking about university-educated women (often Oxbridge graduates) who do a couple of years work in the City before harnessing themselves to a milch cow and “having it all”.

Apparently there’s a new take on “having it all” – and it’s not what the majority of us understood it to mean. Back in the 1970s, it meant effortlessly maintaining a beautiful home, entertaining in grand style, raising perfect children, keeping the husband sweet and having some sort of career in order to create financial independence.

“Superwoman” was the phrase coined for these energetic pioneers; “trophy wives” for the less energetic ones. Today it’s a whole new ball game.

“It is like a perversion of the evolution theory: they have evolved into creatures whose function is simply to get the most for doing the least,” whispered an exhausted husband to me recently. “I wouldn’t mind providing her with so much if she just did something for me occasionally. She’s never even once cooked me a meal.”

“She doesn’t know the definition of sacrifice,” said another angry husband. “Relationships are meant to be about compromise, but she is more about selfishness. I bend and adapt to her needs, yet all she gives me are ultimatums.”

“Can’t you just divorce?” I asked.

“Are you kidding?” he replied. “I’d lose everything I’ve worked for, including my children, and I’d be paying her an indecent amount of money for life.”

“There’s another reason these husbands don’t divorce,” added a sympathetic onlooker. “They don’t want to admit to failure – they don’t want to be ungallant. There’s an unspoken nobility or gentlemanly understanding that divorce is something they don’t do.”

Indeed, “something they don’t do” is a mantra that extends to practically every area of toxic wifedom. Once an intelligent, educated woman who could hold her own in any dinner-party conversation, the toxic wife will do nothing of the sort.

“They not only become utterly vacant, they never throw dinner parties or entertain anyone outside of their small, closeted circle of other vacant wives,” said irate husband number one.

“None of us can understand this: they become obsessed with perfection, grooming, with all aspects of their personal appearance… in a word, they become boring.”

“Vain, boring, indulgent and lazy,” adds yet another voice to the growing army of fed-up husbands. “I have to take the children out of the house every Sunday morning and wander around with them trying to find things to do because my wife must have a lie-in. I’m only allowed back in the house after 11am. Sunday is the nanny’s day off, you see.”

“My wife,” chipped in husband number two, “gives over the whole of the weekend to pursuing what she calls ‘me time’. She goes to retreats, yoga mini-breaks, a spa, a health farm, even art classes… all of which I pay for, of course. What do I get back in return? Nothing.”

So today’s concept of a wife “having it all”, simply put, means never doing anything personally if she can pay someone else to do it for her. And if she can’t find someone else, her husband must do it.

“To be frank,” said another unfortunate husband, “I was conned. And I’m by no means the only one. There’s a pattern of behaviour that these wives all adopt.”

There are five tell-tale signs, apparently. First, she gives up work, ostensibly to care for the brood, only to have the children packed off to either boarding school or intensive (ie, lots of extra-curricular activities) private day schools.

Secondly, she suddenly wants to move somewhere more rural/suburban that suits her idea of family life, yet location-wise is horrendous for her exhausted, ever-commuting husband.

Thirdly, she demands wall-to-wall help, which nearly always includes an abused Filipina who works 12-14 hours a day, six days a week.

Fourthly, she refuses to fulfil in any way the traditional contract of the non-working spouse in terms of doing anything for her husband (such as cooking), while, fifthly, she expects her husband to fulfil the traditional but anachronistic male role in the household (such as paying all the bills).

Here is a typical day outlined by one husband of a toxic wife.

5.30am: Husband leaves for London.
7.45am: Filipina brings wife tea in bed.
8am: Nanny takes children to school.
8.30am: Breakfast, suduko and the papers.
9.30am-4pm: God knows; possibly gym, spa, shopping, boozy lunch with friends, nap or massage.
4pm: Nanny collects children from school.
5.30pm: Nanny gives children tea and goes home.
7pm: Filipina gives children bath.
7.30pm: Wife disappears off to book group.
9pm: Husband returns and roots around for an M&S ready-meal.
10.30pm: Wife returns. Bed.
10.35pm: Sex? In your dreams.

If the above timetable seems hideously parasitic, it is, and so is the woman behind it. The other day I nervously accepted an invitation for lunch with an old school friend. I felt daunted because, several years ago, she married a rich banker and I’d been dumped from her circle.

“Sorry I’m late,” I said on arriving at her mansion. “Got stuck in traffic so bad it gave me road rage.”

“Road rage?” replied Olivia, her eyes swivelling down to my shoes and up to my hair in a split, judgmental second. “Well, I’m suffering from maid rage. I mean, come and look…”

She led me into her kitchen, three times the size of my flat, and slid open a drawer. “How shoddy is that?” She was holding up a fork.

“What’s wrong with it?” I asked, peering at it politely.

“Just look! It has a disgusting piece of encrusted mashed potato on it. I mean, it’s so shoddy! She can’t even unload a dishwasher. I’m really going to have to sack her. And guess what else I discovered this morning? When I opened the towel cupboard after my bath, I noticed that she’d stacked the pink towels amongst the white ones. Can you believe it?”

What made this conversation so scary was the fact that the terrified Filipina was in the room with us, hunched over a table slicing up bits of duck and foie gras for our lunch. “Juanita!” snapped Olivia. “This is your last chance. Do you understand me? You’ll be back in Manila within the week… I couldn’t possibly recommend you to anyone. Understand?”

“Yes Madam,” she sniffed with a tremulous sob.

“And stop dripping your revolting bodily fluids over our lunch. Throw that away and start again. ”

Horrified by her manner and the distressing scene, I asked her for a tour of her home. She had just moved into one of those massive houses in Chelsea Square. Rich folk tolerate people like me (ie, broke ones) only because we make them feel better about themselves.

“Would love to, darling,” she drawled, “but first how about a drinkie-poo? Juanita! Open the champagne chilling in the wine fridge and bring it upstairs to the south drawing-room.”

“Yes Madam,” replied the poor slave.

“I won’t have any, thanks,” I said. “I’m driving and have to pick my children up from school.”

“You mean you don’t have a nanny to do it?” Olivia’s eyes glared with horror. “I have the most delightful Norland one. Although the uniform is brown and ghastly, they are so well trained. She’s downstairs in the basement doing my ironing at the moment…”

This was now utterly surreal. I had no idea that real people lived like this. Yet, minute by agonising minute, it got worse. I tried a bit of light humour.

“Well, let’s hope she’s not weeping tears on to your party dresses, eh?”

“What?” snapped Olivia.

“Well, then you’d ask her to redo the whole lot again, wouldn’t you?”

“Possibly,” she replied. “But a little moisture is no bad thing when ironing out the creases…”

Was she exhibiting a dry wit? I didn’t know. In her pre-toxic wife days, she was amusing and droll. Now we were different beings living in parallel universes. She showed me lavish room after lavish room, and at one point I heard some strange shuffling coming from one of her closets. Maybe her life is not so perfect after all, I thought; maybe she has rats.

As we sat down to lunch in the “informal” dining-room adjacent to the kitchen in an open-plan L-shape, I noticed that Juanita was eating a rather more humble repast slightly around the corner; although I couldn’t see all of her, I could detect an elbow jutting out from time to time.

“She won’t be joining us then?”

“Are you mad?” cried Olivia. “Why would I want to even see my servants?”

As if on cue, a wizened little Filipino man appeared, bowing and scraping. “Madam, I have finished all the shoes. I will go now, thank you madam.” He hurried out.

“See you on Thursday as normal, Pedro,” she replied, barely glancing at him.

“Where did he spring from?” I asked. After all, I’d just endured an exhaustive survey of her house, and there had been no sign of Pedro.

“Oh, he’s our shoe polisher. He comes twice a week. He works in a cupboard – probably why you didn’t notice him.” No rats after all.

Here was an educated woman who spent her days rotting her brain with alcohol, and bossing an army of staff.

“Olivia,” I said, “don’t you miss your old job, your financial independence? Isn’t all this a bit decadent?”

“Forget the work ethic,” she laughed. “Why on earth would I want to struggle, feel tired and look old before my time?”

I left, more agitated than when I arrived. Forget road rage; I was suffering from toxic-wife rage. Driving to collect my children, the outside world felt like a haven of normality and peace. How I pitied these rich and successful men who had naively hoped for a domestic goddess, only to end up with a diva.

Wake up, toxic wives, the game is over. Your milch cows have seen the light of day. You are toxic, you are trouble and you are about to become extinct.


I disagree with the point about us men supposedly wanting high-flying wives with careers. That may be a practicality these days, as a single income cannot really support a family these days, but really, like a lot of men, I’d prefer a woman who works hard, but in the home, something many wives don’t do. This seems to be the attitude of some of the men quoted above, who apparently would like their wives to look after children, clean up, cook meals and whatnot, but these women don’t do that. They don’t have jobs, they don’t do housework, they don’t do shit.

Plus it’s not really a representative view; a fraction of 1% of men in Britain can afford to support a wife, kids, mansion and maids and servants. Still, a lot of women do, nonetheless, seem to think they can quit work or at least cut down on it when they’re married, even though the number of men who can afford to support a wife and kids – even without the mansion and servants – are still in the minority. Then again, these women don’t care; being legally obliged to support his wife regardless of her conduct, it’s apparently the man’s problem to figure out how to do so. I know plenty of women who live with boyfriends and whereby it clearly takes both to make the mortgage payments and bills, but these women casually declare they’d like to quit work or at least take a long break once they’re married. Never mind that the guy (assuming he is dumb enough to ever marry her) will then be saddled with covering two salaries on his own. Once again, these women figure that that’s his problem, and he should somehow be grateful to support her as well!

Also, the author does conclude that the “toxic wives” are about to be extinct, but without really citing anything. After all, these married men are sick of it but as they themselves know, there’s nothing they can do about it. They’re trapped. Of course, we do know that the chances of currently single women getting to become “ladies of leisure” like those in this article are dropping; the marriage strike is taking care of this, especially as more wealthy men see articles like this and tales of Ray Parlour, Paul McCartney and Michael Jordan getting put through the wringer in the divorce courts. Still, the writer could have referenced the plummeting marriage rates, just to back her conclusion up.

(It’s probably worth noting in passing that although I only have an average salary and the men mentioned in this article are millionaires, not only do I have far more free time than they do I no doubt have a much happier and relaxing life.)

Overall, a worthy article. Depressing, admittedly, with regards to the predicament these guys are in, but good in that it’ll surely only increase the ranks of marriage strikers, particularly amongst wealthy men.

It’s also worth noting that this in a mainstream national newspaper. Just the other day The Times had an article by some whining slut complaining that the sexual revolution was a con and it (literally) fucked women over and left many miserable. Now we have this, a woman seemingly sympathetic to men admitting many stay-at-home wives these days are not selfless ladies sacrificing their careers but are utter parasites.

I don’t recall seeing this much criticism of females in major newspapers just a few years ago.

The main thing this article shows is that men are trapped by marriage. These guys, in theory, could do without their wives. They could still afford the big house, the holidays and the maid and nannies, but not having a wife spending like crazy they would still be able to cut down their hours and spend more time with their kids. But if they ditched their wives they’d lose pretty much everything, including, thanks to recent rulings, a lot of their future salary. Feminists complain that actually giving fathers rights, such as joint custody, will mean some poor wikkle women will be stuck in marriages they are fed up with. Yet this is the position of numberless men in the West, stuck in shitty marriages to repulsive harpies but unable to escape without losing nearly everything.

In short, when a man says “I do” in a marriage ceremony, he is trapped, and in as much of a dilemma as a man who has just woken up in an abandoned bathroom with his ankle chained to a pipe, and with nothing to help him escape except a hacksaw only just strong enough to cut through flesh and bone.

Don’t marry, don’t co-habit, stay single.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:23 PM
——————————————————-

At 6:50 PM, bob said…

i say cut out the middlewoman, hire the filipina and she’ll probably be so glad she doesn’t have some bitch bossing her around she’ll gladly take care of all your “wifely” needs.

——————————————————-

At 6:51 PM, Peregrine John said…

The only thing that really bugs me about this article is that it’s so over the top and so focussed on the very wealthy that it’s almost impossible to show it to any of the less wealthy toxic wives and have them make the connection to their near-identical habits.

——————————————————-

At 7:13 PM, Lisa said…

There is a television show in the States called “The Real Housewives of Orange County” (or something like that). It shows women behaving the same way this article describes. It’s a play off of another show “Desperate Housewives”. Both are stupid and disgusting. I really can’t imagine any feminist being able to support the behavior and saying it is progress for women with a straight face.

I won’t have another person raising my child and I won’t have another person cleaning my home. Not only are these things I like to do for me and for my family, the thought of another person inserting himself/herself into such personal aspects of my family makes me uncomfortable. If another woman is taking care of my child, tending to my husband’s meals and folding his underwear, she might as well have his last name too.

I do think it is okay for men and women to have ‘me time’ on occasion. It keeps us sane. It would probably be less of an issue if so many of the other things weren’t so out of balance with these women.

I agree with the author’s tell-tale signs, with the exception of wanting to move to a rural area. My perception of these types of women is they would want to stay in urban areas where the malls, salons, yoga studios and eateries are. I can’t imagine a woman like this tucked away in the country.

——————————————————-

At 7:35 PM, Duncan Idaho said…

The only thing that really bugs me about this article is that it’s so over the top and so focussed on the very wealthy…

That annoyed me too. It’s probably hard for a lot of mere mortal men to identify with. Still, supporting a wife who contributes nothing does certainly happen to non-millionaires, I’ve encountered guys in blue-collar jobs doing long overtime shifts or even doing more than one job whilst wifey stays at home, even though she does no housework, cooks nothing but ready-meals and has no kids to look after or they have kids but they’re in nursery or school anyway.

——————————————————-

At 7:37 PM, Anonymous said…

I’m so glad this information is being published. During the high times of high tech I was earning £150,000 per year. My wife at the time did nothing. She had maids clean the house, all meals and groceries delivered. Wealth and no work turned her into a horrible person.

Now we are divorced. I live alone and earn about £50,000. My ex is remarried to a guy who earns the same. Now she must work and take care of her children. With no more luxury, money, servants and free time, she is much better.

Women need to be controlled and subjugated to be good people. Religion was right! God heads the man, man heads the woman. If women are working hard and living on imposed limits, they behave themselves. If they have maids and luxuries, they become complete asses.

——————————————————-

At 7:54 PM, Peregrine John said…

Well, yeah – my point exactly! Like you, I see so much of this sort of behavior on a much smaller scale that the article’s examples are just the gross logical extension of the problem. I know a few millionaires, but none have staffs like that; most have a weekly maid service. Most also have wives that are worth a damn. The bad behavior that I see is usually middle class versions of self-obsessed nonsense.

lisa, you are spot on: this sort of idiocy would never have been tolerated (outside a privileged class) before feminism took hold, and any feminist worth anything should be revolted by this sort of backward behavior.

Incidentally, Desperate Housewives was pitched as a satire. Kind of disturbing that it could be taken as anything else, no?

——————————————————-

At 8:17 PM, Captain Zarmband said…

This is what feminism is all about. Men are conned into marriage with false promises. Once trapped in marriage the real woman emerges and reveals that she’s a selfish, bullying and lazy trollop. She’s probably shagging behind her husband’s back as well. They can do this because men know that they’ll be taken to the cleaners if they divorce. So she can hold this threat over him like a sword of Damocles. This is what women are really about and most will do it given the chance. Although this article focuses on a rich man’s wife most women do this to what ever extent they can get away with and it’s the divorce racket that facilitates this extremely selfish behaviour.

As always you’re right Duncan…. Advice from an old hand to young men, don’t marry….don’t co-habit. You will regret it.

——————————————————-

At 8:22 PM, Peter said…

Thank you for posting this, Duncan. I was married to a woman who aspired to this type of life, but, unfortunately, I had no money. I still don’t. I probably never will.

Peter

——————————————————-

At 9:29 PM, Anonymous said…

The way it works for the less wealth is this

Guy works 2 jobs.
No housework ever done – house always looks like a pigstye.
Therefore kids cant have their friends over
Lucky to get 1 cooked meal per week
First thing you see when you wake up and the last thing you see at night is wifey in her pajamas beached on the sofa watching TV. (assuming shes not thrusting a bill in your face.)

I can handle it but it really kills me to see my kids in their pajamas watching videos all day because she couldn’t be bothered to get them dressed and take them outside.

The problem that me and the guys in this article face is not really money, or possessions, or even loosing a wife.

We can always make more money and find love again. We can be resilient and prevail.

but she for all practical proposes owns the kids. They are the hostages in the Saw analogy as well

Max

——————————————————-

At 10:16 PM, Anonymous said…

Poor fucking guys. I do feel sorry for them. Imagine working 16 hours a day to support some cunt who spends her day spending your money lunching with her friends and probably bitching about what an asshole you are too behind your back. Whilst you work to support her.

I feel sorry for married men. They are really fucked in this day and age.

——————————————————-

At 10:28 PM, Anonymous said…

Wow, I’m amazed that much truth made it out. Only a chick could write an article like that and get away with it.

I have seen this pattern for years. The woman gets the ring, then the house, then the kids, then starts working on the divorce. They all do it.

I have seen it happen to all the married men around me. It’s what has kept me single. I don’t understand why any man get’s married now that it is so obvious what womens only agenda is. You get married now and you get what you deserve.

——————————————————-

At 11:19 PM, Anonymous said…

Poor Bastards. Good news though, I was just browsing the Drudge Report and found this
The New York Times has just become aware of the effects of the marriage strike.

——————————————————-

At 11:21 PM, mfsob said…

Can you say E-N-T-I-T-L-E-M-E-N-T, boys and girls? Sure you can …

——————————————————-

At 11:52 PM, Anonymous said…

I nominate Captain Zarmband to go open a can of whoopass on wimmin’ and therefore, vanquish the evil called feminazism!

——————————————————-

At 12:11 AM, HAWKEYE said…

great to see the media challenging the feminist ideal,
the truth has a funny way of coming out sooner or later

——————————————————-

At 12:14 AM, Egghead said…

To all the guys out there contemplating marriage, I have just one question: Apart from incubating your sperm for nine months, what can a woman do for you that you cannot do (better) for yourself?

——————————————————-

At 12:58 AM, Anonymous said…

Women need to be controlled and subjugated to be good people. Religion was right! God heads the man, man heads the woman. If women are working hard and living on imposed limits, they behave themselves. If they have maids and luxuries, they become complete asses.

Correct!

Shame on men only works because men think women are these noble creatures or helpless children (rather than mischievous snakes).

Women EXPLOIT the inherently (or rather inbred) good disposition of men towards women. If men were the evil creatures women label us then shame could not work, by definition.

If men were truly the evil beings women try to paint us (to psychologically control us with shame and guilt) then:

– Men would have been the first sex off the Titanic
– Men would only put women in front line combat positions
– Men would see only women as fit for coal mining

ANTIDOTE
Come to view women as only being, at best, worthless crap or worse trouble then shame will no longer work on you.

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

——————————————————-

At 2:48 AM, Anonymous said…

This man needs to plan his escape. It will take years and he has to expect her to make her attempt before the kids turn 18-21. Hopefully imputed income doesn’t apply to alimony like child support.

He needs to look at the quality of his life, ditching this rock around his neck will pay for itself.

Dark Wing Duck

——————————————————-

At 6:00 AM, thirtyplus said…

There is another way. The Reality Method.

It aims to teach guys how to handle these women and turn them into happy, loving, respectful and sexually receptive *natural* women.

Check it out…

http://realitymethod.wordpress.com/

I love your blog, Duncan, am a devoted reader, so don’t think this is spam.

——————————————————-

At 8:08 AM, Anonymous said…

I don’t feel sorry for them, they were warned beforehand, and they’re the same ones that supported feminism and insulted MRAs. You think men like this don’t have the power to change things if they wanted to? If enough of these guys were truly fed up, feminism would die overnight. Laws would immediately change. I think there is a movement in the US to change the income tax to a consumption tax (you’re taxed only on what you spend). If this happens, how quickly do you think men will stop marrying women, when women refuse to stop spending all their money? You’ll see the amusing differences between the sexes, as men will save and then invest very quickly, while women will pretty much make up most of the long term workforce as they spend every bit of their salaries on shoes and pay most of the taxes. The idea was probably suggested when rich men realized that men pay most of the taxes, while women reap most of the benefits.

——————————————————-

At 11:42 AM, Anonymous said…

The woman who wrote this article is just jealous of her rich friend. Why else would she go over to her house and put up with her garbage? She is just pissed off that she can’t be that much of a lazy slag so she wrote a bitchy article. If she had the means to do it she would do it in a second.

Have fun with your cats, twat.

——————————————————-

At 2:04 PM, Chris said…

Hi guys, this may be a really inappropriate place to post this comment, but I’ll do it anyway:

I Live in New Zealand, the only country in the world to have had its five highest public offices simultaneously held by women, and let me tell you: rampant militant feminism is killing my beloved country. Everything that six generations of my family have bled and died for is being torn asunder by angry, stupid, useless women.

To you, you gentlemen (and ladies!) of wit, wisdom and intelligence, I have only this to say: Thank you for being the voices of reason and sanity in an insane, insane world.

I’m glad I’m not the only one who’s tired of being treated like a criminal simply because I was born white, male, heterosexual and middle class.

This blog is now on my favourites.

Cheers,
Chris.

——————————————————-

At 4:06 PM, Anonymous said…

This sounds all too familiar, damnit why do I use my wrong head to lead the way? I shoulv’e listened to my old man.

——————————————————-

At 4:10 PM, Viking said…

I too was struck by the way that the article implies that this is a problem of wealth. I’m a middle class technology profession. I make decent money but I am not rolling it it. That didn’t stop my wife from quiting her job before we were even married. She quit about a month before the wedding saying it would give her the time to do the planning and setting up our new place and everything. Sounded reasonable at the time. She never did go back to work, but that was ok, I didn’t have a problem with her not having a job. My mistake was assuming that she would still work though, work in the home that is. During our three year tour of Hell she did little cooking or cleaning. Maybe she would would 2 or 3 meals in a week and I am not talking about cooking like momma did, I am talking about even just heating up a box of pre made chicken fried steaks and a can of green bean once in a while would have been nice. What doesn’t count as cooking was calling me at work at the end of a long day and asking me to pick up burgers or such.

She had kids but they were teenagers so it is not like she didn’t have help with cleaning the house but some how it never got done. She wanted me to hire a maid service to help her but that bullet was successfully dodged when she realized that the cost of it would cut into what she could spend.

Oh, and there was the year that I did the second job thing to pay off bills. I contracted about 15-20 hours a week in addition to a full time salaried job. Did the bills get paid? Some did, but for the most part things would “come up.” Seems like we, meaning her, could always find a way to spend everything on something. The bills and debts are getting paid now though, now that she is gone.

This is not a problem limited to the very wealthy. Middle class women are doing the same thing and I would guess that working class women, that is to say women married to working class husbands, are probably doing exactly the same as well. The scale of the problem simple shifts as the income shifts.

Be strong, stay single.

——————————————————-

At 7:40 PM, Anonymous said…

lisa said:

“I really can’t imagine any feminist being able to support the behavior and saying it is progress for women with a straight face.”

This is exactly what feminists support. Maybe not all of them, but enough to discredit anyone with less misandric view.

It’s not exactly the same situation, but much the same attitude. From a Q&A on http://www.feminist.com.

A feminists view of equality

Amy’s response has actually been changed from what it was when the post on SYG was originally made.

From memory, her first response was simply: “I’m sure you’ll manage.”.

——————————————————-

At 8:25 PM, not a numpty said…

Anonymous 10:28 PM said… “I have seen this pattern for years. The woman gets the ring, then the house, then the kids, then starts working on the divorce. They all do it.”

Found this on a lawyers site.

Pre-Divorce Planning

“Much of the business of the private investigators comes from spouses engaged in pre-divorce planning. Savvy divorce lawyers tell prospective clients to find out as much as possible as early as possible—before the papers are served.”

——————————————————-

At 8:50 PM, Anonymous said…

“Feminists complain that actually giving fathers rights, such as joint custody, will mean some poor wikkle women will be stuck in marriages they are fed up with. Yet this is the position of numberless men in the West, stuck in shitty marriages to repulsive harpies but unable to escape without losing nearly everything.”

Bravo, Duncan! This simple truth that no one seems to be concerned about needs to be reiterated at every opportunity. My father-in-law, for one, lived it for years until my wife was grown.

If it was good enough for him, it’s damn sure good enough for “some poor widdle women” who think their family obligations are just no fun anymore.

——————————————————-

At 9:06 PM, Boyd-Boyd said…

After my divorce, I still sometimes get the urge to bend over and grab my ankles. My wife was the meanest bitch in Texas, and I lost my shirt. Pretty much the whole shebang. I sure as hell wouldn’t do THAT shit again.

——————————————————-

At 1:05 AM, Lisa said…

I can handle it but it really kills me to see my kids in their pajarmas watching videos all day because she couldn’t be bothered to get them dressed and take them outside.

The problem that me and the guys in this article face is not really money, or possessions, or even loosing a wife.

We can always make more money and find love again. We can be resilient and prevail.

but she for all pratical proposes owns the kids. They are the hostages in the Saw analogy as well

Max

Max, the kids really do suffer in all of this. You are right to point it out. I think it’s bad enough when kids are left to feel their mom’s career is more important than them. When they find themselves coming in second or third to Oprah Winfrey or a manicure, it’s even worse. Although, a woman who is working out of financially necessity to the family has some room for pardon.

There is a new trend emerging in the schools near where I live. They have before and after school daycare. For a small fee, parents can drop their kids off a few hours before school starts and are able to leave them at school as late as 8:00 p.m. Can you imagine? That’s an entire day spent in school with teachers and aides as your parent. How is that good for a child? How does anyone even feel like a parent in that situation? One mom explained the concept to me when I asked if she needed to be getting home from a networking event. She was chewing on a shrimp and drinking a Coke with her business buddies while her son was eating chicken nuggets at school and likely working on his umpteenth finger painting.

——————————————————-

At 4:52 PM, Anonymous said…

>>I don’t feel sorry for them, they were warned beforehand, and they’re the same ones that supported feminism and insulted MRAs.

YES!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous age 64

——————————————————-

At 7:22 PM, am i a bodyfascist? said…

indeed a refreshing article for a mainstream newspaper, though imho too a bit over the top + narrowly focused, even leaving the impression of kinda being made up, so i’m not really sure at the moment what the exact agenda behind it might be, therefore hoping you’ll keep a close tab in the future as you usually do anyway (which as said i appreciate much more than the lumping all feminists together etc. bits n bobs)

——————————————————-

At 6:44 PM, Mamonaku187 said…

Feminism has managed to “defang the snake”.

While the Cobra’s fangs are fearsome, they are also the only tools he can use to defend himself from predators.

And women can be the most vicious predators around!

There is nothing a man can do to really check his wife’s destructive behavior without suffering the consequences.

Hell, a man can go to jail, lose his job, and his honor simply by raising his voice to his wife and telling her fat arse to get up, get out, and get something!

Marriage only works when each partner acts as a counterbalance to the other.

And ever since the governments of the West took it upon themselves to be present at all times in the family bedroom, women know that they are free to do as they damn well please, and there is nothing under Heaven that the man can do about it.

I would never recommend for anyone to get married, until feminism collapses forever and ever.

——————————————————-

%d bloggers like this: