It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

America's attitudes towards marriage and women

page: 3
19
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 11:25 AM
link   
We are all a little weird and life's a little weird, and when we find someone whose weirdness is compatible with ours, we join up with them and fall in mutual weirdness, and call it love. ~ Anonymous


It can't get weird enough for me....




posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Not sure if/how it applies here .. but over the years both working and after walked away from everything .. is that in 3rd world countries and remote areas that "civilization" hasnt reached yet .. they dont have "marriage" instead usually a couple gets together .. sets up a house and starts their family .. in alot of cases there will be a feast of some sort and all the villagers help build a house for the couple .. seen couples still together after nearly fifty years together and families stick together .. maybe its having to work together to survive without all the modern "conveniences" or maybe its not having all the laws .. restrictions .. distractions ..and bovine fecal matter that entails life in modern "civilization" ,.
edit on 28/12/14 by Expat888 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 12:51 AM
link   
It's very simple; the US is predominantly christian. Fornication is not taken lightly in christianity. Therefore if he is so committed to your daughter why doesn't he just head down to the courthouse and commit himself to her? The first assumption is that he is not so committed and that he wants that easy exit (or maybe your daughter wants that exit) left open.

France on the other hand is predominantly catholic. Catholicism has been known to be a little more.... whats a good word....? lenient? with accepting behaviors of members that don't coincide with the bible. As you said, you know many people who don't get married and have children, raising them just fine. That doesn't happen often here in america.

Another consideration is legal recourse, in france, if he just walks away does she lose everything they've built together? Does he lose everything they've built together? do they split it? i would imagine that the child is taken care of fincancially by both parents under the legal system. But as an american I dont know these things about france. People fear what they don't know.

In short: the american view point is that marriage takes little effort and removes the uncertainty from your daughter's and grandchild's lives. The french viewpoint seems to be that if he's committed he's committed.

JMO



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 01:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

Good points to consider.

The laws are different, but not to give the woman more- for example, if there a re children involved, in a divorce, the law gives them joint custody- 50-50. Each child must spend an equal amount of time with each parent each week.
Most divorced people make sure to live very close to each other for that reason, so that the child can move between the two homes easily.

Alimony is a rare thing here, generally not done. Though all property bought since the couple became officially together is split in half.

Child support payments can be installed, but from the person with the higher salary- not according to gender. That is only in cases where the joint custody was rejected by the parents.

Anyone in need of financial aid can get it here, so alimony is kind of unecessary. But then, it is a socialistic type of system- to each according to their needs, and "needs" are considered as essentials for survival- not luxuries. (food, shelter, basic education- not cell phones or brand name shoes).

But all of this remains the same even if people are not married! Even if they are not PACs- (which is an official declaration of couple status, which my daughter and her boyfriend are).

The funny thing is the assumption that HE did not want to get married, and HE might leave!
The whole decision was up to my daughter- he was willing to marry if she wanted to, she decided she didn't want to right now.

At this time, of all the couple we know who have divorced (after 23 years, there is a few of our friends who did) every single one had the woman decide to end it and walk away. I kid you not. We know a lot of heartbroken men right now.

One of them seemed to recover faster because his ex chose (of her own will) to pay for a nice apartment for him, and continues to do so, even nine years later and while he's living there with a new woman and child.
The men are just not seen as bad guys here, to tie down and make into good ones.

edit on 29-12-2014 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2014 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme

Americans place value on commitment, which they are not seeing from this gent, who's not willing to settle down after 6 years of dating.

It is absolutely a cultural thing, be it right or wrong.


Do people actually believe this? That you can be together six years and still be "dating"? That it's not a commitment in itself?



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Please this is MURICA! Do you even need to question why



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Marriage is about the future; a promise to be there as a couple "til death do us part."

Now WITHIN that 'Murican, marrying culture, when one member says he or she doesn't want to get married, it is a hallmark of misgivings about the future of the relationship. In other words, they are still "looking for something better."

Within that culture, it would be a social cue that the questioning partner doesn't plan to be around to help raise any children that ensue from the relationship.

Marriage doesn't mean that in French culture. There ya go. Different baggage.

Most couples in the US do co-habitate before marriage. Living together is seen as a long-term, but not necessarily permanent commitment. That is extremely common in America, and isn't marriage, either.

In fact, one could make the argument that women in France have LESS social status than traditional American females. If French women cannot expect a partner to be willing to commit--if they have no "right" to insist on a wedding--- then they must settle for an un-defined open-ended relationship.

From a traditionalist standpoint, the status of women has been in steady decline for 60 years. No "modern" man could be expected to "wait around" for a girl who didn't put out for a year or more, for the dubious privilege of committing to her long-term.

In the past, a male wouldn't dare to divorce a woman he'd grown dissatisfied with; his own family would have been outraged. Nowadays, it is assumed a man will leave if he loses interest or sees a better opportunity elsewhere. Him being true to himself is more important that being true to his spouse.

If anything, it is men who have been liberated. Not women.

In cultures where women are valued economically, the male pays a "bride price" to her family, for depriving them of a worker. In cultures where women have low status, they come with a "dowry"--an award to make her more palatable to the prospective groom. Modern women come with neither, and can be ditched for a fee, paid as alimony, if there was ever a marriage decree. The end of alimony means there is no longer even a fee.

No wonder reproduction rates are falling in the west.



posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 01:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: tovenar

In fact, one could make the argument that women in France have LESS social status than traditional American females. If French women cannot expect a partner to be willing to commit--if they have no "right" to insist on a wedding--- then they must settle for an un-defined open-ended relationship.




I have the same question come up in response to this as I do to many of these posts-
Where is this assumption coming from that women want to commit, and men do not?

This idea that men want to be free from commitment, as if it is an inherent masculine trait....
I used to believe this too, I am questioning my own conditioning as much as others, because as time has passed, I have slowly gotten used to being in an environment where this is NOT presumed nor do I observe it to be a reality.

So I find myself wondering who started this idea? And why? How do men evolve who do not have this fear of commitment that we see in the males of our culture?

I sometimes focus on their values concerning the home and family life, which are much higher than ours. Home anf family is more important to them than work. Everyone goes home for two hours at lunch time, they only work 35 hours a week, and everyone has paid vacation time in the summer by law. There is a controversy right now here, about allowing people to work on Sundays... it is being considered, and I, in typical american fashion, assumed that people would be "for" that.

I made the mistake of expressing that in public once, and got boxed heartliy by everyone around me. They gave me lectures on how they do not want to become slaves to capitalism, and start putting work and money above their family time. They were somewhat implicit about it, trying to remain polite, but they made it obvious that was a snear towards America, as if we are all just consumed with consuming; our souls have been snatched by the capitalist system and we have lost our attachment to family and home.

Perhaps that is where the idea comes from, that men all desire to be free of commitment? Shopping around, for more, better, and bigger is such a big pastime in our society, we just automatically apply that to relationships too?

The most troubling comment I got here, which is actually a common saying, but I never stopped and thought about it before is "If he can get the milk for free, why buy the cow?"

Women as livestock to be exploited, or bought.

From what I have witnessed, the women here see themselves more as the farmers- the caretakers and anchors of humans, and the men want to find a farmer lady to house and guide them.



posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 01:38 AM
link   
-I just want to say, I am always aware on some level, that my habit of posting about the differences in the two countries can be quite irritating. I am always doing that here. It is not because I think they are better- it is just that these contrasts I am faced with daily always bring me to take a second look at my own conditioning and question it!

When everyone else around you is just assuming something to be true, you don't think any further about it. It is only when faced with blank stares who are wondering what the hell you're saying that you start to ask yourself, "Yeah... what the hell am I saying here?"

The "getting milk and buying the cow " is like that. They ask me, what are you trying to say?

I stumble around verbally, "Well... you know... sex and all... men just want sex, and they don't want a family, so they'll naturally prefer if they can get the sex without the family..."

"What? Men don't want a family? " -they laugh at me.

"Uh...no...right? They want to be free, above all else? No?"

"Hahaha... you're saying, men want to be homeless, cold, and hungry?" Giving me that look that says, what are you, a moron, or a lunatic? Do you hear what you are saying???

And I'm a blank. And I go home and start writing, and analyzing myself.....
edit on 31-12-2014 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluesma

I didn't say that men desiring multiple partners is a biological or hard-wired trait. I just note its prevalence demographically.

French heads of state are famous for their mistresses, no?



posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 01:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: tovenar
a reply to: Bluesma

I didn't say that men desiring multiple partners is a biological or hard-wired trait. I just note its prevalence demographically.

French heads of state are famous for their mistresses, no?



Are they?
It is known that Mitterand had a mistress, and a child with her, but the french don't much care about that.
Do the americans notice that as peculiar? I guess I did at first, and then... I just got used to it, because no one else saw a drama where I did. He continued to be a loving and present husband for his wife too, and she didn't mind, so I guess everyone just decided to shrug and say "to each his own thing".


But he did not abandon his wife, nor children.

Hollande was caught screwing around, (I forgot about that- I think he is a dickhead anyway), but his woman left him when she found out, not the other way around.


But I suspect our heads of state have been filandering too- look at JFK! He was all over the place! But the press just decided not to exploit it.

I doubt that if sexual fidelity is the issue, marriage provides a solution.

ETA- I didn't mean to say that you said anything in particular! I was spurred to delve into my own self questioning, is all.
I actually used to think that men had an inherent need to have sex with many women, and lived with a man that convinced me of that, until I got to be 8 months pregnant, and got sick of coming home to find another woman's make up on my pillow- I decided I was done with men for life then. But later I found a man that really doesn't feel that to be necessary, or else feels being with me is more important to him than conquering new females.. I don't know. He surprised me.
edit on 31-12-2014 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2015 @ 03:59 PM
link   
The new generation of women in America are the epitome of rotten evil. Every single little methodical thought and impulse of there being is based on manipulation towards the souls of other people. Even the sight of attractive men disgust them to the point of vomit. They have absolutely No intention of being righteous, not intention of spirit. Modern day women want to murder every man on the earth. Something Needs to be done about this!



posted on Jan, 4 2015 @ 12:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: greyer
The new generation of women in America are the epitome of rotten evil. Every single little methodical thought and impulse of there being is based on manipulation towards the souls of other people. Even the sight of attractive men disgust them to the point of vomit. They have absolutely No intention of being righteous, not intention of spirit. Modern day women want to murder every man on the earth. Something Needs to be done about this!


Is that a joke?
Sarcasm sometimes eludes me in this medium.
Because otherwise? That sounds really crazy.



posted on Jan, 9 2015 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluesma

No,

In my shoes, I am told, every day, every where I go, from the female gender, that I am hated, with a wrath, for being a human being, who has done nothing wrong.

I let them take advantage of me, attempt to destruct all of my positive emotions, hate me with a passion for smiling to another person in the hopes that I can bring a smile out of them anything that comes out of the name of good, or happiness, is strongly opposed. under any circumstance want true happiness, but to manipulate that of emotion, there is no room for the true love of spirit because that cannot manipulate any more, because to be honest and all things positive is of the light. So the best thing about all this - is that I do not judge, I do not hate but strive to act lovingly, let the unjust hate.

Who will dare to say the truth, they will just continue to have passion just because we are a human being experiencing life, for no other reason why always refusing to love another human being for the pure manipulation of human emotions, pitiful to take advantage of the human mind by neglecting it with every strength of negativity possible - all because of willing obnoxiousness.

And of course in this rant, it is also observed that I am held accountable for the reaction of people based on the laws of nature and the standards of society.
edit on 12Sat, 10 Jan 2015 00:19:30 -0600America/Chicago15America/ChicagoSat, 10 Jan 2015 00:19:30 -0600 by greyer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 04:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluesma

Great info. Thank you for that!




top topics



 
19
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join