- Thread starter Barbara
- Start date
C'mon big T admit you want to be in the threesome running. You must be getting bored with the deers!!
CARIBOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!
with what some of the SSGs have looked like recently, I'd have to agree lol....
yet you never fail to jump in when I post something the least bit derogatory about a (female) poster...
what is chickenshit is you standing up and defending the female posters yet let slide everything to do with the male posters....
You are FAR worse than I, as you are sexist......
Some people find peewee herman funny, some people Lewis Black. Some people think Rodney Dangerfield is hilarious, and some people love Tracey Morgan. The thing is, you don't say a peep when I say HOF was at the gay pride parade taking it up the ass yet when I say barbara should clean her box you get your knickers in a knot. That my friend is S E X I S T.
You only want to believe what is best and good for you. Please give me and us a break. You are so full of shit.
But wait, it does not mean you have to stop posting. You are entertaining and true to your words. You just happen to be a different breed. As long as you believe it is right what you say or what you do I can live with that. But man, you like to shit disturb.
So, let me get this straight, you only believe what is good for everyone else, and not for you? Dude that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I believe what I believe and learned through life. If someone else believes that everyone else's opinions are more important than their own, well, that's insane.
Yes, there are times I post things just to shit disturb, as you say, it's entertaining....but you cannot argue the fact that there are some (many) on here who put on their white knight armor and come to the rescue whenever I disagree with a poster that happens to have boobs. You cannot stand (sit) there and tell me that it isn't 100% sexist to defend a female poster and not a male, or not say something simply because a poster has boobs.
IMO doing that is far more insulting than making a joke about a female poster having to "clean her box". Sorry, I thought this was 2011 where men and women were equal in all things...my bad......I didn't realize it was 1962......
Yes, there are times I post things just to shit disturb, as you say, it's entertaining....
I have to post..... Did you read what you just wrote?. Not much more to add. Dude wake up. OK, now you will come back with another smart ass bla bla bla. No one is against you just have to get your priorities right.
You are living in a make believe world.
I won't say a word again.
I have to post..... Did you read what you just wrote?. Not much more to add. Dude wake up. OK, now you will come back with another smart ass bla bla bla. No one is against you just have to get your priorities right.
You are living in a make believe world.
I won't say a word again.
and you shouldn't have said anything to begin with.....
Actually, I should have wrote "I post things KNOWING it will cause shit", that's more accurate.....
- Thread starter
- #132
Gentlemen please stop, I can see my post has started somewhat of a locker room brawl. I remember in my university days two gentlemen fighting over me but this is somewhat different.
Tboy, you definitely are a self admitted shit disturber, you remind me a bit of my soon to be ex. You are outspoken and adversarial, you should have chosen a career in law. Oddball you on the other hand are a man with a heart of gold, along with a few others.
I find myself popping in and enjoying the comments and reading some of the reviews and stories, strange but true.
Tboy, you definitely are a self admitted shit disturber, you remind me a bit of my soon to be ex. You are outspoken and adversarial, you should have chosen a career in law. Oddball you on the other hand are a man with a heart of gold, along with a few others.
I find myself popping in and enjoying the comments and reading some of the reviews and stories, strange but true.
a 1 player
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2010
- Messages
- 4,904
Okay, now that some time has passed and I've had a chance to think things over, and read the comments on here, a good chunk of my original post still stands.
Barbara, I do feel bad the hubby is having an affair, it has happened to me a few times over the years and it is never easy to deal with, though with time it does become easier. However like I said before, affairs are the norm in relationships, (I'm not saying this is right), and in modern society one should really 'expect' a partner to have one. The choice one must make now is, 'can this be worked through?' If that is the decision that is made (and god knows it will not be easy), it might be the more beneficial for the both of you. One however must learn that when an affair occurs, it is because there was some major problem in the relationship that was not either discussed or dealt with appropriately. These problems are both partners fault, and can very rarely be blamed on a single person. Staying together is certainly better for both of your financial situations, and if there are children involved, the trauma can last a lifetime. My children still have problems with it eight years after the fact. Therapy can help, but it is not a remedy.
Should you choose to terminate the relationship, what are your plans? Just because someone is paying alimony does not mean the partner should get a free ride. What if god forbid his six digit income dropped to $30,000? Don't say it will never happen, it happened to me. The industry I was in totally dried up during the recession. Though I do agree that you are entitled to a portion of his income during the times you were married, I still cannot believe it should be anywhere near half, (the law and courts be dammed). My ex took very good care of the children while we were together, but at the same time she still had the freedom and financial resources to go out with her friends, go on the computer and several other things that were not available to me while I was slugging it away at the office.
One can debate that being a 'stay at home parent' is every bit as valuable as a full time career. The free market disagrees. Even the best nanny who is dedicated to a proper upbringing of the children, and cooks and cleans, very seldomly commands any greater than a $40,000 income. Also, let us not forget that a mother on welfare earns far less than this, and that in essence is what the government says a 'stay at home mother's' job is worth, and what is needed to support children. To demand a substantial part of another persons income, when that person did not contribute physically to the earning of that money makes the money earner a slave. That is the definition of slave:
1. One bound in servitude as the property of a person or household.
2. One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence
and makes the other person a parasite.
1. An organism that lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host's expense.
2. A person who habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return.
A moral person would take a salary (or alimony) that was proper to the job that was being preformed in order to get on their feet again, then go out and find a job so that they may be self-sustainable. The children should reside with both parents equally, and child support paid to the person of lesser income the difference between the two salaries. (Yet even this I do not agree with, as no one can tell me it costs sometimes thousands of dollars a month to properly raise a child), especially when good children are being raised in apartments and without many modern luxuries.
I really do not mean to offend, but because something is law does not mean it is right and just.
Barbara, I do feel bad the hubby is having an affair, it has happened to me a few times over the years and it is never easy to deal with, though with time it does become easier. However like I said before, affairs are the norm in relationships, (I'm not saying this is right), and in modern society one should really 'expect' a partner to have one. The choice one must make now is, 'can this be worked through?' If that is the decision that is made (and god knows it will not be easy), it might be the more beneficial for the both of you. One however must learn that when an affair occurs, it is because there was some major problem in the relationship that was not either discussed or dealt with appropriately. These problems are both partners fault, and can very rarely be blamed on a single person. Staying together is certainly better for both of your financial situations, and if there are children involved, the trauma can last a lifetime. My children still have problems with it eight years after the fact. Therapy can help, but it is not a remedy.
Should you choose to terminate the relationship, what are your plans? Just because someone is paying alimony does not mean the partner should get a free ride. What if god forbid his six digit income dropped to $30,000? Don't say it will never happen, it happened to me. The industry I was in totally dried up during the recession. Though I do agree that you are entitled to a portion of his income during the times you were married, I still cannot believe it should be anywhere near half, (the law and courts be dammed). My ex took very good care of the children while we were together, but at the same time she still had the freedom and financial resources to go out with her friends, go on the computer and several other things that were not available to me while I was slugging it away at the office.
One can debate that being a 'stay at home parent' is every bit as valuable as a full time career. The free market disagrees. Even the best nanny who is dedicated to a proper upbringing of the children, and cooks and cleans, very seldomly commands any greater than a $40,000 income. Also, let us not forget that a mother on welfare earns far less than this, and that in essence is what the government says a 'stay at home mother's' job is worth, and what is needed to support children. To demand a substantial part of another persons income, when that person did not contribute physically to the earning of that money makes the money earner a slave. That is the definition of slave:
1. One bound in servitude as the property of a person or household.
2. One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence
and makes the other person a parasite.
1. An organism that lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host's expense.
2. A person who habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return.
A moral person would take a salary (or alimony) that was proper to the job that was being preformed in order to get on their feet again, then go out and find a job so that they may be self-sustainable. The children should reside with both parents equally, and child support paid to the person of lesser income the difference between the two salaries. (Yet even this I do not agree with, as no one can tell me it costs sometimes thousands of dollars a month to properly raise a child), especially when good children are being raised in apartments and without many modern luxuries.
I really do not mean to offend, but because something is law does not mean it is right and just.
Dude, you should be consulting the heads that be on family law. I love your analogy and I totally agree with it. I would love to see fairness brought to the divorce system in North America.
Oh.....I thought these gentlemen were fighting over me as well as my famous non ass-grabbing hugs.....
a 1 player
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2010
- Messages
- 4,904
The problem as I see it, (and have brought up many times before), is that the justice system is not just, and never will be, (not just in family law, but in all aspects), until a proper moral and ethical philosophy is adopted. Over the past several hundred years critical, rational thought has been all but destroyed, chipping slowly away at the rights of the individual, and adopting in its place the rights of the collective, thereby making those 'in need' have a higher 'moral value' than those who produce. I call it the 'Robin Hood Syndrome'.
This is just the beginning folks.
I'm with trump, you should be an advocate to have the current laws changed....
Two big things (why I truncated):
1) I have yet to meet more than one ex wife who did just that: used the alimony to tide her over until she got back on her feet. Most use this as a windfall lottery to live the high life. Unfortunately some see it this way.....
2) I agree with your point about "just because it is law, doesn't mean it is right". I use a similar line ALL the time: just because it is legal and you can, doesn't mean you should.....
Similar threads
