Marriage is a horrible deal for women

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wome in traditional marriages are the happiest. It’s the only way to do marriage.

I am divorced and agree…but most men now (and in the last 15 years) want a dual income household. So, marriage is a bad deal for the woman.

Np, divorced and also agree that marriage is a bad deal if the woman has to work. There was zero benefit for me in my marriage but I was too young to realize it. Since I got so little out out of it, transitioning to single life was seamless for me but extraordinarily difficult for my ex. I can't imagine a scenario where I would remarry. I love my peace too much.

[Anonymous]

Man here with a couple observations

If you can't outsource or SAH then yes marriage is harder for the woman hands down.

It's gotten better but society still defaults to the woman doing most of the household management and in Type A DC there isn't enough time to make it work without major stress

Now there is an out. If your HHI is under 200k maybe even with both spouses working, realistically the smartest move is to get out of this area.

There are plenty of places in the country where that income is comfortable where you can either stay at home or outsource and things will be much better and happier for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a single mother who isn’t poor is the best.

Say more? Considering this for myself. I'd have less money but my job pays fine.

I wouldn’t do this unless you can really afford a lot of help, or live near relatives that would be willing to help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Man here with a couple observations

If you can't outsource or SAH then yes marriage is harder for the woman hands down.

It's gotten better but society still defaults to the woman doing most of the household management and in Type A DC there isn't enough time to make it work without major stress

Now there is an out. If your HHI is under 200k maybe even with both spouses working, realistically the smartest move is to get out of this area.

There are plenty of places in the country where that income is comfortable where you can either stay at home or outsource and things will be much better and happier for you.

Finally a realistic man's opinion acknowledging the problem. Just today I had a convo with my director at work that they expect me to be available well past 6pm to be promoted. I don't know how the wife can not mommy track and continue growing if husband just removes himself from the household duties!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And who are these men, exactly? If you took everyone I know from elementary school to a graduate degree and/or have worked with, maybe 4 or 5% hit it big. Meaning million dollar salaries or WSJ stories, etc. The rest have had mediocre to good careers.

So let me guess, that 4 or 5% magically married DCUM posters who are in shape and run around in yoga pants?

Are you asking about men who make over half a million with SAHM? Hedge fund managers, real estate developers, tech sales, partners at law firms, built and sold own businesses etc. but these men are fine with SAHM wives their marriages last until men cheat , on average

The worst are these 200k guys with wives who also make 200k. This is when the woman is exhausted to the brink of insanity as they tend to be cheap and controlling with resources on home aide and the wives are that cheaper “second shift”

I’m a $230K woman and although a second income would be nice I wouldn’t marry anyone who made less than me. I have made a ton of career mistakes so I figure any competent guy should be out earning me by now.

Exhibit A

Sorry this bothers you. But I’m highly educated, worked hard and sacrificed a lot to get to this income. And most of my female friends make more. So I figure any intelligent hard working guy from similar background could have done the same. If he didn’t something is wrong and we are not compatible.

That is like the top 1% of US salaries. What on earth do these people do? Everybody can't be a lawyer or hedge fund manager.

Why should she not require the top 1% if she grew up in these circles?

I am a recent immigrant who moved here as a teenager. All my peers from back home ( all from UMC homes) who moved here before 25 make 200k with the exception of PhD holders in academia and myself ( I stayed home for almost a decade).

Lawyers, doctors, engineers, public accountants, some pharmacists, some specialist nurses 15-20 years into their careers usually make 200k.

PP is talking generalities, and she will know when to make exceptions to her rule. But at 43, if you come from an UMC background, your only excuse for not making 200k should be that it's not that important to you.

If it's important to PP, why should she not require it from a partner?

Some of you think women should get married to any Tom or Dick who shows up. It's better to be single than married to someone who does not share your worldview.

This is such a pervasive problem. Women should have exceptionally high standards but having any at all really triggers some DCUM posters.

A man married to an average woman gets— at least— $500,000 equivalent services of a surrogate and egg donor if they have two children.

A woman married to an average man gets less than nothing, because he is a net drain on her resources. Donor sperm is not especially costly.

If you’re not getting a top 10-15% man, you’re getting a bad deal.

bad math

How much do you think surrogacy and egg donation costs?

The math was off but not too far off. Surrogacy cost $150k; egg donation could be free but with select designer egg up $40k. The issue is not that but the wife also provides free labor for the totality of raising the children! It is a net drain on her time, more so than for men as they tend to underdeliver with household duties. There was in fact an economic research that women put in these duties over $100k/year in lost pension savings, career opportunities and free labor

The real issue is that women magically fail to count their half.

The child is half hers. The pregnancy is half hers. Raising children is half on her. Why are you using a cost basis of services provided to the third party? Does your chef eat with you? Does your housekeeper live in your house? Does your nanny have rights on the child? No. They deliver the service and leave. They don't consume half of it. They don't own half of it. And they certainly don't bother you with their opinions on how it ought to be done.

Ok, assume $300,000 plus designers eggs another $80,000, divide by two (since you’re on about it only being half his) and you’re still starting marriage with a dude who needs to bring an additional $200,000 (after taxes) into the marriage before you even hit zero. Most don’t.

Designer eggs? Are you really bringing designer-quality eggs to the table? If a standard 37-year old DCUM professional woman was a donor in a catalogue, no one would pick her. They don't pick them for the salary. I mean why not include a private jet and silk sheets while you're at it? Everyone totally gets that.

[Anonymous]

Being a SAHM because your husband makes a good enough HHI to cover all the family’s needs during the years of peak child rearing would be ideal - except that beyond the reality that many women don’t find being a full time SAHM sufficiently fulfilling intellectually and emotionally, even IF a woman loves it and wants to do it and embraces it wholeheartedly it still requires putting faith into another person that they will keep their end of the bargain and not quit it part way through which leaves the former SAHM in the worst of all worlds, a single mother not by choice and struggling to build career because she took time off to be SAHM and didn’t get the time and supports to transition back to working world and career because exH was too much in a hurry for strange kitty and lost all concern and consideration for his kids and their mother. That’s the experience of far too many women - marriage is a huge crapshoot and so aren’t kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And who are these men, exactly? If you took everyone I know from elementary school to a graduate degree and/or have worked with, maybe 4 or 5% hit it big. Meaning million dollar salaries or WSJ stories, etc. The rest have had mediocre to good careers.

So let me guess, that 4 or 5% magically married DCUM posters who are in shape and run around in yoga pants?

Are you asking about men who make over half a million with SAHM? Hedge fund managers, real estate developers, tech sales, partners at law firms, built and sold own businesses etc. but these men are fine with SAHM wives their marriages last until men cheat , on average

The worst are these 200k guys with wives who also make 200k. This is when the woman is exhausted to the brink of insanity as they tend to be cheap and controlling with resources on home aide and the wives are that cheaper “second shift”

I’m a $230K woman and although a second income would be nice I wouldn’t marry anyone who made less than me. I have made a ton of career mistakes so I figure any competent guy should be out earning me by now.

Exhibit A

Sorry this bothers you. But I’m highly educated, worked hard and sacrificed a lot to get to this income. And most of my female friends make more. So I figure any intelligent hard working guy from similar background could have done the same. If he didn’t something is wrong and we are not compatible.

That is like the top 1% of US salaries. What on earth do these people do? Everybody can't be a lawyer or hedge fund manager.

Why should she not require the top 1% if she grew up in these circles?

I am a recent immigrant who moved here as a teenager. All my peers from back home ( all from UMC homes) who moved here before 25 make 200k with the exception of PhD holders in academia and myself ( I stayed home for almost a decade).

Lawyers, doctors, engineers, public accountants, some pharmacists, some specialist nurses 15-20 years into their careers usually make 200k.

PP is talking generalities, and she will know when to make exceptions to her rule. But at 43, if you come from an UMC background, your only excuse for not making 200k should be that it's not that important to you.

If it's important to PP, why should she not require it from a partner?

Some of you think women should get married to any Tom or Dick who shows up. It's better to be single than married to someone who does not share your worldview.

This is such a pervasive problem. Women should have exceptionally high standards but having any at all really triggers some DCUM posters.

A man married to an average woman gets— at least— $500,000 equivalent services of a surrogate and egg donor if they have two children.

A woman married to an average man gets less than nothing, because he is a net drain on her resources. Donor sperm is not especially costly.

If you’re not getting a top 10-15% man, you’re getting a bad deal.

bad math

How much do you think surrogacy and egg donation costs?

The math was off but not too far off. Surrogacy cost $150k; egg donation could be free but with select designer egg up $40k. The issue is not that but the wife also provides free labor for the totality of raising the children! It is a net drain on her time, more so than for men as they tend to underdeliver with household duties. There was in fact an economic research that women put in these duties over $100k/year in lost pension savings, career opportunities and free labor

The real issue is that women magically fail to count their half.

The child is half hers. The pregnancy is half hers. Raising children is half on her. Why are you using a cost basis of services provided to the third party? Does your chef eat with you? Does your housekeeper live in your house? Does your nanny have rights on the child? No. They deliver the service and leave. They don't consume half of it. They don't own half of it. And they certainly don't bother you with their opinions on how it ought to be done.

Ok, assume $300,000 plus designers eggs another $80,000, divide by two (since you’re on about it only being half his) and you’re still starting marriage with a dude who needs to bring an additional $200,000 (after taxes) into the marriage before you even hit zero. Most don’t.

Designer eggs? Are you really bringing designer-quality eggs to the table? If a standard 37-year old DCUM professional woman was a donor in a catalogue, no one would pick her. They don't pick them for the salary. I mean why not include a private jet and silk sheets while you're at it? Everyone totally gets that.

I sure was. Ivy League and healthy is what most people want in donor eggs.

But it’s still irrelevant. The question is whether marriage is a good deal for women. Most men aren’t coming to the table these days with $200,000 ($400,000 when you consider only half is hers) in after tax assets to contribute to start at level.

[Anonymous]

Marriage has been very good for me

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And who are these men, exactly? If you took everyone I know from elementary school to a graduate degree and/or have worked with, maybe 4 or 5% hit it big. Meaning million dollar salaries or WSJ stories, etc. The rest have had mediocre to good careers.

So let me guess, that 4 or 5% magically married DCUM posters who are in shape and run around in yoga pants?

Are you asking about men who make over half a million with SAHM? Hedge fund managers, real estate developers, tech sales, partners at law firms, built and sold own businesses etc. but these men are fine with SAHM wives their marriages last until men cheat , on average

The worst are these 200k guys with wives who also make 200k. This is when the woman is exhausted to the brink of insanity as they tend to be cheap and controlling with resources on home aide and the wives are that cheaper “second shift”

I’m a $230K woman and although a second income would be nice I wouldn’t marry anyone who made less than me. I have made a ton of career mistakes so I figure any competent guy should be out earning me by now.

Exhibit A

Sorry this bothers you. But I’m highly educated, worked hard and sacrificed a lot to get to this income. And most of my female friends make more. So I figure any intelligent hard working guy from similar background could have done the same. If he didn’t something is wrong and we are not compatible.

That is like the top 1% of US salaries. What on earth do these people do? Everybody can't be a lawyer or hedge fund manager.

Why should she not require the top 1% if she grew up in these circles?

I am a recent immigrant who moved here as a teenager. All my peers from back home ( all from UMC homes) who moved here before 25 make 200k with the exception of PhD holders in academia and myself ( I stayed home for almost a decade).

Lawyers, doctors, engineers, public accountants, some pharmacists, some specialist nurses 15-20 years into their careers usually make 200k.

PP is talking generalities, and she will know when to make exceptions to her rule. But at 43, if you come from an UMC background, your only excuse for not making 200k should be that it's not that important to you.

If it's important to PP, why should she not require it from a partner?

Some of you think women should get married to any Tom or Dick who shows up. It's better to be single than married to someone who does not share your worldview.

This is such a pervasive problem. Women should have exceptionally high standards but having any at all really triggers some DCUM posters.

A man married to an average woman gets— at least— $500,000 equivalent services of a surrogate and egg donor if they have two children.

A woman married to an average man gets less than nothing, because he is a net drain on her resources. Donor sperm is not especially costly.

If you’re not getting a top 10-15% man, you’re getting a bad deal.

bad math

How much do you think surrogacy and egg donation costs?

The math was off but not too far off. Surrogacy cost $150k; egg donation could be free but with select designer egg up $40k. The issue is not that but the wife also provides free labor for the totality of raising the children! It is a net drain on her time, more so than for men as they tend to underdeliver with household duties. There was in fact an economic research that women put in these duties over $100k/year in lost pension savings, career opportunities and free labor

The real issue is that women magically fail to count their half.

The child is half hers. The pregnancy is half hers. Raising children is half on her. Why are you using a cost basis of services provided to the third party? Does your chef eat with you? Does your housekeeper live in your house? Does your nanny have rights on the child? No. They deliver the service and leave. They don't consume half of it. They don't own half of it. And they certainly don't bother you with their opinions on how it ought to be done.

Ok, assume $300,000 plus designers eggs another $80,000, divide by two (since you’re on about it only being half his) and you’re still starting marriage with a dude who needs to bring an additional $200,000 (after taxes) into the marriage before you even hit zero. Most don’t.

Designer eggs? Are you really bringing designer-quality eggs to the table? If a standard 37-year old DCUM professional woman was a donor in a catalogue, no one would pick her. They don't pick them for the salary. I mean why not include a private jet and silk sheets while you're at it? Everyone totally gets that.

I sure was. Ivy League and healthy is what most people want in donor eggs.

But it’s still irrelevant. The question is whether marriage is a good deal for women. Most men aren’t coming to the table these days with $200,000 ($400,000 when you consider only half is hers) in after tax assets to contribute to start at level.

They start with youth, I think.

Nevertheless, your calculation is utterly at odds with reality. It is mostly women who initiate the marriage and children discussion, not men. Marriage must be pretty valuable to women to go after it so doggedly. Are they all misguided? Can you even put a price on what a good marriage brings? Who makes up the majority of single parents by choice, men or women?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And who are these men, exactly? If you took everyone I know from elementary school to a graduate degree and/or have worked with, maybe 4 or 5% hit it big. Meaning million dollar salaries or WSJ stories, etc. The rest have had mediocre to good careers.

So let me guess, that 4 or 5% magically married DCUM posters who are in shape and run around in yoga pants?

Are you asking about men who make over half a million with SAHM? Hedge fund managers, real estate developers, tech sales, partners at law firms, built and sold own businesses etc. but these men are fine with SAHM wives their marriages last until men cheat , on average

The worst are these 200k guys with wives who also make 200k. This is when the woman is exhausted to the brink of insanity as they tend to be cheap and controlling with resources on home aide and the wives are that cheaper “second shift”

I’m a $230K woman and although a second income would be nice I wouldn’t marry anyone who made less than me. I have made a ton of career mistakes so I figure any competent guy should be out earning me by now.

Exhibit A

Sorry this bothers you. But I’m highly educated, worked hard and sacrificed a lot to get to this income. And most of my female friends make more. So I figure any intelligent hard working guy from similar background could have done the same. If he didn’t something is wrong and we are not compatible.

That is like the top 1% of US salaries. What on earth do these people do? Everybody can't be a lawyer or hedge fund manager.

Why should she not require the top 1% if she grew up in these circles?

I am a recent immigrant who moved here as a teenager. All my peers from back home ( all from UMC homes) who moved here before 25 make 200k with the exception of PhD holders in academia and myself ( I stayed home for almost a decade).

Lawyers, doctors, engineers, public accountants, some pharmacists, some specialist nurses 15-20 years into their careers usually make 200k.

PP is talking generalities, and she will know when to make exceptions to her rule. But at 43, if you come from an UMC background, your only excuse for not making 200k should be that it's not that important to you.

If it's important to PP, why should she not require it from a partner?

Some of you think women should get married to any Tom or Dick who shows up. It's better to be single than married to someone who does not share your worldview.

This is such a pervasive problem. Women should have exceptionally high standards but having any at all really triggers some DCUM posters.

A man married to an average woman gets— at least— $500,000 equivalent services of a surrogate and egg donor if they have two children.

A woman married to an average man gets less than nothing, because he is a net drain on her resources. Donor sperm is not especially costly.

If you’re not getting a top 10-15% man, you’re getting a bad deal.

bad math

How much do you think surrogacy and egg donation costs?

The math was off but not too far off. Surrogacy cost $150k; egg donation could be free but with select designer egg up $40k. The issue is not that but the wife also provides free labor for the totality of raising the children! It is a net drain on her time, more so than for men as they tend to underdeliver with household duties. There was in fact an economic research that women put in these duties over $100k/year in lost pension savings, career opportunities and free labor

The real issue is that women magically fail to count their half.

The child is half hers. The pregnancy is half hers. Raising children is half on her. Why are you using a cost basis of services provided to the third party? Does your chef eat with you? Does your housekeeper live in your house? Does your nanny have rights on the child? No. They deliver the service and leave. They don't consume half of it. They don't own half of it. And they certainly don't bother you with their opinions on how it ought to be done.

Ok, assume $300,000 plus designers eggs another $80,000, divide by two (since you’re on about it only being half his) and you’re still starting marriage with a dude who needs to bring an additional $200,000 (after taxes) into the marriage before you even hit zero. Most don’t.

Designer eggs? Are you really bringing designer-quality eggs to the table? If a standard 37-year old DCUM professional woman was a donor in a catalogue, no one would pick her. They don't pick them for the salary. I mean why not include a private jet and silk sheets while you're at it? Everyone totally gets that.

I sure was. Ivy League and healthy is what most people want in donor eggs.

But it’s still irrelevant. The question is whether marriage is a good deal for women. Most men aren’t coming to the table these days with $200,000 ($400,000 when you consider only half is hers) in after tax assets to contribute to start at level.

They start with youth, I think.

Nevertheless, your calculation is utterly at odds with reality. It is mostly women who initiate the marriage and children discussion, not men. Marriage must be pretty valuable to women to go after it so doggedly. Are they all misguided? Can you even put a price on what a good marriage brings? Who makes up the majority of single parents by choice, men or women?

Men overwhelmingly still propose and initiate marriages— I don’t know where you’re getting your idea that women “pursue it doggedly”. Men also get the disproportion benefits of marriage— approximately $200,000 in free services as discussed, and they also live longer if they’re married. Women, by contrast, have a decreased life expectancy if they marry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And who are these men, exactly? If you took everyone I know from elementary school to a graduate degree and/or have worked with, maybe 4 or 5% hit it big. Meaning million dollar salaries or WSJ stories, etc. The rest have had mediocre to good careers.

So let me guess, that 4 or 5% magically married DCUM posters who are in shape and run around in yoga pants?

Are you asking about men who make over half a million with SAHM? Hedge fund managers, real estate developers, tech sales, partners at law firms, built and sold own businesses etc. but these men are fine with SAHM wives their marriages last until men cheat , on average

The worst are these 200k guys with wives who also make 200k. This is when the woman is exhausted to the brink of insanity as they tend to be cheap and controlling with resources on home aide and the wives are that cheaper “second shift”

I’m a $230K woman and although a second income would be nice I wouldn’t marry anyone who made less than me. I have made a ton of career mistakes so I figure any competent guy should be out earning me by now.

Exhibit A

Sorry this bothers you. But I’m highly educated, worked hard and sacrificed a lot to get to this income. And most of my female friends make more. So I figure any intelligent hard working guy from similar background could have done the same. If he didn’t something is wrong and we are not compatible.

That is like the top 1% of US salaries. What on earth do these people do? Everybody can't be a lawyer or hedge fund manager.

Why should she not require the top 1% if she grew up in these circles?

I am a recent immigrant who moved here as a teenager. All my peers from back home ( all from UMC homes) who moved here before 25 make 200k with the exception of PhD holders in academia and myself ( I stayed home for almost a decade).

Lawyers, doctors, engineers, public accountants, some pharmacists, some specialist nurses 15-20 years into their careers usually make 200k.

PP is talking generalities, and she will know when to make exceptions to her rule. But at 43, if you come from an UMC background, your only excuse for not making 200k should be that it's not that important to you.

If it's important to PP, why should she not require it from a partner?

Some of you think women should get married to any Tom or Dick who shows up. It's better to be single than married to someone who does not share your worldview.

This is such a pervasive problem. Women should have exceptionally high standards but having any at all really triggers some DCUM posters.

A man married to an average woman gets— at least— $500,000 equivalent services of a surrogate and egg donor if they have two children.

A woman married to an average man gets less than nothing, because he is a net drain on her resources. Donor sperm is not especially costly.

If you’re not getting a top 10-15% man, you’re getting a bad deal.

bad math

How much do you think surrogacy and egg donation costs?

The math was off but not too far off. Surrogacy cost $150k; egg donation could be free but with select designer egg up $40k. The issue is not that but the wife also provides free labor for the totality of raising the children! It is a net drain on her time, more so than for men as they tend to underdeliver with household duties. There was in fact an economic research that women put in these duties over $100k/year in lost pension savings, career opportunities and free labor

The real issue is that women magically fail to count their half.

The child is half hers. The pregnancy is half hers. Raising children is half on her. Why are you using a cost basis of services provided to the third party? Does your chef eat with you? Does your housekeeper live in your house? Does your nanny have rights on the child? No. They deliver the service and leave. They don't consume half of it. They don't own half of it. And they certainly don't bother you with their opinions on how it ought to be done.

Ok, assume $300,000 plus designers eggs another $80,000, divide by two (since you’re on about it only being half his) and you’re still starting marriage with a dude who needs to bring an additional $200,000 (after taxes) into the marriage before you even hit zero. Most don’t.

Designer eggs? Are you really bringing designer-quality eggs to the table? If a standard 37-year old DCUM professional woman was a donor in a catalogue, no one would pick her. They don't pick them for the salary. I mean why not include a private jet and silk sheets while you're at it? Everyone totally gets that.

I sure was. Ivy League and healthy is what most people want in donor eggs.

But it’s still irrelevant. The question is whether marriage is a good deal for women. Most men aren’t coming to the table these days with $200,000 ($400,000 when you consider only half is hers) in after tax assets to contribute to start at level.

They start with youth, I think.

Nevertheless, your calculation is utterly at odds with reality. It is mostly women who initiate the marriage and children discussion, not men. Marriage must be pretty valuable to women to go after it so doggedly. Are they all misguided? Can you even put a price on what a good marriage brings? Who makes up the majority of single parents by choice, men or women?

Men overwhelmingly still propose and initiate marriages— I don’t know where you’re getting your idea that women “pursue it doggedly”. Men also get the disproportion benefits of marriage— approximately $200,000 in free services as discussed, and they also live longer if they’re married. Women, by contrast, have a decreased life expectancy if they marry.

Yeah well single mothers have a lower life expectancy than both of them. So if you want kids, get married.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And who are these men, exactly? If you took everyone I know from elementary school to a graduate degree and/or have worked with, maybe 4 or 5% hit it big. Meaning million dollar salaries or WSJ stories, etc. The rest have had mediocre to good careers.

So let me guess, that 4 or 5% magically married DCUM posters who are in shape and run around in yoga pants?

Are you asking about men who make over half a million with SAHM? Hedge fund managers, real estate developers, tech sales, partners at law firms, built and sold own businesses etc. but these men are fine with SAHM wives their marriages last until men cheat , on average

The worst are these 200k guys with wives who also make 200k. This is when the woman is exhausted to the brink of insanity as they tend to be cheap and controlling with resources on home aide and the wives are that cheaper “second shift”

I’m a $230K woman and although a second income would be nice I wouldn’t marry anyone who made less than me. I have made a ton of career mistakes so I figure any competent guy should be out earning me by now.

Exhibit A

Sorry this bothers you. But I’m highly educated, worked hard and sacrificed a lot to get to this income. And most of my female friends make more. So I figure any intelligent hard working guy from similar background could have done the same. If he didn’t something is wrong and we are not compatible.

That is like the top 1% of US salaries. What on earth do these people do? Everybody can't be a lawyer or hedge fund manager.

Why should she not require the top 1% if she grew up in these circles?

I am a recent immigrant who moved here as a teenager. All my peers from back home ( all from UMC homes) who moved here before 25 make 200k with the exception of PhD holders in academia and myself ( I stayed home for almost a decade).

Lawyers, doctors, engineers, public accountants, some pharmacists, some specialist nurses 15-20 years into their careers usually make 200k.

PP is talking generalities, and she will know when to make exceptions to her rule. But at 43, if you come from an UMC background, your only excuse for not making 200k should be that it's not that important to you.

If it's important to PP, why should she not require it from a partner?

Some of you think women should get married to any Tom or Dick who shows up. It's better to be single than married to someone who does not share your worldview.

This is such a pervasive problem. Women should have exceptionally high standards but having any at all really triggers some DCUM posters.

A man married to an average woman gets— at least— $500,000 equivalent services of a surrogate and egg donor if they have two children.

A woman married to an average man gets less than nothing, because he is a net drain on her resources. Donor sperm is not especially costly.

If you’re not getting a top 10-15% man, you’re getting a bad deal.

bad math

How much do you think surrogacy and egg donation costs?

The math was off but not too far off. Surrogacy cost $150k; egg donation could be free but with select designer egg up $40k. The issue is not that but the wife also provides free labor for the totality of raising the children! It is a net drain on her time, more so than for men as they tend to underdeliver with household duties. There was in fact an economic research that women put in these duties over $100k/year in lost pension savings, career opportunities and free labor

The real issue is that women magically fail to count their half.

The child is half hers. The pregnancy is half hers. Raising children is half on her. Why are you using a cost basis of services provided to the third party? Does your chef eat with you? Does your housekeeper live in your house? Does your nanny have rights on the child? No. They deliver the service and leave. They don't consume half of it. They don't own half of it. And they certainly don't bother you with their opinions on how it ought to be done.

Ok, assume $300,000 plus designers eggs another $80,000, divide by two (since you’re on about it only being half his) and you’re still starting marriage with a dude who needs to bring an additional $200,000 (after taxes) into the marriage before you even hit zero. Most don’t.

Designer eggs? Are you really bringing designer-quality eggs to the table? If a standard 37-year old DCUM professional woman was a donor in a catalogue, no one would pick her. They don't pick them for the salary. I mean why not include a private jet and silk sheets while you're at it? Everyone totally gets that.

I sure was. Ivy League and healthy is what most people want in donor eggs.

But it’s still irrelevant. The question is whether marriage is a good deal for women. Most men aren’t coming to the table these days with $200,000 ($400,000 when you consider only half is hers) in after tax assets to contribute to start at level.

They start with youth, I think.

Nevertheless, your calculation is utterly at odds with reality. It is mostly women who initiate the marriage and children discussion, not men. Marriage must be pretty valuable to women to go after it so doggedly. Are they all misguided? Can you even put a price on what a good marriage brings? Who makes up the majority of single parents by choice, men or women?

Men overwhelmingly still propose and initiate marriages— I don’t know where you’re getting your idea that women “pursue it doggedly”. Men also get the disproportion benefits of marriage— approximately $200,000 in free services as discussed, and they also live longer if they’re married. Women, by contrast, have a decreased life expectancy if they marry.

From the abundance of relationship advice along the lines of "how to make him propose", none of it directed at men.

I don't agree with your calculation simply because there is no need for an average man to use a surrogate since cheaper options are freely available. Besides, women decide how many children a couple will have, not men. It seems to me women are voluntarily going into the process that you claim is a bad deal for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A better title for this post would be “bad marriage is a bad deal.” Good marriage is a good deal!

Why are women healthier outside of marriage?

Well, husband, kids, family household, in-laws etc add lot of stress and work to a woman's life. Just pregnancy, labor and breastfeeding takes large toll on maternal health. Raising infants and toddlers is hard work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And who are these men, exactly? If you took everyone I know from elementary school to a graduate degree and/or have worked with, maybe 4 or 5% hit it big. Meaning million dollar salaries or WSJ stories, etc. The rest have had mediocre to good careers.

So let me guess, that 4 or 5% magically married DCUM posters who are in shape and run around in yoga pants?

Are you asking about men who make over half a million with SAHM? Hedge fund managers, real estate developers, tech sales, partners at law firms, built and sold own businesses etc. but these men are fine with SAHM wives their marriages last until men cheat , on average

The worst are these 200k guys with wives who also make 200k. This is when the woman is exhausted to the brink of insanity as they tend to be cheap and controlling with resources on home aide and the wives are that cheaper “second shift”

I’m a $230K woman and although a second income would be nice I wouldn’t marry anyone who made less than me. I have made a ton of career mistakes so I figure any competent guy should be out earning me by now.

Exhibit A

Sorry this bothers you. But I’m highly educated, worked hard and sacrificed a lot to get to this income. And most of my female friends make more. So I figure any intelligent hard working guy from similar background could have done the same. If he didn’t something is wrong and we are not compatible.

That is like the top 1% of US salaries. What on earth do these people do? Everybody can't be a lawyer or hedge fund manager.

Why should she not require the top 1% if she grew up in these circles?

I am a recent immigrant who moved here as a teenager. All my peers from back home ( all from UMC homes) who moved here before 25 make 200k with the exception of PhD holders in academia and myself ( I stayed home for almost a decade).

Lawyers, doctors, engineers, public accountants, some pharmacists, some specialist nurses 15-20 years into their careers usually make 200k.

PP is talking generalities, and she will know when to make exceptions to her rule. But at 43, if you come from an UMC background, your only excuse for not making 200k should be that it's not that important to you.

If it's important to PP, why should she not require it from a partner?

Some of you think women should get married to any Tom or Dick who shows up. It's better to be single than married to someone who does not share your worldview.

This is such a pervasive problem. Women should have exceptionally high standards but having any at all really triggers some DCUM posters.

A man married to an average woman gets— at least— $500,000 equivalent services of a surrogate and egg donor if they have two children.

A woman married to an average man gets less than nothing, because he is a net drain on her resources. Donor sperm is not especially costly.

If you’re not getting a top 10-15% man, you’re getting a bad deal.

bad math

How much do you think surrogacy and egg donation costs?

The math was off but not too far off. Surrogacy cost $150k; egg donation could be free but with select designer egg up $40k. The issue is not that but the wife also provides free labor for the totality of raising the children! It is a net drain on her time, more so than for men as they tend to underdeliver with household duties. There was in fact an economic research that women put in these duties over $100k/year in lost pension savings, career opportunities and free labor

The real issue is that women magically fail to count their half.

The child is half hers. The pregnancy is half hers. Raising children is half on her. Why are you using a cost basis of services provided to the third party? Does your chef eat with you? Does your housekeeper live in your house? Does your nanny have rights on the child? No. They deliver the service and leave. They don't consume half of it. They don't own half of it. And they certainly don't bother you with their opinions on how it ought to be done.

Ok, assume $300,000 plus designers eggs another $80,000, divide by two (since you’re on about it only being half his) and you’re still starting marriage with a dude who needs to bring an additional $200,000 (after taxes) into the marriage before you even hit zero. Most don’t.

Designer eggs? Are you really bringing designer-quality eggs to the table? If a standard 37-year old DCUM professional woman was a donor in a catalogue, no one would pick her. They don't pick them for the salary. I mean why not include a private jet and silk sheets while you're at it? Everyone totally gets that.

I sure was. Ivy League and healthy is what most people want in donor eggs.

But it’s still irrelevant. The question is whether marriage is a good deal for women. Most men aren’t coming to the table these days with $200,000 ($400,000 when you consider only half is hers) in after tax assets to contribute to start at level.

They start with youth, I think.

Nevertheless, your calculation is utterly at odds with reality. It is mostly women who initiate the marriage and children discussion, not men. Marriage must be pretty valuable to women to go after it so doggedly. Are they all misguided? Can you even put a price on what a good marriage brings? Who makes up the majority of single parents by choice, men or women?

Men overwhelmingly still propose and initiate marriages— I don’t know where you’re getting your idea that women “pursue it doggedly”. Men also get the disproportion benefits of marriage— approximately $200,000 in free services as discussed, and they also live longer if they’re married. Women, by contrast, have a decreased life expectancy if they marry.

From the abundance of relationship advice along the lines of "how to make him propose", none of it directed at men.

I don't agree with your calculation simply because there is no need for an average man to use a surrogate since cheaper options are freely available. Besides, women decide how many children a couple will have, not men. It seems to me women are voluntarily going into the process that you claim is a bad deal for them.

Women are nature driven to get pregnant just as men to have sex. It's totally insane desire when I was in my 20s: it was painful even to look at other young mothers with babies. I wanted to be mother so badly!My brain was literally numb and I was only driven by whats between my legs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wome in traditional marriages are the happiest. It’s the only way to do marriage.

I am divorced and agree…but most men now (and in the last 15 years) want a dual income household. So, marriage is a bad deal for the woman.

Np, divorced and also agree that marriage is a bad deal if the woman has to work. There was zero benefit for me in my marriage but I was too young to realize it. Since I got so little out out of it, transitioning to single life was seamless for me but extraordinarily difficult for my ex. I can't imagine a scenario where I would remarry. I love my peace too much.

Ditto.