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:This thread is so depressing.

I actually find it reassuring! I see myself in a lot of these responses.

Yeah, I don’t find it depressing at all. I’m happily married and am positive I’ll never divorce. But if I were to lose DH somehow (I’m in my early 40s) I wouldn’t remarry. I’m done having kids; my kids are nearly grown; I’m assuming I’d be financially stable. When a marriage is good, it provides a wonderful sense of peace and stability during those years when it would be hard to do everything alone. When those years are over for me, I’ll still enjoy the love and companionship of DH. But if I didn’t have him, I wouldn’t need that guarantee of stability—I’d have it on my own. Many women are now independent enough that a bad marriage isn’t necessary for economic stability, particularly after they’re done raising kids. And that’s a good thing!

If you “lost” your H, I’m guessing you mean if he died, you can’t marry. You would lose his social security.

My MIL lives in an over 55 community near the beach. They call it sin city. None of the women can marry because they lose all their benefits.

What a weird statement. I have my own Social Security and my own retirement savings. I’ve worked full time since graduation.

You get social security from the time they die to help raise your children. You don’t get social security until you retire.

Okay but likely she would also get life insurance money, and she has her own job. Most women now aren’t planning to depend on their DH’s social security.

Many people are SAHM’s. Life insurance is short lived. Many women are under employed. Many men have retirements that go away when you marry. You seem to have the inability to see past your own nose.

Many people now are not SAHMs. They have their own retirements. There is literally no comparison to a divorced woman now in her 40s and a divorced woman who is older by 15 years or more.

50% of women are NOT head of household.

“While 71% of moms do work outside of the home, 29% are staying home. That number is up 6% from 1999.”

71 percent of women are not SAHMs—they have their own retirement. Your example may be the norm 15-20 years ago…it is not the case now. Most women have their own retirement and income.

70% does not mean they have jobs that make enough money to support a family/themselves, or have retirement.

Only 46% of working women have retirements, now not 15 years ago. The pandemic has hit women’s retirements too.

Retirement accounts are up during a pandemic. Every working woman I know can survive on their own. Stop spewing ridiculous assumptions from 20 years ago.

It shows your friendship group is not diverse. That’s sad and pathetic.

Who cares even if you can “afford” to support yourself why would you say no to $2K/ mth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m 46. Divorced at 42, two teenagers and 50/50 custody with their local dad. I have wanted to get remarried for the secure feeling of a spouse and partner to navigate life with. But reading these comments, it seems like some want what I have -living independently with my kids and spending time with my lovely boyfriend and at our separate homes. Maybe this will be sufficient, emotionally. Especially since he told me he doesn’t want to get married- so kind of a forgone conclusion but I was thinking about breaking up with him over it. I’m not “high worth individual” as others have mentioned (is this the high brow way of saying rich?), just a regular person.

To me this is the saddest part of being post divorce in middle age—nobody wants a real commitment, just more broken and halfway solutions.

Being committed and not married is not 1/2 way.

+1 agree

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:This thread is so depressing.

I actually find it reassuring! I see myself in a lot of these responses.

Yeah, I don’t find it depressing at all. I’m happily married and am positive I’ll never divorce. But if I were to lose DH somehow (I’m in my early 40s) I wouldn’t remarry. I’m done having kids; my kids are nearly grown; I’m assuming I’d be financially stable. When a marriage is good, it provides a wonderful sense of peace and stability during those years when it would be hard to do everything alone. When those years are over for me, I’ll still enjoy the love and companionship of DH. But if I didn’t have him, I wouldn’t need that guarantee of stability—I’d have it on my own. Many women are now independent enough that a bad marriage isn’t necessary for economic stability, particularly after they’re done raising kids. And that’s a good thing!

If you “lost” your H, I’m guessing you mean if he died, you can’t marry. You would lose his social security.

My MIL lives in an over 55 community near the beach. They call it sin city. None of the women can marry because they lose all their benefits.

What a weird statement. I have my own Social Security and my own retirement savings. I’ve worked full time since graduation.

You get social security from the time they die to help raise your children. You don’t get social security until you retire.

Okay but likely she would also get life insurance money, and she has her own job. Most women now aren’t planning to depend on their DH’s social security.

Many people are SAHM’s. Life insurance is short lived. Many women are under employed. Many men have retirements that go away when you marry. You seem to have the inability to see past your own nose.

Many people now are not SAHMs. They have their own retirements. There is literally no comparison to a divorced woman now in her 40s and a divorced woman who is older by 15 years or more.

50% of women are NOT head of household.

“While 71% of moms do work outside of the home, 29% are staying home. That number is up 6% from 1999.”

71 percent of women are not SAHMs—they have their own retirement. Your example may be the norm 15-20 years ago…it is not the case now. Most women have their own retirement and income.

70% does not mean they have jobs that make enough money to support a family/themselves, or have retirement.

Only 46% of working women have retirements, now not 15 years ago. The pandemic has hit women’s retirements too.

Retirement accounts are up during a pandemic. Every working woman I know can survive on their own. Stop spewing ridiculous assumptions from 20 years ago.

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:This thread is so depressing.

I actually find it reassuring! I see myself in a lot of these responses.

Yeah, I don’t find it depressing at all. I’m happily married and am positive I’ll never divorce. But if I were to lose DH somehow (I’m in my early 40s) I wouldn’t remarry. I’m done having kids; my kids are nearly grown; I’m assuming I’d be financially stable. When a marriage is good, it provides a wonderful sense of peace and stability during those years when it would be hard to do everything alone. When those years are over for me, I’ll still enjoy the love and companionship of DH. But if I didn’t have him, I wouldn’t need that guarantee of stability—I’d have it on my own. Many women are now independent enough that a bad marriage isn’t necessary for economic stability, particularly after they’re done raising kids. And that’s a good thing!

If you “lost” your H, I’m guessing you mean if he died, you can’t marry. You would lose his social security.

My MIL lives in an over 55 community near the beach. They call it sin city. None of the women can marry because they lose all their benefits.

What a weird statement. I have my own Social Security and my own retirement savings. I’ve worked full time since graduation.

You get social security from the time they die to help raise your children. You don’t get social security until you retire.

Okay but likely she would also get life insurance money, and she has her own job. Most women now aren’t planning to depend on their DH’s social security.

Many people are SAHM’s. Life insurance is short lived. Many women are under employed. Many men have retirements that go away when you marry. You seem to have the inability to see past your own nose.

Many people now are not SAHMs. They have their own retirements. There is literally no comparison to a divorced woman now in her 40s and a divorced woman who is older by 15 years or more.

50% of women are NOT head of household.

“While 71% of moms do work outside of the home, 29% are staying home. That number is up 6% from 1999.”

71 percent of women are not SAHMs—they have their own retirement. Your example may be the norm 15-20 years ago…it is not the case now. Most women have their own retirement and income.

70% does not mean they have jobs that make enough money to support a family/themselves, or have retirement.

Only 46% of working women have retirements, now not 15 years ago. The pandemic has hit women’s retirements too.

Retirement accounts are up during a pandemic. Every working woman I know can survive on their own. Stop spewing ridiculous assumptions from 20 years ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is so depressing.

I actually find it reassuring! I see myself in a lot of these responses.

Yeah, I don’t find it depressing at all. I’m happily married and am positive I’ll never divorce. But if I were to lose DH somehow (I’m in my early 40s) I wouldn’t remarry. I’m done having kids; my kids are nearly grown; I’m assuming I’d be financially stable. When a marriage is good, it provides a wonderful sense of peace and stability during those years when it would be hard to do everything alone. When those years are over for me, I’ll still enjoy the love and companionship of DH. But if I didn’t have him, I wouldn’t need that guarantee of stability—I’d have it on my own. Many women are now independent enough that a bad marriage isn’t necessary for economic stability, particularly after they’re done raising kids. And that’s a good thing!

If you “lost” your H, I’m guessing you mean if he died, you can’t marry. You would lose his social security.

My MIL lives in an over 55 community near the beach. They call it sin city. None of the women can marry because they lose all their benefits.

What a weird statement. I have my own Social Security and my own retirement savings. I’ve worked full time since graduation.

You get social security from the time they die to help raise your children. You don’t get social security until you retire.

Okay but likely she would also get life insurance money, and she has her own job. Most women now aren’t planning to depend on their DH’s social security.

Many people are SAHM’s. Life insurance is short lived. Many women are under employed. Many men have retirements that go away when you marry. You seem to have the inability to see past your own nose.

Many people now are not SAHMs. They have their own retirements. There is literally no comparison to a divorced woman now in her 40s and a divorced woman who is older by 15 years or more.

50% of women are NOT head of household.

“While 71% of moms do work outside of the home, 29% are staying home. That number is up 6% from 1999.”

71 percent of women are not SAHMs—they have their own retirement. Your example may be the norm 15-20 years ago…it is not the case now. Most women have their own retirement and income.

70% does not mean they have jobs that make enough money to support a family/themselves, or have retirement.

Only 46% of working women have retirements, now not 15 years ago. The pandemic has hit women’s retirements too.

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Woman here. Our marriage was a mistake from the beginning. A horrible 10 years. I regret not getting out immediately—I was strongly considering it. I do not feel I was ever really married. I would never ever do it again. I saw no advantage. Only one-sided sacrifice on my side with nothing in return. It was a complete waste and see no reason why another marriage at my age (mid 40s) would be worth it.


You have posted about this before. Of all the posts on this thread, you sound just angry and bitter. Therapy might help you accept the past and move on, and figure out your role in it. Marriage didn’t just happen to you - you dated first, got to know your spouse and made lots of decisions to get there. It’s hard to believe that the day after you got married your spouse complete dropped the mask and became someone else. Based on your posts, the marriage was literally terrible from day one. How does that even happen?


It happened because we were long distance for a year. I wanted to break up. He wanted to her married. I had strong family pressure. I was in my early 30s and my family thought I was “old.” I am convinced if long distance never happened we would have never gotten married (we were long distance and had to make a decision. My lease was ending…were we going to do another year long distance? No. I had a lot of pressure. I wanted to cancel the engagement all the way up to the altar: I was told that would be a mistake. Well, my gut was right. But I caved to pressure ….that kind of pressure makes you question yourself.

We did not have sex on our honeymoon or hardly at all ever…yes, it was bad and a mistake from day one. We were never really emotionally or physically connected.


Most of this feels eerily familiar for me, except I called off the engagement. Got a lot of sh*t for it from his friends (none from my family, surprisingly), but I didn't see the point of pressing through with the wedding just to divorce a couple of years later. We're both much better off without each other.


You did it right. I wanted our early (again told to stay and I did not know what I was doing). I was married for 10 years. Such a waste of time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is so depressing.

I actually find it reassuring! I see myself in a lot of these responses.

Yeah, I don’t find it depressing at all. I’m happily married and am positive I’ll never divorce. But if I were to lose DH somehow (I’m in my early 40s) I wouldn’t remarry. I’m done having kids; my kids are nearly grown; I’m assuming I’d be financially stable. When a marriage is good, it provides a wonderful sense of peace and stability during those years when it would be hard to do everything alone. When those years are over for me, I’ll still enjoy the love and companionship of DH. But if I didn’t have him, I wouldn’t need that guarantee of stability—I’d have it on my own. Many women are now independent enough that a bad marriage isn’t necessary for economic stability, particularly after they’re done raising kids. And that’s a good thing!

If you “lost” your H, I’m guessing you mean if he died, you can’t marry. You would lose his social security.

My MIL lives in an over 55 community near the beach. They call it sin city. None of the women can marry because they lose all their benefits.

What a weird statement. I have my own Social Security and my own retirement savings. I’ve worked full time since graduation.

You get social security from the time they die to help raise your children. You don’t get social security until you retire.

Okay but likely she would also get life insurance money, and she has her own job. Most women now aren’t planning to depend on their DH’s social security.

Many people are SAHM’s. Life insurance is short lived. Many women are under employed. Many men have retirements that go away when you marry. You seem to have the inability to see past your own nose.

Many people now are not SAHMs. They have their own retirements. There is literally no comparison to a divorced woman now in her 40s and a divorced woman who is older by 15 years or more.

50% of women are NOT head of household.

I only know one SAHM. Every woman I know otherwise has worked her entire adult life. There are not that many stay at home moms 40-45. Women work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is so depressing.

I actually find it reassuring! I see myself in a lot of these responses.

Yeah, I don’t find it depressing at all. I’m happily married and am positive I’ll never divorce. But if I were to lose DH somehow (I’m in my early 40s) I wouldn’t remarry. I’m done having kids; my kids are nearly grown; I’m assuming I’d be financially stable. When a marriage is good, it provides a wonderful sense of peace and stability during those years when it would be hard to do everything alone. When those years are over for me, I’ll still enjoy the love and companionship of DH. But if I didn’t have him, I wouldn’t need that guarantee of stability—I’d have it on my own. Many women are now independent enough that a bad marriage isn’t necessary for economic stability, particularly after they’re done raising kids. And that’s a good thing!

If you “lost” your H, I’m guessing you mean if he died, you can’t marry. You would lose his social security.

My MIL lives in an over 55 community near the beach. They call it sin city. None of the women can marry because they lose all their benefits.

What a weird statement. I have my own Social Security and my own retirement savings. I’ve worked full time since graduation.

You get social security from the time they die to help raise your children. You don’t get social security until you retire.

Okay but likely she would also get life insurance money, and she has her own job. Most women now aren’t planning to depend on their DH’s social security.

Many people are SAHM’s. Life insurance is short lived. Many women are under employed. Many men have retirements that go away when you marry. You seem to have the inability to see past your own nose.

Many people now are not SAHMs. They have their own retirements. There is literally no comparison to a divorced woman now in her 40s and a divorced woman who is older by 15 years or more.

50% of women are NOT head of household.

“While 71% of moms do work outside of the home, 29% are staying home. That number is up 6% from 1999.”

71 percent of women are not SAHMs—they have their own retirement. Your example may be the norm 15-20 years ago…it is not the case now. Most women have their own retirement and income.

Anonymous wrote:Who is the church lady on here condemning posters discussing divorce and remarriage? Get lost curmudgeon!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is so depressing.

I actually find it reassuring! I see myself in a lot of these responses.

Yeah, I don’t find it depressing at all. I’m happily married and am positive I’ll never divorce. But if I were to lose DH somehow (I’m in my early 40s) I wouldn’t remarry. I’m done having kids; my kids are nearly grown; I’m assuming I’d be financially stable. When a marriage is good, it provides a wonderful sense of peace and stability during those years when it would be hard to do everything alone. When those years are over for me, I’ll still enjoy the love and companionship of DH. But if I didn’t have him, I wouldn’t need that guarantee of stability—I’d have it on my own. Many women are now independent enough that a bad marriage isn’t necessary for economic stability, particularly after they’re done raising kids. And that’s a good thing!

If you “lost” your H, I’m guessing you mean if he died, you can’t marry. You would lose his social security.

My MIL lives in an over 55 community near the beach. They call it sin city. None of the women can marry because they lose all their benefits.

What a weird statement. I have my own Social Security and my own retirement savings. I’ve worked full time since graduation.

You get social security from the time they die to help raise your children. You don’t get social security until you retire.

Okay but likely she would also get life insurance money, and she has her own job. Most women now aren’t planning to depend on their DH’s social security.

Many people are SAHM’s. Life insurance is short lived. Many women are under employed. Many men have retirements that go away when you marry. You seem to have the inability to see past your own nose.

Many people now are not SAHMs. They have their own retirements. There is literally no comparison to a divorced woman now in her 40s and a divorced woman who is older by 15 years or more.

50% of women are NOT head of household.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m 46. Divorced at 42, two teenagers and 50/50 custody with their local dad. I have wanted to get remarried for the secure feeling of a spouse and partner to navigate life with. But reading these comments, it seems like some want what I have -living independently with my kids and spending time with my lovely boyfriend and at our separate homes. Maybe this will be sufficient, emotionally. Especially since he told me he doesn’t want to get married- so kind of a forgone conclusion but I was thinking about breaking up with him over it. I’m not “high worth individual” as others have mentioned (is this the high brow way of saying rich?), just a regular person.

To me this is the saddest part of being post divorce in middle age—nobody wants a real commitment, just more broken and halfway solutions.

Being committed and not married is not 1/2 way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is so depressing.

I actually find it reassuring! I see myself in a lot of these responses.

Yeah, I don’t find it depressing at all. I’m happily married and am positive I’ll never divorce. But if I were to lose DH somehow (I’m in my early 40s) I wouldn’t remarry. I’m done having kids; my kids are nearly grown; I’m assuming I’d be financially stable. When a marriage is good, it provides a wonderful sense of peace and stability during those years when it would be hard to do everything alone. When those years are over for me, I’ll still enjoy the love and companionship of DH. But if I didn’t have him, I wouldn’t need that guarantee of stability—I’d have it on my own. Many women are now independent enough that a bad marriage isn’t necessary for economic stability, particularly after they’re done raising kids. And that’s a good thing!

If you “lost” your H, I’m guessing you mean if he died, you can’t marry. You would lose his social security.

My MIL lives in an over 55 community near the beach. They call it sin city. None of the women can marry because they lose all their benefits.

What a weird statement. I have my own Social Security and my own retirement savings. I’ve worked full time since graduation.

You get social security from the time they die to help raise your children. You don’t get social security until you retire.

Okay but likely she would also get life insurance money, and she has her own job. Most women now aren’t planning to depend on their DH’s social security.

Many people are SAHM’s. Life insurance is short lived. Many women are under employed. Many men have retirements that go away when you marry. You seem to have the inability to see past your own nose.

Many people now are not SAHMs. They have their own retirements. There is literally no comparison to a divorced woman now in her 40s and a divorced woman who is older by 15 years or more.

50% of women are NOT head of household.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m 46. Divorced at 42, two teenagers and 50/50 custody with their local dad. I have wanted to get remarried for the secure feeling of a spouse and partner to navigate life with. But reading these comments, it seems like some want what I have -living independently with my kids and spending time with my lovely boyfriend and at our separate homes. Maybe this will be sufficient, emotionally. Especially since he told me he doesn’t want to get married- so kind of a forgone conclusion but I was thinking about breaking up with him over it. I’m not “high worth individual” as others have mentioned (is this the high brow way of saying rich?), just a regular person.

To me this is the saddest part of being post divorce in middle age—nobody wants a real commitment, just more broken and halfway solutions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:42. 37. Because most men are problematic, and I am not sexually attracted to women.

If most men you meet are problematic, it is worth examining (i) the social and professional circles you frequent, and (ii) whether the problem is, in fact, you.