Why get married?

Reddit View
April 13, 2017
9 upvotes

I am 30, in a Ltr LDR. It's nice. It's healthy. But after being on here and lurking. A question pops up every now and then.

Why even get married in the first place? Are there any other benefits apart from sharing a house, joint income, passing your seed on (dunno if even a benefit).

What if a single or LTR person wants to make sure all the things involved before getting married. It doesn't get mentioned much on here. I'm curious to your opinions about your marriage and why took such a huge step.

Edit: posted another question 'why LDR?' for more background.


Post Information
Title Why get married?
Author Tampotissues
Upvotes 9
Comments 93
Date 13 April 2017 03:54 PM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit askMRP
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/206285
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/askMRP/comments/656bx8/why_get_married/
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
long term relationshipLDR
Comments

[–]nastynickdrRed Beret12 points13 points  (24 children) | Copy

Marriage is a bad deal for men nowadays. Period.

You can live together, have kids, joint income, be monogamous (or not) all while not being married.

[–]nonnimooseWoman, something something dark side1 point2 points  (22 children) | Copy

While it's true that you can have kids together without it, any woman that would bear a man's children without the benefit of marriage is either low quality or a fool.

[–]PersaeusRed Beret2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

i am still waiting for the RP answer to question you pose . . . waiting

the only reason for a MAN to get married is to sire and raise his children; why?

  • raising children in a household with a stable dad and mom is best, in particular if dad is the captain
  • women by their nature seek commitment from the best AFBB male they can secure; and we all agree that marriage as an institution is biased towards women
  • a high value woman: one who you would want to contribute 1/2 the genetic input, help raise your prodigyprogeny, and who you would want to spend the next 20-30 years with knows that marriage is in her favor and won't settle for anything less

if you want to be the FAMILY alpha; you must grapple with the BURDEN OF PERFORMANCE at the highest difficulty level . . . sorry

edit, let's hope your progeny is a prodigy

[–]nastynickdrRed Beret3 points4 points  (18 children) | Copy

Bad deal for MEN

I could say the same for men: any men willing to risk 50% of his assets, having to pay alimony, and all other risks of marriage is either low quality or a fool. High quality men dont need to get married to have his needs met.

[–]nonnimooseWoman, something something dark side6 points7 points  (13 children) | Copy

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I stand by: If his needs include having children and he doesn't want to marry, he's got to do it with a low quality woman or a fool.

I wouldn't counsel my own daughter to have children out of wedlock, would you?

[–]nastynickdrRed Beret6 points7 points  (11 children) | Copy

Ah yeah, i would counsel my daughter to get married and my son to not get married

Good deal for women, bad deal for men

[–]unique_leek_critique0 points1 point  (10 children) | Copy

With that in mind, would you prefer your daughter marry a beta bucks?

[–]nonnimooseWoman, something something dark side1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Indeed, would he?

My wish for my own daughter is that she marry the same kind of guy as her father (my husband). A man that is capable of and willing to commit to leading a wife and family. A man that would support her decision, both financially and emotionally, to stay home with their children before they reach school age. A man with his own hobbies and interests that is supportive of hers. A man that she is head over heels in love with. A man that is deserving of the quality woman that she is.

[–]nastynickdrRed Beret0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy

Nah

The highest quality man she could land that would be willing to get married

[–]nonnimooseWoman, something something dark side2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy

And how high quality do you think that's going to be if all sons followed your own counsel? "You can live together, have kids, joint income, be monogamous (or not) all while not being married."

Believing this statement is true for a son but not for a daughter is the kind of illogic RP accuses women of.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

Believing this statement (son don't marry, daughter do marry) is true for a son but not for a daughter is the kind of illogic RP accuses women of

It's not illogical at all. Each sex has it's own imperative, and that is manifested in each sex having a different mating strategy.

Marriage as an institution is a result of the compromise of the male and female mating imperatives/strategy. If for the male, the risk out way the benefits, then it would be cruel and illogical to recommend such a strategy any further. The risk of financial ruin and parental alienation is out of balance for men.

For females they have a lot of power through the state and police (ie. misandrist family law and sexist policing practices (i.e Duluth model/ false allegations), so the female imperative is furthered through marriage. It's in a females best interest to get married.

For one imperative to succeed the other must be compromised... that is part of the RP praxology. This is what we are seeing in the marriage market place today. Men are not willing to compromise now that they know they are getting a raw deal.

Like the other posters I do recommend my daughters to get married. As their father I have to provide advice in her best interest.. not in the best interest of my future son-in-law.

If Father Rights groups get our way, a lot of the marriage discrepancies with regards to parental alienation will be less misandrist, which will make marriage more palatable to men.

[–]nonnimooseWoman, something something dark side0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Believing this statement (son don't marry, daughter do marry)

That wasn't the statement. This was the statement (emphasis mine).

"You can live together, HAVE KIDS, joint income, be monogamous (or not) all while not being married."

I would advise a woman AGAINST this. So far, no one here has come forth and said that this was a good idea for a woman - having kids without being married. A high quality woman who agrees to all of the above INCLUDING THE HAVING KIDS PART is a fool. (The only qualifier I have to that is that I'm talking specifically about the U.S. Cohabiting relationship norms and government policies in some other parts of the world render this viewpoint false.)

So, to say to a man "You can live together, HAVE KIDS, joint income, be monogamous (or not) all while not being married" is disingenuously leaving out the part that to HAVE KIDS in this scenario his mate will be either low quality or a fool. Scratch that - a fool is low quality, so his mate will be low quality period.

Yes, it is a huge risk for a man to get married given all the reasons already stated. But if he wants children and wants the mother of his children to be truly high quality, it's a risk he must take.

I could go on about how marrying and HAVING CHILDREN is a risk for women as well - but this isn't the place.

[–]nastynickdrRed Beret0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

Until law changes (if ever), marriages are bad for men. Period.

In the great majority of cases its the man that gets screwed in a failed marriage, not the woman. There are plenty of cases of men having to pay child support for kids from previous relationships of the woman he married, yet I have ever to see a case of a woman having to pay child support for kids that arent hers. (Equality huh?)

If you want to discuss about "equality" you are in the wrong place. Also you should refrain from making this "about you" (I know it must be hard, since AWALT), mods here dont like that at all.

And dont worry, theres plenty of high quality man willing to marry. Brad Pitt, George Clooney sure did. And im guessing there would be millions of women out there who would be willing to pop one or two of their kids out of wedlock.

[–]nonnimooseWoman, something something dark side3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy

Who is discussing equality?

I maintain that any woman who would agree to bear a man's children without the benefit of marriage is either foolish or low quality. Based on how you would counsel your own daughter it seems you agree.

The rest of your comment here is just your hamster trying to spin some sense into the the illogical notion that men should have children without marrying while women should only have children if they marry.

Good job throwing in AWALT and Brad Pitt to try and make it sound really RP, lol. Brad Pitt is available - maybe you can set him up with your daughter!

[–]Diff888-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Of course you wouldn't. She'll eventually get cash and prizes.

Interesting you picked you daughter to counsel. How about your son? Should he marry the shrew you hate. You'll be the domineering MIL. (How do I know? You're giving advice on a men's marriage site).

Lots of women want a quality man with or without marriage. DO. NOT. MARRY.

[–]FailingBillionaire0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

What do you think about Prenubs?

It would be a requirement if I ever were dumb enough to marry again. Do you think prenubs even out the "bad deal"?

Edit: I mean a professionally made one that gets renewed every couple of years.

[–]nastynickdrRed Beret0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

You´d have to check the laws of where you live, but there are lots of cases os prenups that get voided for reasons like "she was coerced into signing it" or whatever reasons.

[–]Squeezymypenisy0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

This would be something to ask family law attorneys.

[–]weakandsensitive0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

my buddy went through this.

pre-nups hold no water for the most part. what's important about a pre-nup is the willingness to sign.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Or a paid surrogate mom. This a new business in India

[–]Diff888-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

50% of births to women under 30 in 2013 were out of wedlock. (Wedlock...interesting word). Lots of Foolish women out there.

OP. Don't marry and don't let this woman plant the seed that marriage makes for quality.

Fuck the she moose.

[–]creating_my_life13 points14 points  (0 children) | Copy

I am 30, in a Ltr LDR.

There's no such thing as a long-distance LTR.

It's nice. It's healthy.

Keep telling yourself that.

Why even get married in the first place?

Most RP advice steers away from marriage. If I was younger knowing what I know now, I would not get married. Some MRP men are happily married.

Are there any other benefits

Lots of benefits for women. All risk for men.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy

First, I think it is important to dispel the myth that you are 100% protected by not getting married, and instead cohabiting with an LTR. First and foremost, if you have children and end the LTR, you are afforded no protection. And, often times non-married fathers receive worse treatment by the courts than married fathers. If you are not married to the mother of your children, there is no legal presumption that you are the father. Unless you are legally declared the father (placed on birth certificate, established paternity test, registry, etc.) you have no rights (not a 100% accurate statement, you may have rights but you are going to have to argue for them). Now, the courts will gladly establish paternity to make sure that you provide for the child, but until that happens the mother makes the decisions. I'm aware that even in marriage you can't be 100% sure the child is yours (AWALT and DNA isn't as accurate as most people think), so maybe that doesn't have a big impact on the decision.

Additionally, there are plenty of remedies for recovery for unmarried cohabitants. Cohabitation Agreements or other express contracts, implied contracts, joint ventures or partnerships, the theory of quantum meruit, unjust enrichment (big one, especially if you share property owned by you), constructive trusts, resulting trusts, and promissory estoppel. And those are only the ones I know about personally, an inventive attorney could probably find more methods of recovery.

An example is, you own a home. LTR shares the home with you. You decide to finish your basement. LTR contributes funds to the project. Project raises the value of your home. There is an argument for unjust enrichment, and a method for recovery.

Courts are recognizing these forms of recovery at an increasing rate due to the high number of couples who engage in LTRs instead of marriage (and previously as a sort of work around for same sex couples). You are lying to yourself if you believe that a strong public policy argument for marriage no longer exists. Laws and the courts make this very clear.

This being said, you should only get married if you want to. Weigh the pros and cons of marriage and long term cohabitation and choose whatever option you want. I chose marriage because I wanted to. I accept that my marriage could end in divorce (each marriage has its own fail rate, and not everyone is at 50%), and own my decision. The success of a marriage should not be defined by whether or not you divorce. You can have a successful marriage that ends in divorce, and unsuccessful marriages where the couple is still together.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

U beat me to making this point so I will agree with your statements. There are three ways the government can get involved in your life. Marriage, children, and allocation of property. Marriage is alimony so avoiding marriage avoids that but having a working wife mitigates that as well. Children are a financial burden in or out of marriage that u incur as a responsible father. State enforced child support and state enforced parental alienation at the woman's bequest is a huge risk that is mitigated by being childfree or by mrp strategy. Property in or out of marriage is another risk. There are tales on Mgtow sites of women that do short term relationships also to collect cash and prizes. Not as much as marriage but with turnover it adds up. Think daytrader vs long term investor in terms of how women use their hypergamistic strategy to accumulate while branch swinging.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Courts are recognizing these forms of recovery at an increasing rate due to the high number of couples who engage in LTRs instead of marriage (and previously as a sort of work around for same sex couples). You are lying to yourself if you believe that a strong public policy argument for marriage no longer exists. Laws and the courts make this very clear.

They're doing this because there's an attitude among women, and thus in society, that the "transactional" nature of the relationship between men and women must be preserved, no matter what the legalities look like. The transaction is

Woman provides sex. Man pays with money, attention, and time.

So if a man gets out of an LTR, just ends it, the woman and the courts will do all they can to find a way to make the man pay. Since the LTR is over, he cannot be made to pay with attention or time. So, the decision is that money will have to be the recompense. He must pay money to her for the privilege of once having gotten to fuck her on a regular basis.

While you were with her in the LTR, you paid: money, attention and time. To balm her heart, you must now be made to continue to pay, at least for a while.

Men wont' be allowed to leave relationships without paying.

[–]ReddJiveRed Beret2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

I may have said this here before, but as a martial artist grows in whatever his chosen style is he gets to the point where he sees it as expression (Bruce Lee). Meaning he sees the body as weaknesses and strenths. He sees the limited set of movements the body can do. He sees it all as one. Therefore the only difference between the styles is the manner and method of training.

As for marriage....you need to research more if you are asking this question. It varies on the man and where he sees his mission.

My personal view. No. there is no benefit in a modern society. Any benefit gained is essentially a business arrangement (tax breaks, health care, family discounts....). It kind of puts into perspective where society views marriage.

If the woman in my life wants to join my adventure she is welcome to do so. Rules apply so be on board with that. I don't need a legal document to make her. I would rather have loyalty. I know what I am saying in the face of hearing women aren't loyal....I argue then that you aren't doing it right.

Loyalty is a decision each day by you and her to stay the course. the concept I have rolled over in my mind is that you go through the RP process. You get to the point where you understand game, evolutionary psych, AWALT, AMALT, but you are not butt hurt about any of it. You realize that...it's just the way it is. The truth is known and....you know kung fu.

It's literally the truest version of DGAF and OI you can be. In this way you are not disparaging weaknesses nor pedestalizing strengths of the other.

It's your world.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

Marriage can be great when you're working together, make a great team, raising kids, and fucking frequently. But you don't need a piece of paper for that. And it requires enormous amounts of work to maintain your identity.

But if you're even considering marriage while in an LDR you're just a dumb shit who doesn't know what he doesn't know.

[–]Tampotissues0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I guess i asked the wrong question. Will make another post about LDR.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (10 children) | Copy

Call me an old fashioned blue pill piece of shit but there is not any benefit to man nor there should be any. The marriage is proposed by man to woman. What you the marriage implicitly says is:

I will physically protect you.

You will enjoy my company.

You enter my life style.

You can enjoy my guidance.

I will protect our kids.

I am giving you access to my resources.

It is a gift to you, no strings attached.


If you are with a woman and you have strong urge to give her everything above than go and propose.

If you are looking for benefits in marriage, well there are no benefits there. It is gift to her, no strings attached.

Is she worthy of that gift? That is an another question.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (8 children) | Copy

of course there are strings attached to the female even in a Disney princess fairy tale:

... fidelity, economic services to the family, popping out kids, and obedience.

[–]Luis_McLovin2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy

which sadly have been flying out the window in recent times

[–]weakandsensitive1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

have you seen the guys posting here in r/askmrp? the service, fidelity, and obedience applies to the top tier - not joe schlub who keep a job

[–]Luis_McLovin1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

mmm, yes the vast majority of people should not ever bother to marry.

only a small few get it right

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy

That is something she brings to the marriage if she wants. Yes.

However you can not demand it, nor enforce it.

Therefore your marriage proposal is a gift to her, no strings attached.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

That is something she brings to the marriage if she wants.... don't set such low standards for vetting a mate.

You demand it by vetting properly and you do enforce it with further commitment.

My marriage proposal is a gift to her indeed, because for my wife it was something she wanted.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

don't set such low standards for vetting a mate

Good point and well taken.

[–]nzdrummer0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

The marriage is proposed by man to woman

Except in most cases it isn't. The man has to give the perception of asking for her 'hand n marriage' but actually it is usually a goal that she wants which, if not given, will signify the end of the relationship.

[–]blarggggggggggg1 point2 points  (13 children) | Copy

Why? Cause you want to, I guess.

But think about it carefully - You are irrationally entering a contract with 50% failure rate, where you are likely to be bearing all the costs, while the other party will likely gain all the benefits.

You are entering a deal with an institution (govt. and family courts) that are unjust - you are selling yourself out that system and have no power against it, other than the amount of money you have and are willing to throw at it via family law attorneys.

I don't even need to be sexist or demonize women or mindlessly chant AWALT - what I have said above still stands. I'm sure there are still some women out there worthy of marrying. Some who want a relationship that celebrates and follows male/female polarity. That builds upon the strengths of each gender.

But with a legal contract, you need to remove emotion and look solely at risk/reward. Roll the dice if you want but very few would do so after an objective analysis. There is just no point for marriage.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (10 children) | Copy

50% failure rate, and that other 50%. How many of them lives of quiet desperation?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (9 children) | Copy

marriages don't fail. marriage itself is a currently a failure.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy

True. Accidentally Mentionned nihilism on this subject today. Everyone takes it to mean depressed existential crisis, instead of killing sacred cows that no longer provide milk.

Institution better suited to groups that starve when the plow horse stops working

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy

you didn't mention at work did you??

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

Dear god, none of my co workers have seen the Goonies, how in the hell would I talk about philosophy?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy

accidental vomit.

I almost said "that man is so blue, he will do what ever I say"

almost.

instead something like "Hmm, I will talk to him, it'll get done" came out.

but it was close

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy

Ha! I don't think they know what cuck means here, it would sound like I'm speaking gibberish.

Besides, don't you doctors use blue to describe someone about to die? It may have worked

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

sound like I'm speaking gibberish.

you mean like when you go troll on ppd?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Autism is the only language they can speak, and I'm getting rather fluent.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

no , its the ["Q sign"] - tongue out to side, blue lips

[–]Cam_Winston211 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Not arguing with you or your points, just going to point out that the divorce rate is really nowhere near 50%. If that's out of bounds as a comment, I'll gladly delete, just wanting to keep accurate info out there.

[–]blarggggggggggg1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_in_the_United_States#Rates_of_divorce

29% (within 1st 10 years), or 43%, or 40-50% depending on how you slice it - according to this. Interesting that the 50% rule of thumb is based on # divorces per year being double that of # marriages per year. I have seen some article saying divorce stats have been slightly improving lately. Not sure if that can be attributed to the general decline in marriage or what.

[–]BluepillProfessorMod / Red Beret1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy

Why even get married in the first place?

You are only a casual lurker I take it. MRP has an unofficial official position on marriage. It sucks. Don't do it. Yes you CAN make it work as /u/thefamilyalpha reminds us but as others know, the juice is not worth the squeeze in today. When men had power it was worth it. They were respected and had authority over their wives. They could not badmouth the husband without consequences. They were not flaming bitches else they would be sent to their rooms. Today, not so much.

All the prior historical duties and responsibilities remain for men. None of the power. None of the authority. None of the respect. No control over your children. No reasonable promise of fidelity. No thanks.

Most Merps were already married when they unplugged. We are making the best of a situation that has the deck stacked against us. Women have all the power in marriage. She has the law, the police, the courts, the social workers, and the churches 100% in her corner. She has guaranteed alimony/child support and almost guaranteed custody and can throw you away for any reason or no reason.

She can make a phone call at any time and big men with clubs will come over and beat the crap out of you before locking you in a cage for a day or more. She can use her hostages alienate your children at any time and keep you from seeing them for years. At any time she chooses. She has full support of society no matter what she does or wants.

Girl cuts off sex. You go girl.

Guys cuts off sex. Divorce that faggot.

Girl decides to file for divorce. Cash and prizes, full custody, you go girl.

Guy files for divorce (actually it rarely happens but whatever this is one of my rants). Single bedroom flat in the inner city. SMV destroyed. Finances ruined. Continuing to work and slave for a woman you don't even fuck and kids you almost never see who resent you for not shaking some sense into the bitch and paddling her ass when it was needed.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

did you just edit a last sentence? you did, didnt you?

[–]BluepillProfessorMod / Red Beret0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Yep. Don't poke the bear are more than just words.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

excellent summary

[–]Griever1142 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

Lots of benefits for women. All risk for men.

There are NO benefits. Only risks.

There is literally NO reason to get married in today's culture. Unless you like playing with a loaded gun, dont fucking do it.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

well not so fast... there are legal implications that make marriage easier for some things.

1) Property distribution upon death in the absence of a will - married spouse has first dibs. A will would suffice to do the same thing. 2) In some instances you have almost power of attorney like ability to make decisions on loved ones behalf. Then again that is something an attorney can draw up as well between an two people. 3) Putting a ring on it... does claim her as your woman. That is sufficient to keep other guys (beta...) away from her. She could put a ring on anyway or mate guard herself too. 4) Not really a benefit or a risk, but by virtue of marriage you are assumed to the paternal father.

Edit: okay there's nothing on my list that can't be replicated by hiring a lawyer, which actually maybe cheaper than a bridzilla wedding.

[–]Griever1142 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

1) And what if you dont want everything to go to your wife? Inheritance can lead to legal battles as well even with wills

2) Domestic Partnership. And exactly HOW often are you planning on the need to make power of attorney?

3) Rings mean absolutely nothing. COUNTLESS married women can and WILL fuck Alpha's and beta's

4) Assumed paternal father? How does this stop her from fucking someone else and YOU paying for their parasite?

Still looking for a actual answer.

[–]CaptJohnLukeDiscard3 points4 points  (7 children) | Copy

Different people will have different answers. For me, there are two aspects: religious / spiritual and then secular.
The religious component for me is that I truly believe that my wife is a support and help to me in our faith walk together. I'll leave it at that but if you want to know more, feel free to ask.
The secular aspect is more quantifiable. Where I live (US of A), there are tremendous benefits to being married versus a LTR. These involve taxes, rights to your children, retirement planning, social acceptance, etc. Society was built and strong vestiges remain for the respect of the nuclear family unit. While there are certainly downsides, I think the majority of men who have their shit together and aren't married to a bitch would agree that marriage is a net positive in their lives.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy

rights to your children

Could you be more specific?

[–]sexyshoulderdevil75% Liquid Sarcasm1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGomedbMcoY

Penn Jillette (big libertarian and atheist) mentions why he got married b/c of kids briefly in the last few moments of this short video. I've heard other interviews where he talked about it in more detail. In short, his expensive lawyers could not create an iron-clad contract to ensure access to his future kids should something happen to his wife...other than a marriage contract.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

family courts make sure that you don't have access to kids... even in shared parenting states it's not a guarantee.

[–]sexyshoulderdevil75% Liquid Sarcasm1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Sure. He was just hell bent on ensuring the best case scenario via a contract. He settled on a marriage contract even though he hates having the government intermingled in his personal affairs.

[–]CaptJohnLukeDiscard1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

My FIL is an attorney who has dabbled in this (Texas so your mileage may vary in other states) but basically his interpretation of the law and his experience was that there were more barriers to a married father being denied his children than an unmarried father. That does come with the potential for drawbacks obviously (child support, divorce rape, etc.).

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

This is where my risk analysis background comes in. In the places I've looked into it, take the worst case scenario and likelyhood, as well as enforcement and mitigation controls.

Basically boiled down to 'father at the whims of the mother'. In Canuckistan, you can just as easily have an arbitrator enforce these rights, and judged have very rarely had to intervene... Granted, because you guys have a problem with the gays, I assume CL in US is slim to none in most states

[–]Big_Daddy_PDX0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

A LDR is not a normal relationship with potential for long-term success.
Think of a marriage as a business relationship with a successful, high-performance partner. You can never do enough vetting of this type of partner.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Ltr/LDR

Pick any one

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Why get married?

Because you want to. If you don't....don't

I know what you're looking for, but at the end of the day, do some research on the subject and make a decision.

[–]Tampotissues0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

What am i looking for ?

[–]OldRoke0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

What's the point of a LDR? Isn't that the same as imagination

[–]Tampotissues0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Well it's not because there's a real person on the other end you meet once a year

[–]OldRoke0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I can't speak for you, but to me that is no relationship at all. Without the physical and the fun it seems like it really is a bit of dear diary

[–]alphabeta49Red Beret0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

You get to file joint taxes. Bit of a cut, at least in CA. And if your spouse dies, its easier to legally get a payout.

Everything else a marriage is good for, like raising kids, sex, joining income, etc. can be accomplished without involving the government.

I got married because we got pregnant. This was before I found TRP and I believed in Jesus and thought that religion would make sure everything turned out alright.

I wouldn't do it again. In fact, I wouldn't ever offer commitment to a girl again, in any form, unless she was a goddamn unicorn and proved that she wasn't an entitled, two-faced, manipulative, self-absorbed, feminist bitch. Which is a tall order.

Question: what proof do you have that your LDR isn't cheating on you?

[–]Tampotissues0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

I'll make another post cuz i think i asked the wrong question. Mrp is pretty anti LDr. Thanks for asking.

[–]blarggggggggggg1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

red pill is mostly anti-LDR.

  1. It is scarcity mentality - why hold out for someone far away when you could be fucking other women around you on the regular?

  2. It is one-itis - why is one person so special that you would sacrifice so much when you don't even get to see them?

I get it if you've been together in the same place for a long time and are taking a couple months where one moves and the other needs to get shit together to move, but this is rarely the case. Usually it's losers who aren't getting laid wasting time on skype and buying shit from a fat chick's amazon wish list instead of having an awesome life and getting their dick sucked every week.

https://therationalmale.com/2011/09/20/letting-go-of-invisible-friend/

[–]PersaeusRed Beret0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

You get to file joint taxes.

marriage is a tax penalty if you're making fat stacks.

[–]alphabeta49Red Beret0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

True. I only know the benefits when you make less than $50k/yr.

[–]jacksarmy0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

The only reason apart from economic ones,tax incentives etc is that everyone in the family has the same last name....Yeah dont do it

[–]screechhaterRed Beret0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Lots come here looking for a magic pill. Typing into google "why my wife won't fuck me ? "

Lots stumble around using parts of the doctrine to make a few improvements, but never get to the bottom of it.

You can, if you apply yourself and do the work.

Look up the word "propinquity"

When you define it, ask yourself, has a gal at work i work with or see at the gym, or wherever been giving me signals ? Have I pushed them off because I'm committed in an LDR ? . Girl leaves, you get the call from Ms LDR, she says it's not you. It's her. Goodbye. See, this is the truth "propinquity" wins out all the time. It's been researched over and over.

It even wins out in a fucked uo LTR where one freezes out the other. Propinquity will win out with that

Now you know why, we work on ourself and decide is the SO is adding value. Can the SO in an LDR truly add value ? Ask yourself is the benefit so great that you actually enjoy 11 months of solitude ? Will this always be the case ?

As for getting married, look to see if she adds value My SO adds quite a bit of value, but I do have a few issues and decisions to make in the next 3 months

What you need to decide, is what are you willing to do to live your life on your terms ? Does an LTR add value ? Is an LDR seriously fulfilling ?

[–]PersaeusRed Beret0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

propinquity

thanks bro, a new word

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

I got married because of my religion. If I ever become single again I am going to stay that way because marriage is very hard and because it is a bad deal for men.

[–]Tampotissues0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Why is it hard? Are you doing anything to make it better ?

[–]bourbonhipster0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

You don't need to be married to share houses income or for reproduction.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Looking to the future...... maybe your future.

I live in a community of retired people. Yes, there is divorce even for old guys here. Divorce rape is so common that the polite society never discusses this obvious fact. Since there are no children, divorce rape can go both ways here. It isn't always the man that loses.

More men go for the divorce than women, by far. Then there is the death factor. Yes guys die younger than women, nothing new there.

For the healthy single men that are left, there is a "three to one" ratio of single women to men. Then you add in the married women that are looking for side-sex cause hubby can't, OR WON'T, get it up anymore.

Do these oldsters get re-married? Very, very few. They don't even live together very often. Seems you can teach some old dogs new tricks.

So the answer here is a "BIG NO" on (re)marriage.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

LD - are not R's.

and no, there is not an actual reason to get married.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

There are the social implications. It's a nice ceremony and a public ceremony. If you are not ashamed to have her as your woman then declare to the world she is now yours by marriage.

It's just our social custom to celebrate such happiness...

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Cool.

none of that requires a licence. or a legal contract.

and if such contract should be assumed, fuck that noise.

[–]WesternhagenWinner1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

That ceremony has no benefit for the man. He might as well not even be there. Weddings are all about attention and validation for the bride.

Ask any married man if he would have been fine with "no wedding ceremony, just sign this piece of paper" and most of them will say "yeah but she wanted it so what could I do?"

[–]cabanaboy46-1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy

Relationships that can lead to a succesfull marriage have many layers that include sexual chemistry, loyalt, trust, family dynamics, financial dynamics parenting strategies and religious affiliations to name a few.

Most relationships evolve sexually first and then the more layers of a person you see, the less you want to be with them. I decided to get married when i met a woman where my attraction increased as i got to know her more intimately.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

  • sexual chemistry - Fleeting honeymoon phase
  • loyalty - Male quality, read women in love
  • trust - You must be new here, a ring offers no trust, and you better have it before marrying
  • family dynamics - not sure what this means
  • financial dynamics - costs are dynamic, yes.
  • parenting strategies - lead your fucking house
  • religious affiliations - Church seems to loved divorced chicks, see Manosphere for more insight

You're new here, read, lurk, then post

[–]WesternhagenWinner0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I decided to get married when i met a woman where my attraction increased as i got to know her more intimately.

About a month ago you said, "In december of 2016 my wife made a comment that i should go jerk off and i realized that something was not right in the relationship." And then recently she refused to kneel and blow you.

Sounds like her attraction has not been increasing as she got to know you. Or at least, since she got married to you. It's almost like there's something about getting married that kills female attraction...



You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2021. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter