That Facebook page has less followers than Jacob Wohl who you "never heard about" and who spews your exact views.
And he is a felon.
But Single Moms Rule is a real threat to society.
REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Effects of Family Structure on Crime
- Thread starter Mike_Jones
- Start date
And he is a felon.
But Single Moms Rule is a real threat to society.
You're so feminine with your feelings and compassion.
We are supposed to make it harder for single mothers according to GDiddy, not easier.
That's what real men would do anyway - withdraw support for single mothers and their children.
If you were raised in a traditional family, you would understand why that's okay.
meaningless lip service
it has no impact on your life or my life
which is weird, because given the level of shrillness in this thread you'd think
that single mothers were disproportionally benefiting in some regard.
Putin/GRU directs trolling on Fakebook = nothingberder.
Single moms have group on Fakebook = biggest problem facing America today behind some esoteric liberal arts professors.
It has a direct impact on your life. I'm not going to get personal but that philosophy affects the family court system and could end up affecting you if stuff were to go south
Someone either didn't click the link or completely missed the point by only looking at the top result
Have you googled Jacob Whol?
Don't look at the top result only now.
And I love how everything about "traditional family" boils down to money for you.
you make a fair point here; your tact is appreciated.
divorce laws are bullshit, but basically net out to an even split.
sometimes I think that there should be some consideration for cause, but that's a slippery slope.
I'm actually benefiting from court enforcement of the expectation that a grown woman has to work
a full time job just like a grown man...that's all upside, in my book.
in this regard, marrying a housewife and not allowing her to have her own career (work history)
has a negative downstream impact on the husband if the marriage dissolves for any reason at
all....alimony and child support calcs are premised on the respective earning power of both
individuals.
family court laws seem to be becoming more equitable and less bias towards the mother. there is
no way she could have claimed more than 50% short of criminality or outright delinquency on my part.
That's weird. My wife didn't ask for anything, there was never a fight between us or lawyers involved.
We didn't even get properly divorced until 3-4 years later. We're still good friends.
Don't get me wrong, I paid dearly for my decision and it wasn't fun. But I set out to go the distance with my kids, far beyond their childhood. I knew they'd hit adolescence soon enough and at that point they'd start making more and more of their own decisions and choices as to which examples they thought would be more effective for them. Which after all is what we're trying to do as parents, right? If their mom is good with handling the money and the dad is good at handling conflicts and the kid ends up choosing some of this and some of that then that's a good thing, not a slam against the parent.
Besides, kids don't even develop their own self-identity outside of being the kid of their parents until they hit adolescence. So chipping on their mom in front of them is really chipping on the kid's identity and hurting them far more than what it's doing to score points on the parent. It's the kids we're hurting the most when we are being mean to each other, even when we're not doing it in front of them.
Fck that.
As for the stuff, it's just stuff. Up to a point, of course. And the anger over how things aren't fair? You deal with that in part by taking that long view and in part by trying to embrace the merits of the compromise you're taken and recognize that - within the context of the long game - you probably couldn't have done any better for yourself anyway.
You know that cliche that "living well is the best revenge"? I could swear that cliche was coined for dealing with our anger issues in these contentious breakups. The troll wants the other party to be unhappy or angry at the outcome. The act of actually being happy then becomes the slap in the face if/when there's a troll in the house, and it becomes an act of validation and affirmation even when the other isn't acting as the troll. win-win.
What trends supported the lawmakers' decisions to provide relief for children in single-parent families? I think you'll find patriarchal failure as a driver.
As opposed to the failure of the women in choosing those men, allowing themselves to get pregnant, carrying those pregnancies to term and intitiating 70% of the divorces?
No, this outcome most definitely isn't more attributable to the men than to the women. Men are neither positively nor primarily in control of any of these decisions other than having sex, the decision for which also rests with the women.
Both parties chose to have sex. Maybe the woman told the man she was on birth control and maybe she didn't, but she could still have known where she was in her cycle. After the sex act the woman is in control of every other decision that follows. She even controls whether or not she accepts the marriage and/or joint parenting proposal, if there is one.
No, this outcome most definitely isn't more attributable to the men than to the women. Men are neither positively nor primarily in control of any of these decisions other than having sex, the decision for which also rests with the women.
Both parties chose to have sex. Maybe the woman told the man she was on birth control and maybe she didn't, but she could still have known where she was in her cycle. After the sex act the woman is in control of every other decision that follows. She even controls whether or not she accepts the marriage and/or joint parenting proposal, if there is one.
Last edited:
How can one analyze the effectiveness of the legislation if one doesn't compare the current period with the period that preceded the legislation? I think one would find that the trends supporting lawmaker's decision to provide relief to the children of needy families are weighted toward failed paternalism. Back in the day when alcoholism wasn't a diagnosis and was heavily indulged by the patriarchy, women were marching for temperance. Lawmakers eventually acceded.
This was too great a trend to ignore: "Daddy spent all the money..(sob)...came home......(bawling).........beat Mama and me, then did something funny to sister."
Women were almost powerless in those days, unable to vote, unable to earn. It's been a long road.
This was too great a trend to ignore: "Daddy spent all the money..(sob)...came home......(bawling).........beat Mama and me, then did something funny to sister."
Women were almost powerless in those days, unable to vote, unable to earn. It's been a long road.