Hyerdahl wrote:
> mark_sobolewski{at}yahoo.com wrote:
> > Hyerdahl wrote:
> > > Mark Sobolewski wrote:
> > > > In article ,
> > > >  Grizzlie Antagonist
 wrote:
> > > >
> > > > (edit)
> > >
> > > > Can you imagine if the woman had added "with sugar
on top"
> > > > the demand that no only should he pay all the bills
> > > > and maybe take out the trash and mow the lawn, but also
> > > > pay her for her time to look after HER children? :-)
> > >
> > > Where have all the cowboys gone?  :-)
> > >
> > > Here's the thing, Mark....you don't have to marry a SAH spouse,
but
> > if you do, and the marriage doesn't work out, you will have to pay
> for
> > her> sacrifice of career.  Yes, we know you don't think your Irina
is
> > worth that much, and that what she does has little value, but so
> what?
> > > Judges will insist that you pay her for her sacrifice, and that
is
> > good> enough for me.
> >
> > If you insist upon talking about my personal life... :-)
> >
> > It's kind of funny you talk of my wife sacrificing her career
> > when you're aware that she's now working.
>
> >From what I recall about your arguments of the past, you didn't
approve
> of women being equal by having their own work, nor did you approve of
> women not earning money.  :-)  In your world, no woman can win, Mark.

I had said that in a society where women had
equal legal employment rights they should be held to the
same income earning responsibilities as men.  Note the conditional.

On the other hand, you support contradictory demands of men
that even you know will result in most double dippers
winding up in spinster arms apartment complex.  So that's
why your agenda requires increasing socialist programs
lest the women wind up as little more than corporate wage slaves.

Did you see the Simpsons last week where Marges' feminist
sister had to buy a baby in China?  Homer did her a favor
and pretended to be her husband.

> In the real world, should you divorce, the court would consider any
> sacrifice a SAH spouse would have made.

The court would probably first look at NEED regardless of
sacrifice, as you well know.

> If your alleged wife continues
> to work, there will be less to consider.

Ultimately, what mattered to me, wasn't so much as the
risks I was taking as much as the risk of not taking a risk.
I would rather live with that risk than not have a family.
On the other hand, women who followed your agenda oftentimes
did have it all: a handout diversity professional job,
looks, little risk if they got married and they blew
it by "seeking" professional men who would ride up to their
castle door.

This is a perfect case of the tortoise and the hare.
By being hard working, decent, and willing to "share"
as you like to put it, I have a relationship while
many career women my age are having to buy mourners
for their funeral.

Even with a head start, your buddies can't win!

>   In fact,> she's been complaining lately that she finds the schedule
> > of going to school and work to be grueling and wants
> > to lighten it up a bit.  She doesn't want to be a SAH wife
> > though.
>
> Well, then you'd be in sinc with most couples; both work outside the
> home.

Yeah, but both my wife and I know that her job is secondary
and she appreciates my ability to give her that support.
She doesn't have to move to Germany to enjoy first
rate healthcare, for example. :-)

> > I don't spend a lot of time worrying about her.
> > I know of many American women that wanted such
> > an opportunity though.
>
> Not with you, Mark.

Untrue.  Even with humble ol' me.  If I had forked over
the money for the first date burgers and fries, I wouldn't
be surprised if I had 2 dozen offers for marriage instead of
just 3 from such women (many were more than willing to
give me the second date until I had the nerve to be
non-sexist and allow them to pay their way.)

Yep.  It's a good thing Virginia is a red state.  I want
to make sure that it's electoral college vote grows!

regards,
Mark Sobolewski



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/15/05 8:57:19 PM ---