patrick.net

I believe it can likewise work for very young and very old mothers (with the sweet spot somewhere in between and also depending on the physique of the individual), it's the individuals choice (and responsibility) and nobody should try and impose their agenda on people's personal decisions.

I must say, just because a female mammal goes into season, it is known to be a bad idea to have her breed in the first couple of seasons. And, if we shall return to breeding whenever a female comes into season, we should also use the other survival-of-the-fittest systems and have males compete for the right to sire young. We would ba a nation full of Lesners and GSP's in two generations.

lostand confused says

In some jurisdictions, they consider that to be common law marriage and they make men pay the women- even though you are not married.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common-law_marriage_in_the_United_States

Common-law marriage in the United States can still be contracted in nine states (Alabama, Colorado, Kansas, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Iowa, Montana, Utah and Texas) and the District of Columbia. New Hampshire recognizes common-law marriage for purposes of probate only, and Utah recognizes common-law marriages only if they have been validated by a court or administrative order. Common-law marriage can no longer be contracted in 27 states, and was never permitted in 13 states. The requirements for a common-law marriage to be validly contracted differ from state to state. Nevertheless, all states — including those that have abolished the contract of common-law marriage within their boundaries — recognize common-law marriages lawfully contracted in those jurisdictions that permit it.

Note there is no such thing as "common-law divorce" — that is, you cannot get out of a common-law marriage as easily as you can get into one. Only the contract of the marriage is irregular; everything else about the marriage is perfectly regular. People who marry per the old common law tradition must petition the appropriate court in their state for a dissolution of marriage.

Maybe someone should make a movie for teen age girls about a girl that is in love with both a vampire and a wolf man. I think the teenage girls would love that. But I digress.

curious2 says

By 30, they may wish they could remove those piercings and tattoos.

Yeah, probably. Only it's a little harder to relegate that stuff to the back of the closet like a pair of Speedos or double-knit sport coats with lapels generous enough to land an F35 on. They probably go through life with a "yeah-I-meant-to-do-that" resignation about it.

I think kids do this stuff to be fashionable. It's got less to do with being jaded than it does with trying to fit in or being the same as someone else - which, believe it or not - is an immutable urge innate in all homosaps.

It is a crime against humanity to disallow prostitution. It is probably the most natural form of commerce. It is no less outrageous than denying gays the right to be married.

marcus says

That might mean.... (stfu c2).

A real math teacher would be able to calculate from the numbers in the article and available data: "SeekingArrangement.com is the world’s largest Sugar Daddy website with over two million members worldwide. In 2011, 40% of the website’s total population was comprised of college students. But after a 58% increase in co-ed signups in 2012, the total population increased to 44%." And, if you're going to continue pretending to "Ignore" me, you'll have to do better than merely abbreviating "curious2" to "c2".

Peter P says

It is a crime against humanity to disallow prostitution. It is probably the most natural form of commerce. It is no less outrageous than denying gays the right to be married.

And let's not forget about marriage, it is an "arragement" of commerce as well, not really much different.

If I were a feminist I would be jumping up and down. The prohibition of prostitution weakens human rights.

I would not be surprised by 20% at all. Through word of mouth when they learn from a friend what they can get for how little they have to do many would jump on the bandwagon. They don't prostitute as much as they want to do the call girl stuff. I went to a strip club on valentines day a few years back (place was dead), and these girls really liked playing around, the attention was nice, cheaper than today's girlfriend/wife. I should go more often than once about every 5 years. Still, in today's day and age, when the laws favor women, that's legal prostitution because the man pays no matter what!

Feminism has indeed taken over the colleges, saw it first hand back in the 90's. Took over the K-12 schools as well, that's why Marcus clearly has the feminist indoctrination, it's not your fault Marcus!, if you don't go along with their programming they'll notice, and I know it's hard enough being a man in the teaching profession already.

See most women love men for what the man can do for them, i.e. give me money!, they don't actually love the man himself. This is, in my book, her greatest weakness and why 90% of divorces are initiated by women. Less and less women know what love is because more and more kids grow up in fatherless homes. As the family unit slowly dies off so does love.

Although some of the comments above offer profound insights, the distribution seems a bit skewed towards male Users and against female wives. It's worth keeping in mind that something like 90% of violent crime, including domestic violence, is perpetrated by men, and in the case of domestic violence it's almost always against women. Today's news includes yet another tragic example. And, before anyone tries to excuse the fathers by saying they're reacting to judicial bias favoring wives in court, consider the fact that these fathers too often abuse and even kill their own children too. Allegations of abuse can be fabricated, but too often they're true, and that probably explains a great many divorce filings.

morally there is nothing wrong with prostitution.

why is it that it's legal for me to pay a woman to have my finger inside her mouth but when i use my **** it's illegal? this makes zero sense.

hiring a woman to give you sex should be the same as hiring a maid to clean your house or give you a foot massage or a back rub. the only problem with prostitution that I can see is the health concerns but that's only because it's illegal so STD testing is not done. if prostitution is legalized, mandatory STD testing will be administered by health clinics and untested prostitutes face jail time. this will make prostitution a lot safer and a lot cheaper (like anything that's off the black market).

then we also have a lot of jealous wives that do NOT want to realize this reality and will fight nail and teeth against this HAHAHA. but if you think objectively you'll see there is nothing wrong with prostitution.

Mark D says

a lot of jealous wives that do NOT want to realize this reality and will fight nail and teeth against this HAHAHA. but if you think objectively you'll see there is nothing wrong with prostitution.

Much of wives' concern results from a well founded fear of STDs. A majority of the 30 million adults with HIV are women, including typically wives who got if from their husbands, including typically husbands who got it from prostitutes. If vaccine research develops more vaccines against STDs, including especially vaccines that cure people already infected, the fear of STDs (and the related fear of prostitution) will be greatly reduced.

Just checking in to see if the misogynists are still here. Yup, they are.

If prostitution is legalized, sex workers will be less discouraged to get health checks. Also, if hookers are not sheltered/controlled by the underworld, they may be in a better position to demand protections, no pun intended.

Mark D says

morally there is nothing wrong with prostitution.

Yes. And I think it is immoral to criminalize prostitution.

Mark D says

then we also have a lot of jealous wives that do NOT want to realize this reality and will fight nail and teeth against this HAHAHA. but if you think objectively you'll see there is nothing wrong with prostitution.

But gigolos will be legit as well.

MsBennet says

Just checking in to see if the misogynists are still here. Yup, they are.

Just checking to see if the pseudo feminists who think equality means getting a job if you want to or if you decide to stay at home-then the govt grabs the man's assets and gives it ot the wife so she can enjoy life with her ill gotten wealth are here. Yup they are.

You know the main thing wrong with our society is that shame has all but disappeared. It used to be people were proud of hard work and labor. Now-just get knocked up by a basketball star or marry a monied guy for a few years and you are set for life. What a sad state of affairs-all under the guise of equality. Dignity and self confidence are very nice things to posess-more gold diggers-err alimony/excessive child support awardees should try it. But why-the govt encourages grifting and taking somebody's hard earned money and all the while calling them misogynists-like they are the bad guy.'

This sense of entitlement has seeped through to every layer of society-it didn't just come out of thin air. No sense of what is right and fair-just live off someone with no shame . Yeah a few men get alimony-3% of alimony goes to men-but the stats clearly show which gender benefits. if the feminists were so concerned about equality, they should be the one screeching to get theses laws overturned. but they fight them at every turn.

Russell Brand was entitled to 20 million dollars when he divorced Katie Perry-but he walked away from it and decided not to take it. Not many do that on the entitled side, do they?

marcus says

Maybe someone should make a movie for teen age girls about a girl that is in love with both a vampire and a wolf man. I think the teenage girls would love that. But I digress.

You ideas to too far fetched for even Hollywood.

BayArea says

To be honest, I am a bit discouraged at just how many people I know who don't seem to be too happy in their marriages. It always seems to be the same story. Things started off great. There was excitement, adventure, strong physical and emotional chemistry. Then 2-3yrs into it, those feels started to fade. Some couples moved on to the next phase of their lives and had some glue, er I mean kids which kept things fresh and exciting.

To be honest, most people don't know who they are (as individuals) when they decide to get married (it's usually a case of "this person is so awesome that I don't want to lose them/I'm afraid of being alone") and yes, most band-aid the relationship down the line by adding more stuff to the mix.

I recently got engaged after a ten-year courtship. During the first five years I can honestly say that we both needed to grow up, develop ourselves and iron out some issues, which we did. We now sometimes sit back and laugh because we've come to realize most of the couples we know are either dysfunctional or on completely different pages (but don't realize it). It's quite liberating.

Another key: Both of us let go of the consumerist mentality and generally don't give a shit about judging our lives based on what we see or hear from the outside world. We have very little debt, and no recurring monthly expenditures beyond the basics. We're even confused about creating a wedding registry because we simply don't want any more stuff, or for anyone to feel obligated to get us anything at all. That last part will definitely be on the invite, BTW.

Sorry for the long-winded response but I figured a different perspective was needed (and really, what is with all of the HIV talk on a marriage thread?)

TechGromit says

You ideas to too far fetched for even Hollywood.

You do know I was kidding right? There already is the "twilight series" of movies there are about exactly what I described. The novels and the movies were (are) very big with teen girls.

curious2 says

You're cherry-picking statistics by focusing solely on California

that's because this is a Bay-Area centric web site.

Patrick himself, came from outside of the region and got frustrated about the Hip and Cool Bay Area Real Estate Cool-Aid, so he started this blog.
curious2 says

To focus on the tiny % who live in California is to mislead yourself and others. California statistics aren't even representative of this country, let alone the world.

That goes for Bay Area Real Estate, too. But so what? That's what this blog is, all about the Bay Area, Cool And Hip.

curious2 says

It's worth keeping in mind that something like 90% of violent crime, including domestic violence, is perpetrated by men,

90% of women didn't shut up.

I think "you guys" are limiting your discussion to a particular point of view. I know a handful of dads who are the sole guardians of their kids, and are collecting child support from the moms. One of them (a cousin) is even in a redneck-bubba-kinda-state.

mell says

severe chronic fatigue

My french press coffee so mean a crackhead would tweak...

curious2 says

It's worth keeping in mind that something like 90% of violent crime, including domestic violence, is perpetrated by men, and in the case of domestic violence it's almost always against women.

Sorry, pal, but what you say here about domestic violence is completely wrong:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence

Data from Home Office statistical bulletins and the British Crime Survey show that men made up about 40% of domestic violence victims each year between 2004-05 and 2008-09, the last year for which figures are available. In 2006-07 men made up 43.4% of all those who had suffered partner abuse in the previous year, which rose to 45.5% in 2007-08 but fell to 37.7% in 2008-09.

In addition, "6% of women and 4% of men reported having experienced domestic abuse in the past year, equivalent to an estimated one million female victims of domestic abuse and 600,000 male victims"

Even at the 40-45% rate, I think it is a very good bet that men are under-reporting being the victims of domestic violence.

dublin hillz says

mell says

severe chronic fatigue

My french press coffee so mean a crackhead would tweak...

Hehe, yeah, mine too. But CFS is actually a misnomer as it has not much to do with fatigue, it's a lot of pain and utter exhaustion (some are bedridden). Patients usually are/were really driven people who love(d) to exercise (often former athletes) and live an active life, but severe post-exertional malaise is preventing them from doing so. They have been ridiculed but you would not want to wish this on anybody.

curious2 says

Again, you're blaming the wrong villain. It would make more sense to blame the people who misled you. Pining for the McCarthy era is a misguided waste of time. This thread contains much sound advice, including your caution, but Archie Bunker and Paul of Tarsus aren't the gods you're looking for.

The names and faces may have changed, but the desired outcome is the same. I don’t pine for anyone. If there’s a God, that’s wonderful.

mell says

Some argue that HIV taking the forefront has taken money and grants away from other infectious diseases that are far more common and virulent and affect as many people in severe ways.

That argument is mistaken. Misadventures such as the Iraq War and TARP are taking money away from medical research. Pitting subcategories of medical research against each other is part of the divide & misrule game to rob everyone blind with much bigger spending on other categories. If you add up the American lives saved by the Iraq war (probably a negative number), and compare it to the American lives saved by eradicating smallpox (a huge number), it would provide a clearer view of where money gets misspent.

curious2 says

Thank you for the link, from Britain. The article doesn't provide a definition of "domestic violence" so I can't compare to American definitions.

Well, what is the American definition of domestic violence? I bet even the definition is skewed so that men get the blame more than they should. Anyway, wikipedia is your friend. As always is the case in gender relations, there are multiple camps that do not agree with each other, but here are some data that supports the notion that women are as guilty of DV as men are:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence#Violence_against_men

Straus and Gelles found that in couples reporting spousal violence, 27% of the time the man struck the first blow; in 24% of cases, the woman initiated the violence. The rest of the time, the violence was mutual, with both partners brawling. The results were the same even when the most severe episodes of violence were analyzed. In order to counteract claims that the reporting data was skewed, female-only surveys were conducted, asking females to self-report, and the data was the same.[149] The simple tally of physical acts is typically found to be similar in those studies that examine both directions, but some studies show that male violence may be more serious. Male violence may do more damage than female violence;[150] women are more likely to be injured and/or hospitalized. Wives are more likely to be killed by their husbands than the reverse (59% to 41% per Department of Justice study), and women in general are more likely to be killed by their spouses than by all other types of assailants combined.[151] From a data set of 6,200 cases of spousal abuse in the Detroit area of USA in 1978-79 found that men used weapons 25% of the time while female assailants used weapons 86% of the time, 74% of men sustained injury and of these 84% required medical care.[152]

Please read the whole section a well. There is ample evidence that men are physically abused just as much as women are. And what about the psychological abuse?

Married 29 years, male.

I have read through a lot of these comments - but not all. I agree about a good amount of the advice that can be obtained from any self-help book on the subject - you know which advice I am talking about - regularly clarifying expecations, communication, etc.

Something I haven't seen that I think is of critical importance: both must be committed to the IDEA of staying married (as passionately as some posters seem committed to NOT getting married). In some religious circles they call this a "covenent marriage" - a vow before God that has eternal consequences.

If you are both committed to staying married, you both work very hard at staying happy "in" the marriage. Example: you give up or limit activities that move you apart and find activities that you both enjoy that bring you together. Instead of stubbornly sticking to your own "likes" you find mutual preferences and cultivate them.

Re: sex. Yes, it does get less frequent after kids and later in life. And I'll say this as a generalization, that isn't always true but is most of the time (1) men need more frequent sex than women and (2) it doesn't have to be emotionally engaging sex.

So - make sure you wife is good with "servicing you" when she is not up for a longer more emotional and intimate sexual experience. Skillfully performing oral sex can be as quick and easy for a woman thoroughly brushing her teeth or whipping up penut butter sandwiches for the kids.

Then, when you both have time and energy for full-up sex it becomes "her turn". Everything you do is about pleasing her. This exchange has worked wonderfully for us for nearly 30 years.

So - make sure you wife is good with "servicing you" when she is not up for a longer more emotional and intimate sexual experience. Skillfully performing oral sex can be as quick an easy for a woman thoroughly brushing her teeth or whipping up penut butter sandwiches the kids.

Hear, hear!

Tying in monogamy (which means no sex if you don't like each other, possibly for a prolonged time) will mostly fail eventually (unless both are too old to have any significant libido) as generally (there are exceptions luckily) women will not screw you when they are mad at you, usually they will call it conveniently "emotionally not available". If that happens it's best to set a limit, say a couple of months max. for example to have her resolve this issue while both staying amicable and then move on. If kids are involved it is obviously more complicated, but there are solutions, such as cohabitation/co-parenting or living separately but very close by. Or, she is ok with you getting it elsewhere in the meantime. That of course applies the other way round as well. Or you you can successfully program your wife/husband to keep servicing you through thick and thin ;)

fubar awol says

Married 29 years, male.

This exchange has worked wonderfully for us for nearly 30 years.

Does not compute.

marcus says

Certainly in some relationships, the increased understanding of the woman's pleasure in sex, which seems to have occurred concurrently with the women's movement (man hating movement?), has lead to better sexual relations, not worse

I agree with this, it helped women figure out what they personally like and being able to talk about it and live it out with their partner. Nothing bad about it. I don't think it was a man hating movement to begin with, but sometimes it is hard to stop something positive that has a lot of momentum to spill over the balance line and turn into something negative. Anyhow, I like women's movements as long as they are rhythmic.

mell says

I don't think it was a man hating movement to begin with, but sometimes it is hard to stop something positive that has a lot of momentum to spill over the balance line and turn into something negative.

Yes. I agree. Sometimes, even without going beyond balance, there can be a negative side.

For example, women joining the work force and having more fullfilling lives is great. But having our level of (real) income adapt to 2 income households being the norm,...not so much.

I'm not advocating women not working (NOT AT ALL), but if they didn't, then incomes would have to be higher, for us to afford raising families.

If you think about it, that crazy, liberal, women's lib movement was actually one more way in which incomes and wealth has been redistributed upward. You don't have to pay someone as much if his wife works too.

(not that it's that simple - part of it was distributed outward, as the third world countries that live on a fraction of what we do have increased their standard of living)

anyone willing to put a peepee in their pooper is insane.
besides
that's so gay

BayArea says

the disease is primarily sustained through

These aren't "views" or opinions, they are observable facts. There is no evidence to suggest that IV drug use or homosexual sex is more common in countries that have higher prevalence of HIV than the USA. The biology is quite clear. The virus isn't created by any particular activity; it spreads from one person to another. Sharing dirty needles is a very risky activity; proper sterilization of needles can reduce or eliminate that risk. Unprotected anal sex is probably more risky than any other kind, regardless of whether the recipient is male (Bop69) or female. BTW 10% of the 35 million total are children. To say that a disease is primarily sustained by two behaviors, when the numbers say most people who have it aren't even engaged in those behaviors, is contrary to reality. I do respect the distinction that within subsets, e.g. California, the risk factors vary depending on who is involved, but that's only because you can't catch a disease from someone who doesn't have it. It doesn't tell you anything about who primarily does have it, or how they got it.

curious, you are blind. In each area, in each country, the HIV is spread in the way it is spread. In SanFranSicko it is spread by activity "X" the most, but in Tiajuana it is spread more by activity "Y", but in Hastings Neb the most common HIV spreading is by activity "Z". BUT -- in ALL areas of AMERICA, where the HIV is spread in the HIGHEST NUMBERS between ADULTS, it is a 100% undeniable fact that the single largest activity known to spread the infection is by male/male coupling. Stop pretending the truth is not known. You are endangering any young male who may be pondering his first male/male incounter with your misinformation.

Bap33 says

any young male who may be pondering his first male/male incounter

Bop69, you've been pondering so long, you've lost your youth. I keep telling you, instead of obsessing, just make sure he wears a condom.

To the extent your comment mentions statistics and vectors at all, it is consistent with what I've already said. If you look at an unrepresentative sample, you get an unrepresentative picture. Obviously the numbers in San Francisco differ from those in Nebraska. Likewise the numbers in America differ from other countries. That's why it matters to look at the whole picture, to see what's really going on.

ahhh yes ... personal attacks beat idea exchange yet again ... color me surprised

well ,since you added, so shall I.

The numbers where you live, and have unprotected anal sex, are all that matters. Like housing markets, HIV spreading is local.