There is generally a lot of truth in jokes
-
Slacker007 wrote:
there are more cons than pros,
When done right, marriage is the best way to raise children. Religious or not, biological or not, it has been proven to be the best way to raise kids and to stabilize society.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
ZurdoDev wrote:
When done right, marriage is the best way to raise children.
Provided that the marriage does not end up in dogfight and a divorce. Not very many couples divorce as friends. Most end up as enemies. Lots of people who have been living together, and after they break up, they are still friends. Most kids want their parents to be friends. A happy, life long marriage could be a good framework for raising children. Statistics tell that this ideal is not the norm. It is just an ideal. Even if marriages are life long, lots of them are not happy. There is this story from the old days when people were riding horses. One old couple who had been married for fifty years, it was said that there had never been any argument or quarrel. The journalist from the local newspaper asked the couple if that was true, and how they had managed to live in harmony for that long. The husband explained: When we were on our way from church after our marriage, something made the horse pulling our wagon stall. I let it calm down, and commented "That was the first time!" We rode on, and then it stalled again. It calmed down, and I commented "That was the second time!" Well, when it stalled for the third time, I didn't say a word but picked up my handgun and gave that horse a bullet in one ear an out the other. That caused my wife of half an hour gave me a really harsh scolding. I didn't reply with a single word until she ran out of breath. Then I commented "That was the first time".
-
It feels like more of a social notion since most human cultures/societies have marriage institutions.
-
MarkTJohnson wrote:
I wouldn't change any of it except for the times I've been an idiot and hurt her.
Honest question: Has anyone ever found himself to be a situation where she admitted being the idiot and hurt you? That always seems to be so one-sided. The old joke, and it is one of them, is that it's always the guy who's wrong, no exception. I make mistakes and I'll own up. But it has to go both ways. Otherwise one of the two is pretending, and I refuse to play that game if those are the rules. (says the happily single guy)
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
the best way to raise children
Don't we have a few billion monkeys too many on this planet already?
ZurdoDev wrote:
stabilize society.
I'm not sure that I want to s(t)abilize it.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats. His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
-
You'd be surprised how varied they are across the world. Both in their structure and the rights/obligations of the parties.
No I realize that, and I'd sometime I'd love to study some of those differences and similarities someday. I just object to the notion that marriage is merely a religious institution. A bit pedantic perhaps, but if it's something common across humanity, those similarities and differences should reveal something about humanity. Anthropology is one topic I wish I knew more about
-
I mean, my wife regularly apologizes to me for when she's hurt me, and I apologize to her for when I've hurt her. That's just being a mature person.
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
You know, the standard girl's dream, big day, rituals, rings, through sickness and health, blah blah... Until the divorce anyway.
I guess that was never my sister's thing. She got married in my folk's backyard in the presence of them, myself, and a priest. And yeah, today she's divorced. Lasted a whole, I think, 6 years. She'd never admit it, but to me it's this simple: She spent 11 years with her first boyfriend, then when it became clear, as she was reaching her mid-30s, that she wasn't ever going to change his mind about not having kids, she got hitched to the first poor SOB who came along, got the kid she wanted, divorced him, he served his purpose, wham, bam, thank you sir, and they're now divorced. I actually feel more sorry for the guy than her, but at least she let him off easy, financially. By all legal rights she could've made his life a whole lot more difficult. Yet another way to convince me I've done the right thing. I want nothing to do with that sort of crap, and I've seen it all but too often.
I absolutely do not want children, so I guess I'm good :D
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
at least they tend to be more funny when there is. With all of the "marriage sucks" jokes lately (a lot of them by one specific member) it makes me wonder why do people bother getting married? Why do people keep getting married if it's such torture? I've never understood that. Marriage sucks jokes have been around forever yet people keep getting married. If your marriage is like all of these jokes, I suggest you go to counseling. Marriage does not have to be and should not be torture. It should be the best relationship you ever have. I suppose for some of you, maybe it is torture AND the best relationship at the same time. :laugh:
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
ZurdoDev wrote:
Why do people keep getting married if it's such torture?
It is easy... to solve problems that one doesn't have living alone.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
ZurdoDev wrote:
Why do people keep getting married if it's such torture?
It is easy... to solve problems that one doesn't have living alone.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
Nelek wrote:
to solve problems that one doesn't have living alone.
Like what? I can open my own pickle jars. :laugh:
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
-
Nelek wrote:
to solve problems that one doesn't have living alone.
Like what? I can open my own pickle jars. :laugh:
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
That doesn't sound like any problem to be solved, neither within nor without marriage. But take a problem such as snoring, keeping the partner awake. Through true love, you learn to handle that. And when you repeatedly hear your partner bitching about your terrible snoring to her friends, your anger over that is handled the same way: Through true love. If you live by yourself, there is no partner getting angry from your snoring, and you do not get angry from hearing her complaining over you. So there is less true love exercized, but the problem is avoided.
-
I wasn't planning on getting married, ever :D It's a weird social construct that adds nothing when you're happy in love, but adds a lot of trouble when that love has gone :laugh: On a side note, I think raising or burning a flag, or a politician apologizing for slavery or WWII or whatever (anything they didn't personally do or had any influence on), a minute of silence and that sort of symbolic statements are all weird social constructs that I really don't get. They're symbolic and change absolutely nothing to what has already passed. Marriage, in that sense, is purely symbolic and does nothing except give you some tax benefits and arrange for your heritage that you could also get from a cohabitation contract.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
I've been with my missus for about 35 years and raised two kids. Neither of us saw any advantage in getting married as here in NZ there's no tax, social or whatever benefit and there certainly been no disadvantages. It does not change the way we behavior, respect or treat each other. We just saw marriage as a meaningless religious symbolic bureaucracy.
A Fine is a Tax for doing something wrong A Tax is a Fine for doing something good.
-
I'm the same age as your son and lived with my girlfriend (now my wife) under my parents roof for a long stretch (5 years). I thank you too, because the possibility of living together while starting up is pure gold and speaks a lot on the kind of parent you are!
GCS d--(d+) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
He has a large part of his student loan still to pay (in the US, students/parents are on their own financially - it's a mess) so living at home helps with his bills. he was reluctant to come back at first but now he's happy he did.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
-
I've been with my missus for about 35 years and raised two kids. Neither of us saw any advantage in getting married as here in NZ there's no tax, social or whatever benefit and there certainly been no disadvantages. It does not change the way we behavior, respect or treat each other. We just saw marriage as a meaningless religious symbolic bureaucracy.
A Fine is a Tax for doing something wrong A Tax is a Fine for doing something good.
RossMW wrote:
here in NZ there's no tax, social or whatever benefit
How it should be! :thumbsup:
RossMW wrote:
We just saw marriage as a meaningless religious symbolic bureaucracy.
:thumbsup:
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
Because you can't raise children when you're not married? :confused: You can live together and do all the things you'd do when you were married without actually being married.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
He didn't say you can't raise children while unmarried, he said doing so while married is the best way. And he's right - when controlled for all other variables, a child being raised by two parents instead of one tends to do better.
-
at least they tend to be more funny when there is. With all of the "marriage sucks" jokes lately (a lot of them by one specific member) it makes me wonder why do people bother getting married? Why do people keep getting married if it's such torture? I've never understood that. Marriage sucks jokes have been around forever yet people keep getting married. If your marriage is like all of these jokes, I suggest you go to counseling. Marriage does not have to be and should not be torture. It should be the best relationship you ever have. I suppose for some of you, maybe it is torture AND the best relationship at the same time. :laugh:
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other. Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it. Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
There was a saying in England :: "many a true word is said in jest.".
-
That doesn't sound like any problem to be solved, neither within nor without marriage. But take a problem such as snoring, keeping the partner awake. Through true love, you learn to handle that. And when you repeatedly hear your partner bitching about your terrible snoring to her friends, your anger over that is handled the same way: Through true love. If you live by yourself, there is no partner getting angry from your snoring, and you do not get angry from hearing her complaining over you. So there is less true love exercized, but the problem is avoided.
Thank you... I didn't think an explanation was needed... I was obviously wrong :rolleyes:
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
He has a large part of his student loan still to pay (in the US, students/parents are on their own financially - it's a mess) so living at home helps with his bills. he was reluctant to come back at first but now he's happy he did.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
In Italy at 30 you're considered a beginner and offered stages paying well below the cost of an apartment rent in high crime areas or a room rent elsewhere. I've been lucky (and opportunist) to start working at 24 but I could never live alone with what I was paid, took me exactly 5 years to manage to move out in a ridiculously cheap apartment (it's worth a lot but it's cheap, I've been exceptionally lucky, 2 days window of opportunity which I narrowly missed but since I've made a good impression on the owner I manage to get it noetheless) with my girlfriend. It has been all the help I ever needed in the moment I needed it the most. In further 5 years the situation got so bright I lent my dad 10k to expand the house without a second thought, but all thanks to them.
GCS d--(d+) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
-
He didn't say you can't raise children while unmarried, he said doing so while married is the best way. And he's right - when controlled for all other variables, a child being raised by two parents instead of one tends to do better.
You are making the implicit assumption that the marriage is a happy and long-lasting one. If the marriage keeps the parents quarreling and fighting all the time, leading to a brutal breakup with lawyers, lying from both sides and lots of hate, then lots of kids would prefer less close, but more friendly relationship between their parents. Furthermore, you are making the implicit assumption that kids are brought up Western style: In a small core family, with the parents taking 90% of the responsibility for the upbringing. In lots of non-Western societies, kids are the responsibility of the entire village, with neighbours and grandparents and uncles and aunts and their friends having roles as extra parents. The kids eat with the others where they happen to be at meal time. Maybe they sleep where they happen to be at night. Lots of adults tell the kids what to do, and what not to do, teach them what it takes to solve tasks of various kinds, teach them history and traditions and their local culture. To a large degree, it was that way on farms, even in Western Europe (maybe not in the US): A large farm could have dozens of people, maybe a hundred, if you count everyone associated with the farm, spanning three generations or more. I am not sure that a tiny core family with two lone parents being fully responsible for the entire upbringing of the kids is so much better than the way it is done in other cultures. Maybe it is not too bad in the idealistic, happy, life long, resource rich and well educated family. But "the village model" is certainly more robust against all sorts of problems.
-
He didn't say you can't raise children while unmarried, he said doing so while married is the best way. And he's right - when controlled for all other variables, a child being raised by two parents instead of one tends to do better.
Member 13301679 wrote:
a child being raised by two parents instead of one tends to do better
I'm not arguing about that. I'm just saying you don't have to be married to be together ;)
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
You are making the implicit assumption that the marriage is a happy and long-lasting one. If the marriage keeps the parents quarreling and fighting all the time, leading to a brutal breakup with lawyers, lying from both sides and lots of hate, then lots of kids would prefer less close, but more friendly relationship between their parents. Furthermore, you are making the implicit assumption that kids are brought up Western style: In a small core family, with the parents taking 90% of the responsibility for the upbringing. In lots of non-Western societies, kids are the responsibility of the entire village, with neighbours and grandparents and uncles and aunts and their friends having roles as extra parents. The kids eat with the others where they happen to be at meal time. Maybe they sleep where they happen to be at night. Lots of adults tell the kids what to do, and what not to do, teach them what it takes to solve tasks of various kinds, teach them history and traditions and their local culture. To a large degree, it was that way on farms, even in Western Europe (maybe not in the US): A large farm could have dozens of people, maybe a hundred, if you count everyone associated with the farm, spanning three generations or more. I am not sure that a tiny core family with two lone parents being fully responsible for the entire upbringing of the kids is so much better than the way it is done in other cultures. Maybe it is not too bad in the idealistic, happy, life long, resource rich and well educated family. But "the village model" is certainly more robust against all sorts of problems.
Quote:
You are making the implicit assumption that the marriage is a happy and long-lasting one.
Where did I do that?
Quote:
In lots of non-Western societies, kids are the responsibility of the entire village, with neighbours and grandparents and uncles and aunts and their friends having roles as extra parents.
And those primitive lifestyles, while nice, have produced very little of value to the world.
Quote:
. Lots of adults tell the kids what to do, and what not to do, teach them what it takes to solve tasks of various kinds, teach them history and traditions and their local culture.
And that's why they remain primitive and useless to the world. The next breakthrough isn't coming from the non-western village where the children run around being "educated" about the sun god of whatever the local culture is ...
Quote:
with two lone parents
You keep saying this, I never said anything about "two lone parents", I said "two parents instead of one", not "two parents instead of five". I mean, there were only two sentences in my post and you managed to misread both of them? If I had written a third sentence you may have gotten a hat-trick :-) And what I said is still true, two parents tend to produce more successful children than one parent, and married couples tend to produce more successful children than non-married couples. The simplest way to halve a child's lifetime earnings is to have the parents divorce/never live together. There's a lot of factors in that, but they mostly boil down to "less time, money and effort goes into the child after a divorce". It is not unusual, for example, for a divorce to cost a man more than the complete educational cost of a child to age 18. That is money that would have gone towards the child, going to the lawyers instead.
