Thread: Men are better than women

Some statistics would be nice. "I have heard these comments, or comments very similar to this, numerous times lately," and "several women" is not informative data. It is hardly a significant source from which to draw an accurate conclusion about all married women or all women in general. This was from a blog about a blog. If you read the original "article" you will see that it is an opinion piece. One woman sharing stories of women that have told her their "oh my gosh I'm not in love with him" sob story. Hardly grounds for changing social dynamics. There are no numbers, statistics, or research backing this. There isn't even a poll. It is an article of ridiculous "make news" sensationalism with no substance.

There are plenty of women who stay with their man even if he cheats-- sometimes multiple times. Several of these women are my friends. I know women that have stayed with abusive spouses. Therefore, women are forgiving and willing to try and work things out, no matter how poorly treated they have been in the past. (Are you convinced by my bold assertions and tiny data pool?)

All this article proves is that there are bad women who wish they could use cheating as an excuse to divorce. No one needs blogs and statistics to prove that there are bad women in the world. But that doesn't mean all women are bad anymore than all men are bad just because of a few of them cheat.

However, I have some statistics. 2/3 of divorce in the U.S. are initiated by women-- because the divorce laws are unfairly biased for women's benefit and they are more likely to get custody that they figure they have nothing to lose (actually their standard of living decreases by 27%, but men's only decreases by 10% after divorce.) If the laws were not so blatantly biased against men perhaps there would be less divorce and perhaps men and women would cheat, divorce and wish their spouse cheated so they could get divorced in equal numbers. But the laws are misandrist and if there is one thing we know about humans it is this-- they tend to do what they can get away with. Right now, women can get away wrecking families.

I wish we could flip the laws entirely the other way-- give men all the benefits of divorce and make women pay the child support-- for 10 years. Then we can collect some data, and maybe women like the ones in the article above will learn to appreciate what they have when the have it.

Eidolon;302293]There are no numbers, statistics, or research backing this. There isn't even a poll.

Always encouraging to hear women talk dirty.

But seriously Eidolon, I like the cut of your jib. A fair and forthright woman you come across. The forum needs to hear a bit more from you lady.

This wasn't a "scientific" post; just something I wanted to share with the members here.

One can become so blinded by "science", "statistics" and "data" that one can miss what is happening around them. Like the shooting in Colorado that happened this weekend, if one person had a weapon with them at that theater, fewer people would have been injured or died. However, there is a push to control guns instead. Will the law breakers really obey that law?

You can shove all the awesome statistics you want into someone's face, but if they are not interested in listening to what you have to say, it is all meaningless. I have done a lot of watching people, and have learned a lot from that - most of which can never be found in some research data. I don't dislike women/girls, in fact I like them very much, but I will not put them on some pedestal as if to be worshiped or something.

And as for love, love is a state that is shown by actions. It is not a feeling.

That was a good post Eidolon. I agree with CD; we need to hear more from you.

What follows is quibbling and not directed against you personally . .

All this article proves is that there are bad women who wish they could use cheating as an excuse to divorce. No one needs blogs and statistics to prove that there are bad women in the world. But that doesn't mean all women are bad anymore than all men are bad just because of a few of them cheat.

In the next para you go on to talk about the U.S. The world = U.S. is a common misconception/assumption. I agree that the trend has been in that direction since the end of WWII but the U.S. is vastly outnumbered by 'the world'.

I wish we could flip the laws entirely the other way-- give men all the benefits of divorce and make women pay the child support-- for 10 years. Then we can collect some data, and maybe women like the ones in the article above will learn to appreciate what they have when the have it.

Interesting idea...
But I wouldn't want to see women 'thrown away' under false pretences - any more than men are now.

Right now, women can get away wrecking families.

They can. I doubt if the answer is to equalize the situation by giving family-wrecking rights to men.

I most places in the world, family-wrecking involves great social stigma. The state and the law are irrelevant.

Finally, I must question this word 'cheating'. That's playing a game in defiance of the rules. What are the rules? Who makes them and by what right?
Is there only one game in town?

Quote from Eidolon

However, I have some statistics. 2/3 of divorce in the U.S. are initiated by women-- because the divorce laws are unfairly biased for women's benefit and they are more likely to get custody that they figure they have nothing to lose (actually their standard of living decreases by 27%, but men's only decreases by 10% after divorce.)

I genuinely struggle to believe this claim. If women were so hard-done-by after a divorce, I think many of them would think a lot longer and harder over the decision. In my experience, I've yet to find one man who genuinely is financially better off after a divorce (let alone the emotional costs) while most women at least appear considerably better off. To my knowledge, the study that this claim comes from (and derivatives thereafter) was a feminist study, meaning it was advocate research which cannot be claimed to be neutral or unbiased else it wouldn't be advocacy research in the first place.

Quote from Eidolon

If the laws were not so blatantly biased against men perhaps there would be less divorce and perhaps men and women would cheat, divorce and wish their spouse cheated so they could get divorced in equal numbers. But the laws are misandrist and if there is one thing we know about humans it is this-- they tend to do what they can get away with. Right now, women can get away wrecking families.

Indeed. Between things like the pill, misandrist implementation of supposedly gender-neutral laws and systematic demonization of men's sexuality while praising women's, it's no wonder women are rewarded - quite literally - for destroying men's lives (i.e. stopping them having a relationship with their child).

Quote from Yan Yan

But I wouldn't want to see women 'thrown away' under false pretences - any more than men are now.

Nor would most of us.. but it would be interesting to see just where we ended up; could we argue after 10yrs that men are more moral than women and give the female supremacists (feminists) the finger for their endless lies?

Quote from Marx

I genuinely struggle to believe this claim. If women were so hard-done-by after a divorce, I think many of them would think a lot longer and harder over the decision. In my experience, I've yet to find one man who genuinely is financially better off after a divorce (let alone the emotional costs) while most women at least appear considerably better off. To my knowledge, the study that this claim comes from (and derivatives thereafter) was a feminist study, meaning it was advocate research which cannot be claimed to be neutral or unbiased else it wouldn't be advocacy research in the first place.

Divorced women have to claim and appear that they are better off, else their stupidity would show. They would be seen as a fool for having made such a destructive choice and no one would support them and "make them feel better". By keeping the lies going, they can stave off the condescending eyes and keep their "friends".

The problem we have, trying to change things is near impossible as the female supremacists and their misguided male supporters have a closed mind mentality and anything that challenges the stereotypical view they have will just be ignored as misogynist lies.

Why do I see both sides of the argument?

I will stick with my theory though... I don't believe it is that men are innately better overall but more that women have never been too uncomfortable as a group to step up and reach full maturity. Every once in a while one does but because more haven't she is stuck on using tools and methods men have built. I have seen female business owners profit and inflate their companies, yet it is comfort that keeps them from going global. As to love... Yes women have the capacity to love unconditionally


Marx I have in the past read several legit stats showing the divorce rate. It is always between 66-75% of it initiated by women. Women have little to lose and often much to gain so why wouldn't they be the majority of divorcees?

Marx I have in the past read several legit stats showing the divorce rate. It is always between 66-75% of it initiated by women. Women have little to lose and often much to gain so why wouldn't they be the majority of divorcees?

The quibble is not with the stats on who initiates divorce but with the claims of comparative decrease in wealth.

If women decrease in wealth after divorce it's because they spend more than they earn and if men's wealth increases after divorce it's because they earn more than they spend (in spite of alimony). However, those men would be financially better off not spending their money on a woman married or divorced in the first place.

Women keep spending and men keep earning.

*Shrug* I'm far better off financially, but I do think I'm an exception to the rule. I learned early on the only person I could count on was me, and I don't think that's the case for most people, especially women.

Quote from nivek

The quibble is not with the stats on who initiates divorce but with the claims of comparative decrease in wealth.

The idea that women (generally) are worse off in divorce is as risible as believing the courts favour men.

@YanYan: In the next paragraph is exactly the clue. A new paragraph signals the start of a new section and a new direction-- even a new idea. The paragraph indicates that there is not a continuation of the previous paragraph. As a U.S. citizen I feel comfortable speaking about U.S. statistics because I know them and I know about them personally. I don't know "the world" I am not qualified to speak on behalf of "the world." I don't trust people who speak on behalf of "the world" unless they were raised in some mystical Shangri-La where members of every country, nation, and culture had an equal part raising that mystical child who can speak for "the world."

What do I know about divorce in the U.K. or Europe? What do I know about the social dynamics and family politics in smaller cultural groups like tribes of the Amazon? Only as much as I can read. But that in no means qualifies me to speak on their behalf. Let the world have it's voice rather than our imperialistic culture telling the world what it has.

The world is definitely not the U.S. and vice versa which is why I split the subjects up with a paragraph and clearly labelled from whence the statistics were derived (the U.S.) so that members of "the world" could bring in their own relevant experiences, perspectives and statistics (which are probably more accurately reported to them than a stranger halfway across the globe.)

Extracting contention from whence there is no cause is not a pleasant or especially useful trait. But a pet peeve gives offence even where no offence is meant or indeed present because a person is sensitized to the illusion of it. And it is a relevant pet peeve, I grant you that. I feel the same.

The world is definitely not the U.S. and vice versa which is why I split the subjects up with a paragraph and clearly labelled from whence the statistics were derived (the U.S.) so that members of "the world" could bring in their own relevant experiences, perspectives and statistics (which are probably more accurately reported to them than a stranger halfway across the globe.)

Yes you did. My post was not meant to be adverserial but merely to question.
The 'stranger' is obviously me. "Halfway across the globe" is a deliberate and insulting term. Halfway from where? The font of all wisdom? Centre of the universe? Am I too far away from the trivial intricacies of US domestic politics to have any credibility at all?
As such, am I dismissed as a 'third world' resident. So, if I don't believe that statistics in the western world are manipulated for political purposes, that just shows how ignorant I am?
Why would you wear your western insularity as a badge of pride?

As for pet peeves, I have only one. American women believe that the entire world should be ordered according to their personal likes and dislikes. If any race, religion, culture, nation or any revolutionary group whatsover, dares to raise objections, they'll call upon their fathers and big brothers to bomb the 'enemy' out of existence. But you're just an 'oppressed woman' so it's not your concern. Neat trick!

Fred Reed recently posted about 'wimmins studies' in US univerities.

There is in such courses much nattering about Women of Color. The inmates of these refuges from adulthood apparently regard themselves as being at one with oppressed women of the Third World, which in all likelihood they have never seen one of. If they had any idea of what an actual Nicaraguan woman thinks of pampered brattesses lolling about a pseudo-educational theme park paid for by their fathers, they would hide under their beds.

But since I'm "halfway around the globe" with a vibrant family that needs to eat every day, what would I really know about the misery of pathetic, 'oppressed' western women? Some of us have never been to Disneyland and wouldn't wan't to.

What do I know about the social dynamics and family politics in smaller cultural groups like tribes of the Amazon?

What do you know about "social dynamics" in your own country? Are they assumed as 'normal' and taken for granted? Come on. Nobody's fooled.