I find them attractive. I'll share.I have to imagine that the "hot" women Onoes posted about wouldn't even register on our radar. He just reminds me so much of that friend we've all had who brags about all the "hot ass" he gets, and then when you finally go out with him you see that he's hitting on chubby chicks that are 10-20 years younger than him.....
They are all fine specimens. I was thinking a bit mpre methy.... well the middle one may be a touch methy.I find them attractive. I'll share.
This is the girl I was dating Nov-Dec, the one I was blown away by, and quite heartbroken over.
This the 24 year old I was talking to, very pixie girl.
And the 29 year old I'm entirely enamored with, a feeling I believe she shares.
I know everyone has different ideals of beauty, but I don't feel like any flak should be given for any of these girls. I mean, obviously knees are too sharp on all, but what are you going to do?
I only browsed through that link but I don't get how this is fundamentally different than being in a non-married relationship and doing the same thing. What you're essentially worried about is that someone is going to lie and claim rape. Well... that can already be done by anyone, spouse or not. All these newer laws are doing is saying that marriage shouldn't affect a claim of rape -- it either is or isn't rape regardless of if the accused is a stranger, friend, date, or spouse. If a husband forcibly rapes his wife when she is clearly not consenting, then it doesn't make sense that it should be punished less than if a complete stranger did the exact same action with the exact same reaction by the woman.TIL that in most statesa vindictive wife could claim rape to any sex between her and her husband. Only 13 states raise the legal bar for non-consent between husband and wife. In other states, a spurned spouse could claim the tipsy sex after date night was rape. Or she could claim she was coerced into any given sexual encounter and that would be valid (letter of the law, at least). Mind blown.
Apparently the goal was to help abused women have legal recourse. Noble idea. But in many states, the implementation was lazy as fuck. They just removed the marriage exemption from rape laws, opening the door to the above possibilities.
Does this kind of shit go down in acrimonious divorces?
Also, INB4 anyone points out a husband could do the same thing to his wife. True. This thread is vast majority dudes, so I'm speaking to my audience.
No one is saying that, but by her saying he has to wear a hat around her parents is right out of the gate saying she would be embarrassed to have her parents see that and they aren't even "together" yet.So, let's say he cuts the horns. Total success in the relationship, right?
No one is saying that, but by her saying he has to wear a hat around her parents is right out of the gate saying she would be embarrassed to have her parents see that and they aren't even "together" yet.
These are good points.It's entirely possible that she was fucking with him. You know, because he has horns.
The surprise is that a wife could legally drag a husband into a rape case during divorce using circumstances applicable to strangers.I only browsed through that link but I don't get how this is fundamentally different than being in a non-married relationship and doing the same thing. What you're essentially worried about is that someone is going to lie and claim rape. Well... that can already be done by anyone, spouse or not. All these newer laws are doing is saying that marriage shouldn't affect a claim of rape -- it either is or isn't rape regardless of if the accused is a stranger, friend, date, or spouse. If a husband forcibly rapes his wife when she is clearly not consenting, then it doesn't make sense that it should be punished less than if a complete stranger did the exact same action with the exact same reaction by the woman.
It will still come down to having to prove it in court and it's probably ten times harder to prove rape in this situation because there's likely not going to be physical evidence and only a he said/she said thing. This law is not some instant "I win" button for women willing to claim rape when it didn't happen.
Or do you think rape in marriage isn't possible because marriage implies consent while married? If that's not the case, I really don't see the big fear here.
QFTI think he has mentioned before that he wants a relationship, but is also enjoying himself. Or was until that shitty breakup he had.
idk, he seems fine to me. He's off doing whatever and taking care of his responsibilities. He has horns, but apparently it isn't a big enough deal for this girl to be a dealbreaker and he holds a respectable job that provides for his kids. He has missteps but the difference between him and everyone else here is he posts his, everyone else here isn't chronicling every mistake they make in life.
But need to get that child support fixed, for real.
I think it would behoove you to do more reading.The surprise is that a wife could legally drag a husband into a rape case during divorce using circumstances applicable to strangers.
In a sane implementation, the bar would be raised on spousal rape allegations. By getting married, you are agreeing you generally want sex with each other. So the "I had two drinks and lost all sense of judgement, so it is rape" or "I felt coerced because he was persistent about wanting sex one night, so it was rape", things a vindictive spouse could easily claim and have no basis in the context of marriage, are technically permissible. And the point isn't to win, it is to attack reputation and gain leverage. So you can theoretically claim the soft rape charge and have him arrested, get him fired from work, gain temporary custody, use it in the proceedings, etc.
From the light reading I did on the subject, that isn't how it plays out. Apparently, vindictive sociopaths will make much worse accusations, like completely baseless accusations of child molestation, sexual abuse, etc. Some really sick shit.
It just struck me as lazy legislation with obvious exploits. I have no academic knowledge in the area and I can't argue it from that perspective. For all I know, men are more likely to lie about abuse than women. That seems unlikely, but possible.I think it would behoove you to do more reading.
The American Bar Association's (a fairly reputable organization, as far as lawyers go) top 10 divorce myths:
http://www.americanbar.org/content/d...thcheckdam.pdf
Sorry I don't have links to every actual paper/study mentioned, but most of those I found were behind pay walls (but if you're really curious they're at least available). Myth 3 is relevant, all three points. The third point of myth 3 also seems extremely relevant to your fear (men falsely accusing at 21% versus 1.3% of women). Myth 1 is also notable since men, in general, physically abuse more than women. You might say, ah, but what if those domestic abuse claims are false? Well, Myth 5 addresses that and seems to indicate that abuse fathers, real or not, are not heavily impacted by such allegations.
From that information alone, it definitely sounds like I'd have more reason to be wary of a divorce as a woman than as a man.
This is only a few minutes of research so it's extremely far from comprehensive and I don't claim anything definitive nor do I deny that there are definitely real life examples of women doing all the bad things you talked about. Maybe you'll dismiss these and other sources as biased, anti-men, or agenda-driven, but it just seems like finding other perspectives to add to your light reading would be beneficial before you go painting such a scary picture.