Shortage of eligible men as women struggle in dating game

I hope I'd never be asked to represent someone in a similarly
ridiculous situation.

We've all read of cases like the guy who set a ladder on a manure pile
in the early morning, when the crust was frozen.

Later, it thawed, and down he went. He successfully sued the ladder mfg.

Now, what does it say that men, or farmers, can successfully launch such attacks?

Whether the girl was cheating is salt in the wound but it is irrelevant.
Same for the ladder company if the guy was a democrat, or,
a card cheat. The case is about the case.

 

Not a good analogy false equivelance.

A ladder is not a person and the company which made it did not know the user who purchased it.

The essence of these cases is that the woman somehow felt decieved because she was not made completely aware of the facts from the guy she cheated on.

As in she would not have cheated or even gotten involved with the guy if he had told her about his vasectomy and therefore he is liable for her own deception.

As another poster pointed out men have in fact been succesfully sued for supprt in cases where it is proven the child is not there's because the woman they lived with went out and cheated and got pregnant.

Somehow the courts are seldom deciding in favor of men the attitude being " you're a man suck it up ".This is clearly due to the influence of feminisim which is why more and more men seem to be bailing on the whole program which strangely seems to worry feminists who are losing control over those men.

 

Ok you feel it is about something it isnt, which is feminism. What it is about is people
successfully pressing what are,or seem to be, ridiculous lawsuits.
Or in your case, it is also about someone reaching a verdict without hearing any of the arguments, or
knowing what was the legal basis for reaching a decision.

And, as I noted earlier, introducing a matter not germane to the case "such legal attacks can be launched by a cheating woman."

as if it is relevant. Even a werewolf is entitled to full and equal access to the legal system.

 

Yes a legal system geared to give advantage to women in cases such as divorce, paternity, child support or whatever due to feminisim whether you like it or not.

 

There are instances inwhich the advantage is to the woman, yes.
I wonder if you'd have been equally outraged in any time in the past when it was entirely weighed against the women.

There may be some injustice in how the laws are written, if you feel that is so, then please specify what exact law.

You might also identify in what way "feminism", defined, svp,has
caused laws to be written as they are.

In the like it or not,dept. cases are generally* settled on their merits; evidence, facts, and how they apply to the specific law.

Likewise likeornot, your concern with the woman cheating is a prejudicial detail irrelevant to the merits of the case, and your taking sides without knowing either the law of the facts suggests an ideological stance rather than one concerned with justice as such.



*no white court would have ever found in favour of a black man
vx a white man, at one time

 

Well, if one of them wants to leave the Outback for the prairie, I'm here.

 

I don't just look at the cheating as the ridiculous part of cases like these cases. I look at the fact that the women stopped taking her birth control and didn't tell the man and the man is the one found guilty of, 'deception' for not telling the women he had a vasectomy as the ridiculous part of cases like these.

It's not just cases like these where the justice system is biased, men spend 63% more time in prison than women arrested for the same crime, and that's after being 20 times more likely to be prosecuted for the crime in the first place.

...and do I really need to post the pages and pages and pages of studies and links I've posted before that show that family and divorced courts are biased against men???

 

Yes I think you need to because when faced with such facts certian people will claim every case is judged on it's merits and there is no such bias

I have to ask if there is no such bias could I succesfully file a suit against my girlfriend to force her to help raise a child which I have with another woman who I cheated on my girl friend with.

After all we were co habitating.

 

Too much drama in the world today on both sides of the fence to make a long-term commitment and expect it to last.

 

But the article is not arguing that - they are pointing to simple maths. There are more available women than there are men. It is not a case of gun shy men, the guys are just not physically there

 

Wrong.

The article clearly describes an absence of ELIGIBLE men without even bothering to explain what makes a man eligible other than he needs to make $60,000 a year or more and be single.

The argument in the article is actually over whether women are just being too picky or of the men are not there. Either way they over looked the other obvious alternative which we have been discussing since the OP.

Turning against marriage and relationships is not gun shy it is merely sensible

 

Of course, each country has its own demographics for its own reasons.
There is a huge shortage of eligible women in China.

In Japan, and lot of women dont want to marry those worlds most unromantic guys aka overgrown babies.

In singapore, a lot of women dont want to spend so much time on education and then be housewives.

And most anywhere, guys who are eligible in the sense of being stable,
mature and of course, hetero are always in short supply.

Its not easy to grow up and a lot of guys dont have it in them.

 

Demographics do count for a lot you are correct.
But that has nothing to do with this thread or the Op whichis how men are being driven away from marriage and relationships by feminists who call all men of certian cultures overgrown babies or something.

 

Said by a feminist who admits flat out she doesn't like men,

...and by, "stable' she means wealthy. So as a feminist she believes women should make more money than men, but at the same time, the only men she finds eligible are wealthy men.

Talk about having your cake and eating it too

I love ho she also puts all the blame for this issue on men

talk about gynocentrism

 

Some men are pretty sorry specimens. I know more than a few women who are, too. I'd feel so sorry for any many who married one of them!

I know a Japanese couple who seem so in love, so perfect for eachother, i'd never stereotype an entire nation.

Regardless of all that, IF some guys are of so little fibre that they will
let the reality or their perception of "feminists" ruin their lives, well, ok; Dr Darwin would understand. It should work equally well for their nemeses, too, fair is fair.

I meet very few men I'd remotely consider, if they were what men and marriage were all about, Id sure stay single and stay away from them.

I wasnt even looking, and then found myself spending more and more time studying with this guy, and then it wasnt all study any more!

I wish you and the other guys here well, Someone is looking for someone like you!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gLOD0yvFCw

 

You did in fact stererotype all the men of a nation even if you did not mean to. It was borderline racist.

No one ever said anything about men ruining their lives the fact what has been discussed is the opposite.

Men are claiming their lives and refusing the play the game. It is not a perception but fact that feminist idealology has been influential in passing laws such as no fault divorce, abortion and demand and many court precedents which destroy the lives of men.

Therefore men are simply responding by no longer letting such feminist thought have it both ways.

You cannot blame men for everything ( even if you call it the patriarchy ) and then expect them to be your husbands and fathers.

Women claim not to need a man and guess what? More and more men agree except it is women we do not need.

 

Suit yourself, you will believe / make up whatever you want about me or other women anyway, you dont need me to say anything.

Dr. Darwin will settle your account, tho barren old age is probably its own reward.

 

Thanks for proving at least one of my points.

You are so judgemental of others who ignore your standard of happiness

 

"Thank you for proving my point" has to be the lamest internet quip, ever.

its not my fault you make things up. Its your fault if you believe them.

As for "barren" you will like it or not.
bar·ren (brn)
adj.
1.
a. Not producing offspring.
b. Incapable of producing offspring

Old age comes along too.

The "racist" comments i made came directly from the Japanese couple I mentioned.

You were speaking of someone besides you as being judgemental ?

 

It's only lame when it applies to you as it did.
The racist comment you made was yours and only after the fact do you attribute it to anyone else.

My life is a fukll and satisfying one desite your attempts to call it or me barren.

Thats the point of mine which you helped to prove.

Not lame but accurate

 

Like I said, you will make things up as you like.

but im sure your life is in fact fukll.

 

I made nothing up I stated fact

 

I love how she blames men for the problems created by feminism

Typical gynocentrism and entitlement

 

Coming from someone whose whole belief system is based on lies-lol

 

You'd make a good creationist, that is their stock in trade, making things up and never acknowledging it. Maybe not even knowing it.