[GlockTrigga]

(03-27-2015 01:51 PM)s3k Wrote:  

It is possible (without baby moms being a drug addict, or poor, or alcoholic, or abusive etc) to win custody of your children. Just have to read family and probate law books and prove its in the best interest of your child to live with YOU and not your baby mom!

Please start another thread on this explaining how you did it and the social/economic status of your baby mothers (which factors into a Man winning custody). In my 28 years of life knowing multiple Fathers dealing with this issue including my own (regarding my half-sister) and speaking with many Lawyers cases like yours are rare and limited to certain jurisdictions.

This is obviously a huge issue and for any Man who has had this degree of success it is paramount to share how exactly you overcame the mountain of legal obstacles. Because at the end of the day after watching Divorce Corp the documentary it doesn't come down to laws in family court - It is totally at the Judge's discretion.

[Sonsowey]

On the topic of Judith Rich Harris' theory of zero parental influence, I'll let her speak for herself, from an interview for Time:

"How strongly do you believe The Nurture Assumption's assertions hold up a decade on?

They've held up quite well. I took an extreme position: that parents have no important long-term effects on their children's personalities. By doing this, I was making myself an easy target, inviting developmental psychologists in the academic world to shoot me down. But their attacks have been surprisingly ineffectual. One traditional developmental [psychologist]even admitted, not long ago, that they still can't prove that parents have any long-term effects on children. She continues to hope, however, that someday they will find the proof they are looking for — proof that can stand up to the scrutiny of skeptics like me. (See the best and worst moms of all time.)

You distinguish between moral attitudes and personality traits in terms of the extent each are molded by influences outside the home. What sets them apart?

It hinges on the distinction between socialization and personality development. The strongest influence on morality is the local culture or subculture. But this influence may be different in different situations. For example, according to the local culture, it might be okay to cheat on a test in school but not okay to cheat in sports. Socialization adapts children to their culture — they learn to behave in the manner approved by their culture.

Personality development, on the other hand, is not about conformity. Differences in personality don't go away during childhood and adolescence — they may even widen. Explaining why this happens, and why even identical twins reared in the same home have different personalities, is a challenge.

Where does genetics come in?

Genetic influences account for a little less than half of the variation in personality within a given population. Some of the variation may be due to random biological processes: just as identical twins don't have exactly the same freckles, they don't have exactly the same brain. Some small amount may be due to socialization — for example, some cultures foster a more aggressive personality. The remainder depends on the experiences people have over the course of childhood and adolescence — experiences they have outside the home, often in the presence of their peers.

One of the things children have to do while they're growing up is to find out what kind of people they are. Am I smart or dull? Pretty or plain? Strong or weak? They find out the answers by comparing themselves to their peers. And they put this knowledge to good use. They find out what they're good at and concentrate on that, and give up competing in contests they are sure to lose. They try out for leadership, for example, by finding out whether other kids are willing to follow them. Research has shown that boys who are taller than their peers in adolescence tend to have more dominant, self-assured personalities in adulthood. On average, they earn higher salaries in adulthood, even though the others may have caught up to them in height. (See 9 kid foods to avoid.)

So if they can't influence the adults their children become, then what, if any, steps can parents take to help ensure their kids succeed? Or become "good" people?

I believe the most important function of parents is to give their children a happy home — not because it will make them more likely to succeed but because everyone has a right to a happy home life. Aside from that, there are other things parents can do, such as providing training in music or sports. Parents have some ability to decide where they will live and where their children will go to school. Some schools have an atmosphere that is more favorable to academic achievement.

As for making them into "good" people, the evidence shows that parents cannot do this. A child who is well behaved at home — who doesn't lie or steal, for instance — may lie or cheat in school if that's what all the other kids are doing. It works the other way, too: some kids are terrible troublemakers at home but little angels in school.

Research now suggests that much of the achievement gap in the U.S. is in place before children even reach kindergarten, suggesting parents play a huge role in their kids' academic success. How does those conclusions fit into your own research?

Adoption studies show that being raised in an intellectually rich environment can give a temporary boost to a child's intelligence and knowledge. The reason it's temporary is that bright children raised in less advantageous environments eventually catch up. But there's another factor here: subculture. A child raised in a subculture that values intellectual activities and takes schoolwork seriously has an advantage that doesn't go away. So even if the early achievement gap is due to deficiencies in the children's homes, the later achievement gap may be due to subcultural attitudes toward schoolwork and learning."

http://content.time.com/time/health/arti...84,00.html

[Excalibur]

Haven't read all the replies in this thread, but this is a timely topic for me. I am 43 y/o and will turn 44 in a few month. Some guys wrote about male master spinning in the head. Yup, it's true. My mind set has been increasingly like a 33 y/o woman.

Anyways, I don't want to wallow in my own plight. I do like to propose a scenario for the younger guys.

One of my co-worker is the same age 43, but he popped out 2 different kids, a boy and girl earlier in his lie with 2 different woman out of wed lock. Sure he pays child support, but that's an obvious responsibility. But he doesn't pay any alimony. He shares custody with the women, which also means half of the time he lives the single life. So a possible scenario for you younger guys is

- Have a good time and practice contraception in your 20's.
- Knock up a girl or 2 in your early 30's, but not get married.
- In your late 30's or early 40's get on TRT(testosterone replacement) to get's you sex drive and physique back to hit on more young hot girls

Right now I don't want to get on TRT, but without it it's harder to build muscle mass, stay lean. Yes you can get on TRT, and come off it to have children, but I am sure it's a horrible feeling to be on and off testosterone. Those weeks while you recover will feel like total sh-t.

So the point is to have kids without marriage some what early so that you can continue your player lifestyle indefinitely. Also most guys will not continue their player life style because you just will not have the sex drive like in your 20s. That's shy it'll be nice to be on TRT and stay on it.

Thoughts?

[Basement Dweller]

Here are some thoughts on having children that I think you should all consider:

- The world doesn't need more children, overpopulation is already a problem and the human race is at no risk of going extinct due to population decline.

- You don't need to pass on you 'amazing' genes. Your children will most likely amount to nothing in the great scheme of things, they will not impact the world in the way every parent thinks they will.

- Many people who did change the world had children that amounted to nothing, see Einstein.

- Your 'legacy' is worthless in the great scheme of things (see above points). Your genes will be wittled down to nothing after a few generations anyway.

- Bringing children into this world so that they can look after you in your old age is tyranical. There is no guaruntee that your children will look after you in your old age anyway, they might have their own families and problems to deal with, they might be living in another country etc.

- The world is not a very nice place. Your children could be exposed to negative influences whilst you are away busting your ass trying to provide for them...drugs, crime, gangs etc.

- Your children could be born then die horribly shortly after, or they could be born with down syndrome or with a lifelong affliction that you will have to carry the burdon of...consider the risks.

- Most people who have children do so out of selfish ego extension, so they can see themselves in other people and craft a new self for themselves in a way they failed to do in their own lives. These kinds of people don't care for children, they want to have their own needs met first so they can vicariously live through another person.

[Laner]

(03-29-2015 11:54 AM)Basement Dweller Wrote:  

Here are some thoughts on having children that I think you should all consider:

- The world doesn't need more children, overpopulation is already a problem and the human race is at no risk of going extinct due to population decline.

- You don't need to pass on you 'amazing' genes. Your children will most likely amount to nothing in the great scheme of things, they will not impact the world in the way every parent thinks they will.

- Many people who did change the world had children that amounted to nothing, see Einstein.

- Your 'legacy' is worthless in the great scheme of things (see above points). Your genes will be wittled down to nothing after a few generations anyway.

- Bringing children into this world so that they can look after you in your old age is tyranical. There is no guaruntee that your children will look after you in your old age anyway, they might have their own families and problems to deal with, they might be living in another country etc.

- The world is not a very nice place. Your children could be exposed to negative influences whilst you are away busting your ass trying to provide for them...drugs, crime, gangs etc.

- Your children could be born then die horribly shortly after, or they could be born with down syndrome or with a lifelong affliction that you will have to carry the burdon of...consider the risks.

- Most people who have children do so out of selfish ego extension, so they can see themselves in other people and craft a new self for themselves in a way they failed to do in their own lives. These kinds of people don't care for children, they want to have their own needs met first so they can vicariously live through another person.

Damn you are something dark. Get out of the basement and into the real world.

Sure those are things to "consider" but if any one of those things were enough to stop a man from having children, then that man should probably just not have children until he can get his head straight.

And if you actually believe all these things..... God help you. Truly.

[MY DETROIT PLAYAS]

@Reco2100

Your observation was totally on point. With my sister there was certainly favoritism in play, and many times as kids can sense these things - this creates a competition. Looking back, I can also see where their clinical diagnosis was used to excuse some disturbing behaviors.

[Sonsowey]

(03-29-2015 11:54 AM)Basement Dweller Wrote:  

Here are some thoughts on having children that I think you should all consider:

- The world doesn't need more children, overpopulation is already a problem and the human race is at no risk of going extinct due to population decline.

- You don't need to pass on you 'amazing' genes. Your children will most likely amount to nothing in the great scheme of things, they will not impact the world in the way every parent thinks they will.

- Many people who did change the world had children that amounted to nothing, see Einstein.

- Your 'legacy' is worthless in the great scheme of things (see above points). Your genes will be wittled down to nothing after a few generations anyway.

- Bringing children into this world so that they can look after you in your old age is tyranical. There is no guaruntee that your children will look after you in your old age anyway, they might have their own families and problems to deal with, they might be living in another country etc.

- The world is not a very nice place. Your children could be exposed to negative influences whilst you are away busting your ass trying to provide for them...drugs, crime, gangs etc.

- Your children could be born then die horribly shortly after, or they could be born with down syndrome or with a lifelong affliction that you will have to carry the burdon of...consider the risks.

- Most people who have children do so out of selfish ego extension, so they can see themselves in other people and craft a new self for themselves in a way they failed to do in their own lives. These kinds of people don't care for children, they want to have their own needs met first so they can vicariously live through another person.

Your genes will not be passed on and the next generation will be a tad bit sunnier in its disposition!

[reco2100]

(03-29-2015 11:01 AM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

On the topic of Judith Rich Harris' theory of zero parental influence, I'll let her speak for herself, from an interview for Time:

"How strongly do you believe The Nurture Assumption's assertions hold up a decade on?

They've held up quite well. I took an extreme position: that parents have no important long-term effects on their children's personalities. By doing this, I was making myself an easy target, inviting developmental psychologists in the academic world to shoot me down. But their attacks have been surprisingly ineffectual. One traditional developmental [psychologist]even admitted, not long ago, that they still can't prove that parents have any long-term effects on children. She continues to hope, however, that someday they will find the proof they are looking for — proof that can stand up to the scrutiny of skeptics like me. (See the best and worst moms of all time.)

You distinguish between moral attitudes and personality traits in terms of the extent each are molded by influences outside the home. What sets them apart?

It hinges on the distinction between socialization and personality development. The strongest influence on morality is the local culture or subculture. But this influence may be different in different situations. For example, according to the local culture, it might be okay to cheat on a test in school but not okay to cheat in sports. Socialization adapts children to their culture — they learn to behave in the manner approved by their culture.

Personality development, on the other hand, is not about conformity. Differences in personality don't go away during childhood and adolescence — they may even widen. Explaining why this happens, and why even identical twins reared in the same home have different personalities, is a challenge.

Where does genetics come in?

Genetic influences account for a little less than half of the variation in personality within a given population. Some of the variation may be due to random biological processes: just as identical twins don't have exactly the same freckles, they don't have exactly the same brain. Some small amount may be due to socialization — for example, some cultures foster a more aggressive personality. The remainder depends on the experiences people have over the course of childhood and adolescence — experiences they have outside the home, often in the presence of their peers.

One of the things children have to do while they're growing up is to find out what kind of people they are. Am I smart or dull? Pretty or plain? Strong or weak? They find out the answers by comparing themselves to their peers. And they put this knowledge to good use. They find out what they're good at and concentrate on that, and give up competing in contests they are sure to lose. They try out for leadership, for example, by finding out whether other kids are willing to follow them. Research has shown that boys who are taller than their peers in adolescence tend to have more dominant, self-assured personalities in adulthood. On average, they earn higher salaries in adulthood, even though the others may have caught up to them in height. (See 9 kid foods to avoid.)

So if they can't influence the adults their children become, then what, if any, steps can parents take to help ensure their kids succeed? Or become "good" people?

I believe the most important function of parents is to give their children a happy home — not because it will make them more likely to succeed but because everyone has a right to a happy home life. Aside from that, there are other things parents can do, such as providing training in music or sports. Parents have some ability to decide where they will live and where their children will go to school. Some schools have an atmosphere that is more favorable to academic achievement.

As for making them into "good" people, the evidence shows that parents cannot do this. A child who is well behaved at home — who doesn't lie or steal, for instance — may lie or cheat in school if that's what all the other kids are doing. It works the other way, too: some kids are terrible troublemakers at home but little angels in school.

Research now suggests that much of the achievement gap in the U.S. is in place before children even reach kindergarten, suggesting parents play a huge role in their kids' academic success. How does those conclusions fit into your own research?

Adoption studies show that being raised in an intellectually rich environment can give a temporary boost to a child's intelligence and knowledge. The reason it's temporary is that bright children raised in less advantageous environments eventually catch up. But there's another factor here: subculture. A child raised in a subculture that values intellectual activities and takes schoolwork seriously has an advantage that doesn't go away. So even if the early achievement gap is due to deficiencies in the children's homes, the later achievement gap may be due to subcultural attitudes toward schoolwork and learning."

http://content.time.com/time/health/arti...84,00.html

Both Time magazine and the author are part of the liberal anti human intelligentsia that I referred to earlier. This interview is a softball with no rigor at all, typical of the ongoing failure of of Time and its publishers. Also keep in mind that both these parties are also part of the subset of radical feminism that has wrecked so many lives and what we discuss on RVF daily.

For example she is criticized for confusing correlation for causation. But this is not addressed at all. Also the fallacy of treating the child's peer group as having more influence than the parents. When the parents are in actuality part of their peer group, and even assist with the choosing of the peer group.

[s3k]

- Glocktrigga
Aight I got you but I need time. Lots of time because theres A LoT involved. It really isn't up to a judge. Its up to the guardian at litum (childrens lawyer) the judge is going to side with the guardian at litum 99% of the time. I'll do a write up for everybody but going to take me at least a couple of weeks (u seen how many kids i got lol).

[Sonsowey]

(03-29-2015 04:16 PM)reco2100 Wrote:  

Both Time magazine and the author are part of the liberal anti human intelligentsia that I referred to earlier. This interview is a softball with no rigor at all, typical of the ongoing failure of of Time and its publishers. Also keep in mind that both these parties are also part of the subset of radical feminism that has wrecked so many lives and what we discuss on RVF daily.

For example she is criticized for confusing correlation for causation. But this is not addressed at all. Also the fallacy of treating the child's peer group as having more influence than the parents. When the parents are in actuality part of their peer group, and even assist with the choosing of the peer group.

If you want more rigor you can read Harris' book or this paper by her here, well cited beyond any doubts:

http://faculty.weber.edu/eamsel/Classes/...arris.html

You can also cite something about her claim as specifically wrong besides using ad hominem attacks against her.

Further, I have no idea if Harris is a liberal or conservative or what, but the idea that a child's nurture has nothing to do with it is 100% opposed to the typical liberal idea about child-rearing. If you have read anything about education research, every failing of children or groups of children usually ends up going back to a bad home environment or a bad school, where Harris says that things like intelligence are to a big degree inborn and things like reading to your kid, putting them in enriching after-school programs, etc. basically doesn't amount to squat.

[Smooth Operator]

(03-28-2015 04:29 AM)nizona Wrote:  

First of all at my work there are more or less two levels of workers, those with kids or those without. I feel like I have been 'promoted' above my colleagues without children because I have now more in common with my older colleagues with children (I am the youngest by several years) and having a child is much more difficult than anything anyone does at work (and we are working on a 500 million euro project).

Good observation that deserves a thread on its own. I noticed this tendency very strong with my past 2 employers. Colleagues with kids or just in a serious relationship were perceived in a better way than the bachelors. They received higher wages and bonuses even when they were not better at work than the bachelors.

I think employers like them more because (i) these people are less likely to switch jobs (as they want security) and (ii) they can relate better to them (people that never were players are envious towards players and feel them as a threat/better than them).

[forever_beta]

(03-31-2015 06:17 AM)Smooth Operator Wrote:  

Good observation that deserves a thread on its own. I noticed this tendency very strong with my past 2 employers. Colleagues with kids or just in a serious relationship were perceived in a better way than the bachelors. They received higher wages and bonuses even when they were not better at work than the bachelors.

I think employers like them more because (i) these people are less likely to switch jobs (as they want security) and (ii) they can relate better to them (people that never were players are envious towards players and feel them as a threat/better than them).

I think it depends on the industry. In my field, at the end of the day its really about skill and how much you accomplish. People without kids can completely neglect everything in their life except work, giving them an edge if they choose. Many of the best paid and highest ranking people in my company are workaholics like this.

[RoastBeefCurtains4Me]

(03-27-2015 05:56 PM)Slacker101 Wrote:  

(03-20-2015 11:40 PM)RoastBeefCurtains4Me Wrote:  

I am 50 and can't have children. Actually, I believe that I could using IVF with ICSI http://infertility.about.com/od/ivf/a/icsi_ivf.htm, but there are lots of reasons why this will never happen. This is a technology that only came along after my ex-wife had already gotten too old.

• I'd have to meet a woman who wants to try to have children by this risky means.
• It's expensive and frequently fails, so multiple attempts are needed.
• There is an increased risk of health and behavioral problems with IVF children.
• I'd be in my 70's by the time any kids even reach adulthood.
• Finally, there's always the chance she'd block me from access to the children and still hit me for child support.
  

The thing is, while I accepted it at a certain point when I was younger, I feel a strong regret over not having any children now. I'm tempted to do whatever it takes to find a woman who will do the IVF with me, raise the funds to cover it, and take my chances with the risks involved.

Perhaps this is only my hamster, but I really do feel like I have no legacy. I wish I had a loving wife who was the mother of my children, with a several grown, successful, loving children, and a growing brood of grandchildren.

If I were younger, I'd go overseas and find a traditional girl to build a family with. As it is, I'm trying to arrange my affairs to be able to start spending time overseas, and at least give myself the option to pursue this route.

Are there really health/behavioral problems with IVF? I'm actually the result of an IVF (not ICSI). Back then it was far less common and all. My dad was actually 45 when they started attempting it. So he was 65/66 when I hit 20. It wasn't really that different thoguh, other than people sometimes mistaking my parents for being my grandparents. I do believe it actually took 3 or 4 tries though. I've met other people that were IVFs while I was in College, bio classes liked to ask people when talking about reproduction. They seemed normal, and were at a very good school like myself. That being said we could be the exceptions I suppose.

I had seen this claim in other places, and researched it. From what I found, there are problems. I forget exactly what at this point. The percentage rate was not too high, just a few percent, and I believe the problems were behavioral in some way. I suppose the risk is low enough that this isn't a reason to avoid trying.

As I understand it, IVF is very hard on a relationship. Each cycle is a multi-step process. In each step, it is possible to fail, and it takes a couple of weeks to see if it succeeded or failed. Therefore, since it often takes 2-3 IVF cycles for one successful birth, you live for a couple of years in a non-stop sequence of living on pins and needles, waiting to see if you've failed, and usually there are a couple of failures, so the stakes on each subsequent step just keep getting higher and more stressful. This kind of strain on the relationship is what I'm most concerned about.

In any case, it's one thing to go into a relationship with the intent to have children, then find that one of the partners has a fertility problem. However, in my case, I already know, so I'd have to tell a prospective mate before we married. I'd want to marry before having children, and raise them in wedlock. I doubt any childless woman would choose to marry an infertile man with plans for trying IVF. I'm not interested in a single mother. I already went this route once.

[iknowexactly]

(03-28-2015 12:28 AM)reco2100 Wrote:  

I have two kids planned and I am still married to their mother. And despite all of her faults she is a very good mother. My daughter is truly a beautiful girl and nothing like many of the little sluts I see in her high school. But I worry about her future being surrounded by the class of women in our society. Learning those behaviors.

And you will never stop worrying. Get used to it.

Thanks for telling us about your story, it's really educational.

I wonder if you've seriously considered trying to raise kids somewhere else? I'm not in any way criticizing you as of course most people's financial situation makes that impossible but I wonder if th narcisissm of American culture really is a bad thing especially for girls...

The question is of course where could one go where people are organized like Americans but not so rude .. .or can you really overcome that if you raise them well?

It's hard for me to envision either way. I knew one French guy who was beaten up repeatedly in school, that doesn't happen in most schools here.

[reco2100]

(04-07-2015 04:34 AM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

(03-28-2015 12:28 AM)reco2100 Wrote:  

I have two kids planned and I am still married to their mother. And despite all of her faults she is a very good mother. My daughter is truly a beautiful girl and nothing like many of the little sluts I see in her high school. But I worry about her future being surrounded by the class of women in our society. Learning those behaviors.

And you will never stop worrying. Get used to it.

Thanks for telling us about your story, it's really educational.

I wonder if you've seriously considered trying to raise kids somewhere else? I'm not in any way criticizing you as of course most people's financial situation makes that impossible but I wonder if th narcisissm of American culture really is a bad thing especially for girls...

The question is of course where could one go where people are organized like Americans but not so rude .. .or can you really overcome that if you raise them well?

It's hard for me to envision either way. I knew one French guy who was beaten up repeatedly in school, that doesn't happen in most schools here.

Well my daughter and son go to a school that is considered one of the finest in the county in a district that is considered one of the best in the state. The kids themselves sarcastically call it the white school. But there are quite a few fights in the hallways and guess who are involved in all of the fights? Always girls.

Why is that? Single mothers. The feminist culture. The feminization and marginalization of boys in the school system. No strong male figures in the school system. My kids never get in trouble. One day my son left his cell phone on in class and got a detention. It was such a rare occurrence that we were truly surprised.

I am concerned about girls narcissism and I sometimes see it in my daughter but I nip it in the bud early. And when I do she becomes closer to me.

I am not sure about where you could go to raise them. Countries with a traditional culture. And get involved and stay involved. Know what is going on, on a daily basis. We have kids in my neighborhood from Russia,China,India,Jordan,Vietnam,Puerto Rico, Chile,Columbia,Cuba,Dominican Republic, and on and on. And without exception except for one Puerto Rican girl with a single mother all of the problem kids are American and usually the girls. There was one British family that had a mean little boy but his parents literally never came out of the house.

Not sure about overseas maybe pick a educated European country with traditional values. Research the schools, private school is also an option in third world countries. I like Costa Rica as a place to live but don't know the schools there.

[reco2100]

Another thing on the bullying of the French kid. Kids are highly social in their organizing and friends but even in their bullying. They are also much closer to animals. Have you ever seen where the pecking order comes from.

I knew someone who raised chickens and once one chicken pecks another chicken and the victim does not do anything about it then a third chicken will come over and peck the victim himself. Before you know it all the chickens will come over and take a shot at him. Before long the primary victim will be dead. That is how pecking order starts. All the chickens are trying to do is remove the weak ones from the gene pool. Brutal but it is for survival.

People are a little like this. Especially bullying. I have watched it. I was raised in a very rough area and had to fight or get victimized. That is why I taught both my kids never to take shit from anyone. The easiest way to stop it is to retaliate immediately and they will leave you alone.

I suspect the french kid did not know how to defend himself or he would not. Eventually everyone just treats him like that chicken whether they use violence themselves or not. A good school will control bullying and violence. But in the US schools are run by women and they really don't know how to deal with it.

[Tytalus]

If you're going to marry and wife up a woman, from wherever, I strongly, strongly recommend looking up Athol Kay on how to survive marriage. He has a great series of very red pill guides on how to maintain attraction in your marriage, which is something not a lot of the manosphere focus's on.

If you do one thing, look up his primer:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Married-Life-P...1460981731

There is his new site:

http://atholkay.com/

his old blog

http://marriedmansexlife.com/blog/ - you have to go back a little bit as he has shifted his marketing material/approach.

Also, since I was a client of his I can pass on a code for a discount of his new videos - which are good.

He does have forums... But they're well... Full of guys (I will admit, I was one once) formerly like me who had hit rock bottom in their marriage and are in a pretty bad place. It's taken me two years to improve and build up my married game and not sound like a puling beta schlub when describing my marriage to other people.

There are definitely guys on his forum who were totally badass in their 20s, slaying pussy left and right, finally get married... And then over the years fall apart and one day in their 40s or 50s are like "what the fuck happened to me?" Go in with your eyes open.

On the topic of kids, I have 3. I love em to bits and really do enjoy being a father. As for my wife... ergh. I could have done better. Under no circumstances whatsoever, never ever, ever, EVER marry a diabetic.

If anyone wants to PM me with questions about married life and how to pick a wife and not make my mistakes, feel free.

[Dr. Howard]

(04-07-2015 10:31 AM)reco2100 Wrote:  

Another thing on the bullying of the French kid. Kids are highly social in their organizing and friends but even in their bullying. They are also much closer to animals. Have you ever seen where the pecking order comes from.

I knew someone who raised chickens and once one chicken pecks another chicken and the victim does not do anything about it then a third chicken will come over and peck the victim himself. Before you know it all the chickens will come over and take a shot at him. Before long the primary victim will be dead. That is how pecking order starts. All the chickens are trying to do is remove the weak ones from the gene pool. Brutal but it is for survival.

People are a little like this. Especially bullying. I have watched it. I was raised in a very rough area and had to fight or get victimized. That is why I taught both my kids never to take shit from anyone. The easiest way to stop it is to retaliate immediately and they will leave you alone.

I suspect the french kid did not know how to defend himself or he would not. Eventually everyone just treats him like that chicken whether they use violence themselves or not. A good school will control bullying and violence. But in the US schools are run by women and they really don't know how to deal with it.

So true. I was a year younger than my peers as I skipped grades like doogie houser. So though school I was continually smaller and 'looked' like a target. However all that was that required was me savagely beating a mid level bully in front of everyone to be left alone. It had to be repeated every time some new kid would come into class or I moved. It also couldn't be mild. That kid had to be crying and shielding his face, with either blood or snot coming out of his nose. Such is the law of the schoolyard jungle.

[Mister X]

Couldn't be further away from wanting kids at the moment. But I am nowhere near ready emotionally or financially. My maturity level is not there right now and it would be better for all parties involved if I didn't have kids. That can change when I enter my 30s.

My issue is not so much having children as much as it is finding a woman to bear them. At 27 years old, I have not even found a woman I'm remotely comfortable having an exclusive relationship with. Let alone someone I can see having a family with.

Women as a whole need to step it up big time quality wise if I'm going to go the family route.

I'm finding quite a lot of girls that are misandrist, vapid, difficult, inconsiderate, flakey, and overall just don't have many of the motherly qualities I would want in a wife. If that's the bunch I'm supposed to pick from, I'll pass.

[Travesty]

(03-24-2015 07:16 AM)Isaac Jordan Wrote:  

It also gives me another decade of experience with women, which I imagine will only become more important given the fragility of modern relationships.

An understated, yet extremely important note to highlight for other young guys. You hear a lot of guys getting that first divorce quickly. Lots of times these are guys in their 20s (even from on this board).

That extra ten years or so to wait is great. The difference between the way I treated women from 28yrs. old vs 29 is huge. I imagine I will have a huge upgrade again from 30-35.

Also late 20s is when a lot of guys start feeling the need to seriously succeed financially if they ever will. This drive when you are a bit older will make your game tighter by valuing a woman's attention less.

[VforVlad]

[Laner]

Update on kids.

I am just over a couple months into fatherhood and my son is doing great. Just had his two month check up where they weigh him, give him some shots and give a general overview of his health. His health is perfect, his size is in the 80th percentile (bigger than 80% of the two month boy population) and he is responding to all his alertness tests.

Even still, as another poster wrote, this still does not stop a man from having thoughts of fear. In two short months, I have had a new mental hurdle suddenly thrown in front of me. Only this one is looks easy but the consequences are terrible for failure. Suddenly the only thing I want in life is to have my son healthy. Strange feelings from such a selfish man.

Childbirth created a strange bond between his mother and I. We have always been very tight with lots of love, but in her 3.5 hours of labour I was able to see just what kind of pain a woman goes through for her children. In those hours I was thinking "f*ck feminism for guilting men into the labour room" and "what a miracle, what an amazing woman". I will say straight up that being there in that room is one of the most uncomfortable places I have ever been. If she would not have wanted me there, I would have been out in a heart beat. Its a place for women, and I mean that in the kindest way. It was the female equivalent to a hockey dressing room during a final game. The only real reason I see men being there is to hold a massive amount of guilt over the men, and I am sure many husbands never really are able to crawl out of this deficit.

The first month was not very memorable, other than being proud to be able to walk over and hold my son, or lay in bed and read with him sleeping on my chest. Special moments for sure, but he was very much the mothers 24/7. I never even changed a diaper.

Towards the second month things changed fast. He was smiling when he would see me, loved being swung, and would talk to me (not much to his mother). Even at this extremely young age, it is very apparent that he is a boy. He loves being naked (as all boys/men do) and this is not something a mother would ever understand. She changes him so fast that his balls dont have a chance to even air out. So I started changing him once or twice a day. Get him naked, let him free ball, and then just talk with him. This is by far the most vocal he ever gets, just me and him, a special bond between father and son that is not understood by women.

I knew this was going to be good, but I had no idea. I am not going to be one of the cliche men that says that he never knew what life was until his kids. But I will say that it brings a different kind of meaning into my life. The first month I worked hard, long hours, every day. But now I cut my hours way back in order to spend time with my son. He changes every day, and I came to terms with being financially struggling for a while in order to spend these rapid development moments with him. What do I want to think about when I am dying? The answer is absolutely clear to me.

[MY DETROIT PLAYAS]

(06-02-2015 12:02 PM)Laner Wrote:  

Update on kids.

I am just over a couple months into fatherhood and my son is doing great. Just had his two month check up where they weigh him, give him some shots and give a general overview of his health. His health is perfect, his size is in the 80th percentile (bigger than 80% of the two month boy population) and he is responding to all his alertness tests.

Even still, as another poster wrote, this still does not stop a man from having thoughts of fear. In two short months, I have had a new mental hurdle suddenly thrown in front of me. Only this one is looks easy but the consequences are terrible for failure. Suddenly the only thing I want in life is to have my son healthy. Strange feelings from such a selfish man.

Childbirth created a strange bond between his mother and I. We have always been very tight with lots of love, but in her 3.5 hours of labour I was able to see just what kind of pain a woman goes through for her children. In those hours I was thinking "f*ck feminism for guilting men into the labour room" and "what a miracle, what an amazing woman". I will say straight up that being there in that room is one of the most uncomfortable places I have ever been. If she would not have wanted me there, I would have been out in a heart beat. Its a place for women, and I mean that in the kindest way. It was the female equivalent to a hockey dressing room during a final game. The only real reason I see men being there is to hold a massive amount of guilt over the men, and I am sure many husbands never really are able to crawl out of this deficit.

The first month was not very memorable, other than being proud to be able to walk over and hold my son, or lay in bed and read with him sleeping on my chest. Special moments for sure, but he was very much the mothers 24/7. I never even changed a diaper.

Towards the second month things changed fast. He was smiling when he would see me, loved being swung, and would talk to me (not much to his mother). Even at this extremely young age, it is very apparent that he is a boy. He loves being naked (as all boys/men do) and this is not something a mother would ever understand. She changes him so fast that his balls dont have a chance to even air out. So I started changing him once or twice a day. Get him naked, let him free ball, and then just talk with him. This is by far the most vocal he ever gets, just me and him, a special bond between father and son that is not understood by women.

I knew this was going to be good, but I had no idea. I am not going to be one of the cliche men that says that he never knew what life was until his kids. But I will say that it brings a different kind of meaning into my life. The first month I worked hard, long hours, every day. But now I cut my hours way back in order to spend time with my son. He changes every day, and I came to terms with being financially struggling for a while in order to spend these rapid development moments with him. What do I want to think about when I am dying? The answer is absolutely clear to me.

[MMM]

I’m early 50's, the father of girls.  I never had a strong desire for children.  I enjoyed other people’s kids, but didn’t see the need to necessarily have my own.  Everyone told me, “oh wait till you have your own, you’ll see ...”  So, now I have my own and yes, they’re incredible, a joy and a blessing, each in their own way.  But ........ they’re also a huge financial burden and they tie me to my ex, who’ll I’ll have to see for the rest of my life.  Thank the universe that at least she’s a great mom. 

As a man, you can live comfortably and support yourself and perhaps a broad if you so desire.  But once you have children, the system is an efficient well oiled machine that will suck the surplus of your hard work till you drop.  Don’t be that sucker.  Be the “cool uncle” that travels the world; does interesting things; and is loving life.

So, my advice is don’t have children.  Enjoy the children of your siblings and friends.  Be the “cool uncle.”  That’s why grandparents love grandchildren, its all of the fun and games and at the end of the day, you send them home to mom and dad for the heavy lifting.  That’s my two cents, your mileage may vary.  

[CleanSlate]

(06-02-2015 01:43 PM)MMM Wrote:  

So, my advice is don’t have children.  Enjoy the children of your siblings and friends.  Be the “cool uncle.”  That’s why grandparents love grandchildren, its all of the fun and games and at the end of the day, you send them home to mom and dad for the heavy lifting.  That’s my two cents, your mileage may vary.  

That's the way I am leaning. I have 3 nieces who live 30 minutes from me, and I see them every weekend for tickle fights and I enjoy them immensely. But, as much as I love them, I'm glad they aren't my own children because after about the 3 hour mark, they start driving me crazy.