[the Thing]

(12-05-2018 09:08 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

Your dad was sackless and you blame your mother for becoming the man of the house?

I'm not blaming my dad nor am I blaming my mother. I'm not blaming anyone.

Exactly how did you figure I was blaming my mother for anything let alone as ambiguous as something like "becoming the man of the house"?

(12-05-2018 09:08 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

Christ, I hope you inherited your masculinity from her side of the family.

No. I grew up raised by women, without a proper father figure and had to learn masculinity, and by extension, how life as a man works, all on my own.

And by the way, I'm not claiming that I'm nearly even close to having it figured out yet.

But I stand firmly that no other kid has to go through all that shit that I have.

OP -- relationships are built on gender role structures whether you deny it or not.

In an ideal marriage there should exactly 1 man and 1 woman. If you are 1 man, but she's also 1 man, it's pretty obvious that that shit's not going to work out.

All I'm saying is you won't be doing your child a favor by trying to save a lost cause of a relationship.

Edit: just read Laner's post, he sums it up quite well.

[Beirut]

If not a troll, you should divorce. You refer to the mother of your child as a bitch to other men and constantly seeking outside action. You're just a selfish childish dude who is stuck in adolescence. You shouldn't head a family. Im the same that's why i didn't start one.

[Jefferson]

(12-06-2018 03:33 AM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

If a guy's divorced, he's not raising his kids, some other dude is. Other dude might also be sexually abusing them, guy wouldn't know, because he's not there, some other dude is. That, or no one's really raising them and they're out on the streets running wild while the mom is overwhelmed by life as a single mom.

Also, if a guy's divorced, instead of the kids growing up learning, by seeing their parents' example, how a strong relationship works, they learn instead how to have a broken relationship, again, by example. Then they go out into the real world, and in many cases, put what they learned at home into practice, repeating the cycle.

I don't know if you come from a broken family or not, but my friends that had no dads all had daddy issues, males and females. The men don't learn how to establish frame with women, and the women never learn how to be nice, how to flow with things, how to be part of a team. They then have to learn later on in life, if at all.

I remember one of my best buds growing up, his favorite song was that song by Sublime:

"Daddy was a rollin', rollin' stone
He rolled away one day and he never came home…"

That was in his 20's. His father had left before he was 5.

There's no getting around it, a divorced father has failed his children, at least the ones he leaves behind. He can try to make up for it in many ways, and that's commendable, but the damage is there, instead of having this unconditional love from both parents, those children learn that anyone, even parents, can leave, at any time. No such thing as believing in unconditional love from parents for those kids. They don't have that anchor that those of us that come from loving, two parent homes have.

Being a father isn't about hanging out on weekends or sending kids money and stuff. It's about being there. If a father's divorced, he's not there, not in the full sense of the word. He's more of a shadow of a father. Now, that's better than nothing, that's a lot better than nothing, but it's not the same, not even close.

Despite my earlier advice to not put up with the behavior, I gotta agree with Leonard in a lot of ways.

I mean, if someone's going to divorce, then it is what it is, but let's not pretend the impact on the children won't be massive.

First of all, some of the most successful men and women in the world have come from single parent households. Just because parents divorce does not mean the mother shacks up with a child abuser, that happens in 0.00000001 per cent of cases. Let's try to stay rational.

A divorced father has not failed his children, if he continues to be accessible, a presence, and takes care of their most important physical needs by providing financially, and takes care of their emotional needs by being in close contact.

Obviously a full presence is better, but the ideological hatred is a bit much, given that 50 percent of marriages end in divorce, it's not credible to claim that all children from such households will have severe psychological problems or be abused. They won't.

And OP has a right to consider his own happiness. Nobody should subordinate his happiness to children, who will grow up, and after 13-17 years will want to avoid daddy anyway. It's nice when there is convergence of happiness, but often there is not, and that's allright too.

OP should not be guilted into making the wrong decision.

[MongolianAbroad]

(12-06-2018 02:39 PM)Jefferson Wrote:  

(12-06-2018 03:33 AM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

If a guy's divorced, he's not raising his kids, some other dude is. Other dude might also be sexually abusing them, guy wouldn't know, because he's not there, some other dude is. That, or no one's really raising them and they're out on the streets running wild while the mom is overwhelmed by life as a single mom.

Also, if a guy's divorced, instead of the kids growing up learning, by seeing their parents' example, how a strong relationship works, they learn instead how to have a broken relationship, again, by example. Then they go out into the real world, and in many cases, put what they learned at home into practice, repeating the cycle.

I don't know if you come from a broken family or not, but my friends that had no dads all had daddy issues, males and females. The men don't learn how to establish frame with women, and the women never learn how to be nice, how to flow with things, how to be part of a team. They then have to learn later on in life, if at all.

I remember one of my best buds growing up, his favorite song was that song by Sublime:

"Daddy was a rollin', rollin' stone
He rolled away one day and he never came home…"

That was in his 20's. His father had left before he was 5.

There's no getting around it, a divorced father has failed his children, at least the ones he leaves behind. He can try to make up for it in many ways, and that's commendable, but the damage is there, instead of having this unconditional love from both parents, those children learn that anyone, even parents, can leave, at any time. No such thing as believing in unconditional love from parents for those kids. They don't have that anchor that those of us that come from loving, two parent homes have.

Being a father isn't about hanging out on weekends or sending kids money and stuff. It's about being there. If a father's divorced, he's not there, not in the full sense of the word. He's more of a shadow of a father. Now, that's better than nothing, that's a lot better than nothing, but it's not the same, not even close.

Despite my earlier advice to not put up with the behavior, I gotta agree with Leonard in a lot of ways.

I mean, if someone's going to divorce, then it is what it is, but let's not pretend the impact on the children won't be massive.

First of all, some of the most successful men and women in the world have come from single parent households. Just because parents divorce does not mean the mother shacks up with a child abuser, that happens in 0.00000001 per cent of cases. Let's try to stay rational.

A divorced father has not failed his children, if he continues to be accessible, a presence, and takes care of their most important physical needs by providing financially, and takes care of their emotional needs by being in close contact.

Obviously a full presence is better, but the ideological hatred is a bit much, given that 50 percent of marriages end in divorce, it's not credible to claim that all children from such households will have severe psychological problems or be abused. They won't.

And OP has a right to consider his own happiness. Nobody should subordinate his happiness to children, who will grow up, and after 13-17 years will want to avoid daddy anyway. It's nice when there is convergence of happiness, but often there is not, and that's allright too.

OP should not be guilted into making the wrong decision.

There's a mountain of evidence that proves that children of divorce, are, in fact, messed up by it. Statistically speaking.

The outliers don't invalidate the facts.

Also, guilt/shame is a completely valid form of societal pressure. It works, and we need more of it in the West, not less. That said, it's OP's decision in the end, and I can see both sides to it, I can, it's just, to trivialize the impact of divorce on a child isn't good. The impact is huge, and it is negative.

[Lino]

(12-07-2018 05:11 AM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

There's a mountain of evidence that proves that children of divorce, are, in fact, messed up by it. Statistically speaking.

The outliers don't invalidate the facts.

Also, guilt/shame is a completely valid form of societal pressure. It works, and we need more of it in the West, not less. That said, it's OP's decision in the end, and I can see both sides to it, I can, it's just, to trivialize the impact of divorce on a child isn't good. The impact is huge, and it is negative.

You are right on everything but sometimes you have to choose the lesser evil. Probably better for a kid to be in a single parent family than living with both his parents, seeing them arguing every day and lying and cheating left and right.

[MongolianAbroad]

(12-07-2018 05:28 AM)Lino Wrote:  

(12-07-2018 05:11 AM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

There's a mountain of evidence that proves that children of divorce, are, in fact, messed up by it. Statistically speaking.

The outliers don't invalidate the facts.

Also, guilt/shame is a completely valid form of societal pressure. It works, and we need more of it in the West, not less. That said, it's OP's decision in the end, and I can see both sides to it, I can, it's just, to trivialize the impact of divorce on a child isn't good. The impact is huge, and it is negative.

You are right on everything but sometimes you have to choose the lesser evil. Probably better for a kid to be in a single parent family than living with both his parents, seeing them arguing every day and lying and cheating left and right.

If the scenario's that black and white, then I'd be inclined to agree, even if I may be wrong.

[Jefferson]

(12-07-2018 05:11 AM)Spaniard88 Wrote:  

There's a mountain of evidence that proves that children of divorce, are, in fact, messed up by it. Statistically speaking.

The outliers don't invalidate the facts.

Also, guilt/shame is a completely valid form of societal pressure. It works, and we need more of it in the West, not less. That said, it's OP's decision in the end, and I can see both sides to it, I can, it's just, to trivialize the impact of divorce on a child isn't good. The impact is huge, and it is negative.

You're wrong on this. The research shows the vast majority of children adjust well after divorce. Only a tiny minority of children have serious problems.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...-children/

OP should make the decision that is right on the facts. Not one based on guilt about the child, who will most likely adjust well in any event.

[doc holliday]

I read that article and it presents a lot of caveats and a lot of conditions where things have to go right for the kids to be well adjusted post divorce. In fact one study that they cited stated that they found that most children of divorce experience issues as adults but they then go on to minimize that study in favor of another one which found something else more palatable to the authors of this article. I'm sorry but this article reads like the authors were doing everything possible to minimize the real effects of divorce on children despite them presenting a bunch of facts that would say otherwise. It's hamstering plain and simple. While it's not great for children to live in a home filled with conflict, saying the divorce is a panacea and not a big deal long term is just plain ridiculous. Neither scenario is good for children. But hey, people will do anything to rationalize their stupid choices rather than looking deep within and taking responsibility for their selfishness and irresponsibility.

[Jefferson]

We must have read a different article. The one I read says:

"In a 2002 study psychologist E. Mavis Hetherington of the University of Virginia and her then graduate student Anne Mitchell Elmore found that many children experience short-term negative effects from divorce, especially anxiety, anger, shock and disbelief. These reactions typically diminish or disappear by the end of the second year. Only a minority of kids suffer longer.

Most children of divorce also do well in the longer term. In a quantitative review of the literature in 2001, sociologist Paul R. Amato, then at Pennsylvania State University, examined the possible effects on children several years after a divorce. The studies compared children of married parents with those who experienced divorce at different ages. The investigators followed these kids into later childhood, adolescence or the teenage years, assessing their academic achievement, emotional and behavior problems, delinquency, self-concept and social relationships. On average, the studies found only very small differences on all these measures between children of divorced parents and those from intact families, suggesting that the vast majority of children endure divorce well.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...-children/

Seems pretty clear to me.

[RawGod]

(12-07-2018 02:39 PM)Jefferson Wrote:  

We must have read a different article. The one I read says:

"In a 2002 study psychologist E. Mavis Hetherington of the University of Virginia and her then graduate student Anne Mitchell Elmore found that many children experience short-term negative effects from divorce, especially anxiety, anger, shock and disbelief. These reactions typically diminish or disappear by the end of the second year. Only a minority of kids suffer longer.

Most children of divorce also do well in the longer term. In a quantitative review of the literature in 2001, sociologist Paul R. Amato, then at Pennsylvania State University, examined the possible effects on children several years after a divorce. The studies compared children of married parents with those who experienced divorce at different ages. The investigators followed these kids into later childhood, adolescence or the teenage years, assessing their academic achievement, emotional and behavior problems, delinquency, self-concept and social relationships. On average, the studies found only very small differences on all these measures between children of divorced parents and those from intact families, suggesting that the vast majority of children endure divorce well.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...-children/

Seems pretty clear to me.

The establishment has been 100% behind the divorce culture and minimisation of the role of fathers for decades. There is huge incentive to appease and please the proponents of divorce and normalise single-parent families. Surely forum members would be familiar with the weaponisation of the social sciences? And the replicability crisis? Divorce is a wonderful predictor of damaged and low-functioning people. The thing is, it has damaged so many people now 40 years after the divorce epidemic began, that the level of function of its victims is perceived as normal. These are the soyboys and SJWs you see all around you.

[doc holliday]

You conveniently omitted this part.

"The experience of divorce can also create problems that do not appear until the late teenage years or adulthood. In 2000 in a book entitled The Unexpected Legacy of Divorce: A 25 Year Landmark Study, Judith Wallerstein, then at the University of California, Berkeley, and her colleagues present detailed case studies suggesting that most adults who were children of divorce experience serious problems such as depression and relationship issues."

This part as well:

"In a review article in 2003, psychologists Joan B. Kelly of Corte Madera, Calif., and Robert E. Emery of the University of Virginia concluded that the relationships of adults whose parents' marriages failed do tend to be somewhat more problematic than those of children from stable homes. For instance, people whose parents split when they were young experience more difficulty forming and sustaining intimate relationships as young adults, greater dissatisfaction with their marriages, a higher divorce rate and poorer relationships with the noncustodial father compared with adults from sustained marriages. On all other measures, differences between the two groups were small."

Much also depends on the personality of the child as related in this paragraph that you glossed over:

"In addition, certain characteristics of the child can influence his or her resilience. Children with an easygoing temperament tend to fare better. Coping styles also make a difference. For example, children who are good problem solvers and who seek social support are more resilient than those who rely on distraction and avoidance."

Given these important caveats, the authors still dare to make this conclusion that you cosign to happily:

"Most children bounce back and get through this difficult situation with few if any battle scars."

Few if any battle scars? Damn, that sure isn't what I would have concluded from reading that article.

[Jefferson]

Well, you are omitting the rather important continuation to your first excerpt:

"Yet scientific research does not support the view that problems in adulthood are prevalent; it instead demonstrates that most children of divorce become well-adjusted adults. For example, in a 2002 book, For Better or For Worse: Divorce Reconsidered, Hetherington and her co-author, journalist John Kelly, describe a 25-year study in which Hetherington followed children of divorce and children of parents who stayed together. She found that 25 percent of the adults whose parents had divorced experienced serious social, emotional or psychological troubles compared with 10 percent of those whose parents remained together. These findings suggest that only 15 percent of adult children of divorce experience problems over and above those from stable families. No one knows whether this difference is caused by the divorce itself or by variables, such as poorer parenting, that often accompany a marriage's dissolution."

Again, that seems pretty clear.

And as for your second excerpt it is hardly surprising that a child has a poorer relationship with a noncustodial father than with an one from a sustained marriage, is it?

The numbers don't lie, most children bounce back well after divorce. And who doesn't have some battle scars from family, anyway?

[Jefferson]

(12-07-2018 02:57 PM)RawGod Wrote:  

Divorce is a wonderful predictor of damaged and low-functioning people.

No, the science says it isn't actually.

That's just a myth.

[doc holliday]

Well the first sentence of that paragraph that you quoted is utterly nonsensical because the first part that I quoted was an extensive study, but yet they are talking in the very next breath about scientific research as if the first study which showed extensive damage that gets manifested later isn't scientific research. This is just an article by a couple of SJW scientists that want to conclude that all is well that ends well when the truth is that it is a very mixed bag. Look I'm divorced with my own kids and they've thankfully been ok but I know they were affected by the divorce and I worry all the time about how they will be later in their life. My ex and I get along very well and we make sure our kids are doing ok. Most ex's do not get along remotely as well as my ex and I do. Still, I didn't initiate my divorce largely because I didn't want the guilt of causing all of this fallout even though in my case it has been ok. To flippantly state that divorce is no big deal for the children is flat out wrong but it's being done to justify doing what you want to do.

[Laner]

Its all pretty complicated and there is no absolutes in this.

Some of my most successful friends came from shitty homes with unstable environments. But every one of them had a mom who did her duty as mother first, social life second, in order to give their kids stability. Most of them ended up with step dads who are still in their lives to this day. So divorce from a shitty relationship and into a loving relationship would be the ideal, and perhaps that is where much of the positive stats come from. On the other side, a divorce and then a revolving door of boyfriends will no doubt fuck a kid up, but again its no hard rule to living a shitty life in the future.

I know its anecdotal, but even in the late 30's things can bubble their way to the surface and cause some pain. Recently, my old hockey coach told me and my parents separately that if he had been able to coach me further, he would have gotten me into the NHL. This coach has put a number of players into the league, and no doubt has an eye for talent. When I spoke to my parents about this, it was brutal as my memories of it were that I had no dad to help me navigate the daily politics of rep league hockey. My dad worked away from home, and mothers just can't be there like dads can. Other guys had their dads there, working them when the coach couldn't, helping them see through the politics, teaching them how to be men in the precious few moments when it counts.

I didn't mean to hurt my parents, but I can tell it did. And I never knew it affected me until my late 30's when my old coach told me it was a failure for him, and he wish he could have seen me through. So while this is minor, these types of experiences do add up, and even if you have a dad they can still effect a kid.

[doc holliday]

Damn, George Jefferson got banned. Too bad, I wanted to hear more stories about the $90000 girlfriend that he left his wife for.

[Sgt Donger]

(12-06-2018 01:20 AM)HankMoody Wrote:  

Leonard is involved in an internet chatroom to discuss other RVF members and "call bullshit." That is what you're dealing with. "Dudes" who spend their day talking about other dudes. She isn't worth addressing.

So Hank, are you saying that Leonard is a female?

[Matt Warner]

My thoughts as a divorced dad, two adult and one teenage child.

It all comes down to whether your marriage is likely to last anyway.

If the answer is no, and you are miserable, then takes steps to make the separation as painless as possible.
Of course see a lawyer on the sly etc. and all that stuff.

In my case, married over 20 years, in my mind it was over after about 10 years. I stayed for the children. My ex was a good mother but the differences we had when we met just got bigger over time.
In hindsight I made a mistake staying the extra 10 years for the children and I guess to a lesser extent the worry about what everyone would say.

I made my decision to finish it a bit like your situation. I came back early from a family vacation and spend a week fixing up the place and when they got back I didn't get the hug glad to see you rather I got abused for some small thing. That was the last straw.
From that point it was all over but I took another 3 years to pull the pin.

I normally agree with most stuff written on here, but sorry guys you are not doing anyone a favor staying in a doomed marriage. Rather focus on making the split as painless as possible.
It basically was two years of really tough life when I left but life does get better.

My ex did way better financially then she would have if it went to court (I had pre-marital assets) but I'm now still on good terms and my child lives in a paid off house. I also saved the cost and stress of the legal process. So I'm glad I did the right thing by the ex.

So really only you know if you can save it or not.
Counselling is something couples should do, even though like you in my case it was a total waste of time and money. At least you can say you tried.

[MongolianAbroad]

A buddy posted this on Facebook a few years ago:

Quote:

I've been playing a game of hide and seek with my father now for twenty six years.

He's the best ever, lol! Where are you dad?

And then he reposted it earlier this month.

It leaves a mark, no way around it.

[MongolianAbroad]

I wonder why Jefferson got banned? I was looking for a meltdown, but didn't find any.

His sponsor thread was really entertaining, even if only in a negative way, as in, what not to do, useful for blue pill guys. If that thread prevents one blue pill guy from following in Jefferson's footsteps, then that's pretty cool.

Although he actually ended up continuing to pursue the girl he was sponsoring, even after everything, to the shock of many of us.

[lex the impaler]

OP, if your wife is making 500k/year at an MBB firm, she's probably on track to be CEO at Fortune 500 company at some point. Ride it out, stack cash, bond with your child. Have her buy you all sorts of nice shit, Porsches,, etc. Do your best to keep her and look at her as a retirement account. At MBB salaries that high, she's a smart woman, don't feel too bad for her. She'll be fine in the long run. Like others said, she doesn't need you, but doesn't mean you can't enjoy the ride.

[jcrew247]

(12-20-2018 05:47 PM)lex the impaler Wrote:  

OP, if your wife is making 500k/year at an MBB firm, she's probably on track to be CEO at Fortune 500 company at some point. Ride it out, stack cash, bond with your child. Have her buy you all sorts of nice shit, Porsches,, etc. Do your best to keep her and look at her as a retirement account. At MBB salaries that high, she's a smart woman, don't feel too bad for her. She'll be fine in the long run. Like others said, she doesn't need you, but doesn't mean you can't enjoy the ride.

Yeah, I get that most men want feminine women, but when the wife has a career that earns her 500K she has a fairly demanding career. Unless she's a model or pulling in easy money, most careers are very demanding and stressful for both men and women. Anyone in a demanding career or CEO/manager is going to adapt masculine-leadership roles. Its not always easy for a 40 year old woman to become feminine at home when she has to be a pitbull at work. If the OP wants a feminine wife, he may have to go for a poor 25 year old girl who is financially dependent on him.

[ShroudedMist]

Listen long and hard to the lawyer advice actual lawyers around here might give you. In addition, seek out a Men's Divorce forum (the link escapes me currently) and read through the important points. Understand what you're about to get into and how to protect yourself BEFORE making the plunge.

I'm not saying that the choice isn't the right one nor am I trying to talk you out of it. Go about it the right way with everything lined up before you let her catch wind of what you intend to do. It will be far harder on you and your child than you realize, anticipate or can guard against.

Best of luck.

[Polniy_Sostav]

I am not understanding OP's problem.
She has money , you have too but much less.
Sex is good (although i don't think it is that important)
The problem is that she behaves like a man because she has a career.
Just fuck girls on the side and keep this woman as the woman of your life and mother of your kid.
Don't divorce.

[Black Kitten]

You want warmth and love in your own home, reliably and unconditionally, something every man should aspire to achieve. She's being cold and unwelcoming on an uncertain basis due to work stress, a notable salary difference, and female age hormones. Her current marriage to you is continuing purely due to her being the mother of your child and you not wanting to deal with the dangers and difficulties of divorce.

The insane option is to motivate yourself to somehow successfully earning a million per year, effectively allowing her to retire and restoring natural hypergamy, which is obviously unrealistic for multiple reasons.

However, there's a very simple solution to regaining the caring devotion and sweet affection you've lost. It might sound trivial or trollish, but just get a good dog. Dogs are literally designed to be personalized family members that provide on-demand emotional and physical affection and appreciation, with real-time ROI. You might not have your wife welcoming you at the door, but you will have your best friend, and likely your child's best friend, eagerly greeting you. This is a serious recommendation; it is immediately actionable and helps immensely. A well-behaved pet easily changes family dynamics for the better, and is indisputable evidence of its master's responsibility and kindness.

That being said, like others have mentioned, hormones hit hard. You almost definitely cannot change how she currently treats you no matter how much you improve yourself and your own behavior. Rather, focus your attention on ensuring the best possible future for your child.


To all those calling out this guy for being immature, disloyal, or delusional, get useful. Everyone knows how to not solve problems.