My ex was my everything and now he's gone

[Hypnalis]

in the interest and welfare of a child caught between a mother and father who had an incredibly contentious divorce and at times both seem to take their anger out on her.

I didn't respond to the post above that this quote came from, because the thread seemed to have some to its natural end (and anyway, IMO there's nothing "wrong" with any of your posts in this thread).

But this section captures the difference in out perspective quite well.

Marriage is for the children. Prior to the 1960's children were the usual objective and outcome of a marriage, and this was woven into society's attitudes. Parents didn't have to stay "in love", but they had a responsibility to raise their children as well as they could.

A lot of people still believe parents have that responsibility. And, wile there can be low-probability exceptions, in general it's unconditional. "Falling out of love", "wanting to find yourself", economics advantages to one partner, a desire for "freedom", etc are not exceptions.
And if an exception should occur, the requirement is that whatever happens between the parents during and after a split do not have a negative effect on the children.

The quote I included was chosen to demonstrate that our views on this aren't too far apart.

But IMO the "modern" narrative is completely wrong, and we might well disagree about some of the details.
For example I completely reject two things that are depressingly common IRL:

* "Freedom from my marriage, despite our having mutual still-dependent children" is seen as a valid reason to disrupt the family unit.
* Normalization of "Separation (e.g. Divorce) where there are mutual dependent children is a valid occasion for selfish conflict".

In both cases, it would be different without children involved.
* "Freedom" is still a poor explanation, but between two adults, no explanation is actually necessary. Stupid stuff like "it's not you, it'd me" are just to make the discussion easier for both parties. Objectively a text is better, because there's semi-permanent record, and no need for the conversation.

* Similarly, why not have a fight over money and assets if there are no kids involved. It's stupid, and a sign of personality issues in one or both parties, but ultimately it's between two adults, both of whom have to take responsibility for their earlier decisions and actions.

BTW: The reasons this changed, and the major consequences, are well-known. I'm not trying to make a general comment about them. Society will change, because it does, but not via negotiation, so the way we got here no longer matters much.

Raising children as well as we possibly can still matters.

 

[Judge]

Raising children as well as we possibly can still matters.

Indeed. A child who was not mine by blood.

Though I attempted to do the best I could in a relationship outside of marriage altogether. Unless of course one wants to split hairs over defining the legal parameters of what various states refer to as "common-law marriage".

Doomed to fail in my case not due to my autism, but due to a "functional alcoholic" who chose not to get the help she needed. Who up to this very day never got it. All of which still haunts me, so many years later.

 

[Rodafina]

"Women cannot understand how someone(a guy, man, human male) cannot be desired or doesn't have any dating options unless something is seriously wrong with them. They(women) get desired and wanted, sought after, by default have dating options, just for existing and being a normal person, so they assume that's how it is for men, but it's not."

never truer words have been said or spoken.

Who said this?

 

[Steelbookcollector217]

Who said this?

saw a twitter post

 

[AspieChris]

"Women cannot understand how someone(a guy, man, human male) cannot be desired or doesn't have any dating options unless something is seriously wrong with them. They(women) get desired and wanted, sought after, by default have dating options, just for existing and being a normal person, so they assume that's how it is for men, but it's not."

never truer words have been said or spoken.

Yeah…. I can’t say I agree with this.

There are plenty of women who are undesirable and cannot understand why. There are probably more things about a man that could potentially cause him to become a “catch” that are not given at birth. Whereas a woman’s physical attributes can be less than traditionally sexy and still find a sexual partner.

In short: It’s easier for an ugly girl to find a one-night-stand than it is for an ugly guy. And since guys generally focus on sex, it feels like girls have an unfair advantage. As if their chromosome package is a genetic lottery.

But imagine if that lottery was an actual $$$ lottery. Ugly guy wins $1Billion. Ugly girl wins $1Billion. The ugly guy gets young and sexy women lined up around the block, while the ugly girl is lucky to get a couple of wanna-be middle aged playboys trying to be married to her when she finally dies.

 

[Steelbookcollector217]

Yeah…. I can’t say I agree with this.

There are plenty of women who are undesirable and cannot understand why. There are probably more things about a man that could potentially cause him to become a “catch” that are not given at birth. Whereas a woman’s physical attributes can be less than traditionally sexy and still find a sexual partner.

In short: It’s easier for an ugly girl to find a one-night-stand than it is for an ugly guy. And since guys generally focus on sex, it feels like girls have an unfair advantage. As if their chromosome package is a genetic lottery.

But imagine if that lottery was an actual $$$ lottery. Ugly guy wins $1Billion. Ugly girl wins $1Billion. The ugly guy gets young and sexy women lined up around the block, while the ugly girl is lucky to get a couple of wanna-be middle aged playboys trying to be married to her when she finally dies.

well a lot of men have the mindset that women on average have more options than men do since women have always had the luxury of being sought after and having men come up to them or hit on them, make advances on them.

 

[Aspychata]

@Steelbookcollector217 , well head on over to Los Angles, because it's 5 woman to everyone man. I really think it gets down to where you live. The funny thing is, l actually met a guy who was serious about me there.

 

[Steelbookcollector217]

@Steelbookcollector217 , well head on over to Los Angles, because it's 5 woman to everyone man. I really think it gets down to where you live. The funny thing is, l actually met a guy who was serious about me there.

yeah and 9 times out of 10, the relationships are still a result of the man asking the woman out or the man being the initiator

 

[AspieChris]

Opportunities in life can be earned or stolen. But they can also be lost or given away. Finding one’s place in the mess is the true challenge.

 

[Jonn]

Disregarding the relationship, it sounds very tough to lose a good friend, so I hope you can at least rescue the friendship. I still talk regularly with my ex now, five years after we broke up and I'm in another relationship.

Yes, it is very tough.

 

[AspieChris]

Just a bit from my own experiences with relationships:

It doesn’t much matter if you’re a girl or a boy, white or black, old or young….. you have the right to maintain a friendship with whomever you choose.

BUT!!! Imagine that your partner keeps talking about their previous “romantic partner”, again and again, for months to years. How many fights would happen before you just ended it?

Don’t be that person who hangs onto an old relationship. It almost never ends in a life-long friendship. It really only ever causes trouble.