nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Anyone else enjoy being single?

ancapailldorcha

So, I'm a little into my thirties now and still single. What I didn't expect was to actually be enjoying it. I'm able to pretty much do as I please. I can pursue my own interests, travel when and where I want and do sod all when I want.

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't say no to meeting someone but I figure I should try and enjoy single life while it lasts.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Gimme A Pound

Mad_maxx wrote: »

It's not possible to highlight the unfairness of what can happen to men in the event of break - ups without referring to women, it's hysterical and dishonest ( aswell as intellectually lazy) to infer a hatred of women from these points

I don't think you hate women (I think others here certainly do though) but "men are better off single" as if all women could potentially ruin them is a bit of a woman hating thing to say.

Mad_maxx

....... wrote: »

So you dont have any evidence or examples then?

Ok - whooosh......thats the sound of your unsubstantiated misogynistic nonsense whizzing past on its way to the bin.......

If this is how you behave in real life its no wonder you have experienced such negative interactions with women.

Blanket sexist generalisations with no rationalisation do not make for much of a catch.

Well you've reached a verdict I see, being judged on all sorts I see

Mad_maxx

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Women automatically granted custody of children and family home.
Family law courts treat men as second class citizens.

Ideology blinds people to reality

Charles Ingles

Allinall wrote: »

So there's three examples to prove your statement that

"Women automatically granted custody of children and family home"

is wrong.

I see it day in day out.
Thousands of times.
You really don't know what you are talking about.
Have you ever seen s father given full custody of his children unless there is an extremely good reason.
Man are never given guardianship of their children over the mother.

Mad_maxx

Paulie Tortell wrote: »

Why are you being hostile and insulting people?

It's what gormless bores ( posing as wise intellectuals) do

Charles Ingles

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Ideology blinds people to reality

Apply that logical thinking to your own views.
If you think men get a fair crack of the whip in the family courts you don't understand family law

Mad_maxx

Tucker Hot Bell wrote: »

I don't think you hate women (I think others here certainly do though) but "men are better off single" as if all women could potentially ruin them is a bit of a woman hating thing to say.

Again that's an interpretation, I say again, it's impossible to highlight the fact that the courts discriminate against men without reference to the female partner

Mad_maxx

Charles Ingles wrote: »

I see it day in day out.
Thousands of times.
You really don't know what you are talking about.
Have you ever seen s father given full custody of his children unless there is an extremely good reason.
Man are never given guardianship of their children over the mother.

Yes and in order to get access to his kids, the man must dance to the woman's tune, this often involves funding lifestyle choices

Feisar

sbsquarepants wrote: »

That's the important part.

I'm not married but I may as well be, I can do pretty much what I want too - so long as what I want to do isn't her sister, or sister in law, or friends, or that one across the road with the body of a porn star, or strangers or anyone really.

So not exactly like being single.......not in my case anyway;)

I love being married to my wife however it is a tad restrictive so yer dead right. I can do what I want, sort off.

Charles Ingles

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Yes and in order to get access to his kids, the man must dance to the woman's tune, this often involves funding lifestyle choices

Absolutely, father is at the whim of the mother backed up by a court system that discriminates against the father

Stacksofwacks

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Absolutely, father is at the whim of the mother backed up by a court system that discriminates against the father

Are you on a trolling mission by any chance?

Berserker

Feisar wrote: »

I love being married to my wife however it is a tad restrictive so yer dead right. I can do what I want, sort off.

What do you mean by a tad restrictive?

Mad_maxx

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Apply that logical thinking to your own views.
If you think men get a fair crack of the whip in the family courts you don't understand family law

Someone needs to read back a few pages

cjragoo

BBFAN wrote: »

I've previously ended a relationship I never should have because I thought there was better out there.

Sounds like the person you dumped dodged a bullet.

Mad_maxx

Charles Ingles wrote: »

Absolutely, father is at the whim of the mother backed up by a court system that discriminates against the father

Whole thing is set up for a long and thorough shakedown

Floppybits

Purple Mountain wrote: »

In an ideal world, I wouldn't mind a part time boyfriend, someone to go out with once a week or holiday with but I'd never give up my independent living or want a husband!

In other words a FWB.

Dial Hard

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Whole thing is set up for a long and thorough shakedown

Not it's not. It's reflective of the culture & times during which family law as we know it was drawn up.

The reason that family law tends to favour women in break-up scenarios where there are children involved is because we are not all that far removed from a time when many women were required by law to give up work as soon as they married. This created a society where by and large, the burden of earning fell solely on men and the burden of childcare fell solely on women. And this reality was and still is reflected in the kinds of decisions and orders made by the courts in familial break-up cases.

Now, times have changed, and quite rapidly, but the law and the courts have not caught up with the real world. Legislative change is notoriously slow to come about and judges tend, by and large, to be middle-aged and conservative and this is reflected in the kind of orders they make.

Blaming women for laws and decisions that are a direct result of a patriarchal society and judicial system is actually laughable.

.......

grahambo wrote: »

What he means is...

Everything you have described is actually favouring the children, not the mother.

Mad_maxx

Dial Hard wrote: »

Not it's not. It's reflective of the culture & times during which family law as we know it was drawn up.

The reason that family law tends to favour women in break-up scenarios where there are children involved is because we are not all that far removed from a time when many women were required by law to give up work as soon as they married. This created a society where by and large, the burden of earning fell solely on men and the burden of childcare fell solely on women. And this reality was and still is reflected in the kinds of decisions and orders made by the courts in familial break-up cases.

Now, times have changed, and quite rapidly, but the law and the courts have not caught up with the real world. Legislative change is notoriously slow to come about and judges tend, by and large, to be middle-aged and conservative and this is reflected in the kind of orders they make.

Blaming women for laws and decisions that are a direct result of a patriarchal society and judicial system is actually laughable.

Use of the term "Patriarchy"

Classic!

Even the courts overwhelmingly side with the woman, the system is still mysogonist :rolleyes:

Feminists loose even when they win

Gimme A Pound

Dial Hard wrote: »

Not it's not. It's reflective of the culture & times during which family law as we know it was drawn up.

The reason that family law tends to favour women in break-up scenarios where there are children involved is because we are not all that far removed from a time when many women were required by law to give up work as soon as they married. This created a society where by and large, the burden of earning fell solely on men and the burden of childcare fell solely on women. And this reality was and still is reflected in the kinds of decisions and orders made by the courts in familial break-up cases.

Now, times have changed, and quite rapidly, but the law and the courts have not caught up with the real world. Legislative change is notoriously slow to come about and judges tend, by and large, to be middle-aged and conservative and this is reflected in the kind of orders they make.

Blaming women for laws and decisions that are a direct result of a patriarchal society and judicial system is actually laughable.

It was set mostly by men - based on the belief that children are better off with their mother, and that men need to do all the providing while women raise the kids. Not a misogynistic view but certainly not a feminist view.

It's easier to jump to the conclusion that it's a feminist creation though. The reality is much too inconvenient.

Dial Hard

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Use of the term "Patriarchy"

Classic!

Even the courts overwhelmingly side with the woman, the system is still mysogonist :rolleyes:

Feminists loose even when they win

Are you seriously suggesting that the Irish government, legislature & judiciary haven't been pretty much entirely made up of men for the entire history of this state? Seriously???

Charles Ingles

Stacksofwacks wrote: »

Are you on a trolling mission by any chance?

Facts are trolling now?

kunst nugget

Thread starts: 'Golly gosh, I didn't expect it to happen to me in my thirties but I think I rather enjoy the single life.'

Sixteen hours later: 'FEEEEEMINISTS!!! AAARRRRGHHH!'

Mad_maxx

Tucker Hot Bell wrote: »

It was set mostly by men - based on the belief that children are better off with their mother, and that men need to do all the providing while women raise the kids. Not a misogynistic view but certainly not a feminist view.

It's easier to jump to the conclusion that it's a feminist creation though. The reality is much too inconvenient.

Are feminists looking to radically reform this aspect of family law so as to take a more even attitude towards asset division and care of children?

Mad_maxx

Dial Hard wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that the Irish government, legislature & judiciary haven't been pretty much entirely made up of men for the entire history of this state? Seriously???

Strawman

[Deleted User]

kunst nugget wrote: »

Thread starts: 'Golly gosh, I didn't expect it to happen to me in my thirties but I think I rather enjoy the single life.'

Sixteen hours later: 'FEEEEEMINISTS!!! AAARRRRGHHH!'

I wonder did anyone - especially the OP who is not just a smart guy but a MOD of the forum of some experience - expect anything else? The moment I read the OP I knew pretty much instantly the thread would be a Men V. Women Crapfest.

Only thing that surprised me is it did not happen _faster_ than it actually did

EmmetSpiceland

kunst nugget wrote: »

Thread starts: 'Golly gosh, I didn't expect it to happen to me in my thirties but I think I rather enjoy the single life.'

Sixteen hours later: 'FEEEEEMINISTS!!! AAARRRRGHHH!'

I think one of the benefits of having grown up in the 80s was that we didn’t spend almost all our time indoors staring at a computer screen. I can’t help but feel that there is now a generation of overweight young men who lack both the social and hygiene skills to attract a partner and somehow this is the girl’s fault.

[Deleted User]

These things go in cycles in boards, the evil feminists, evil catholic church ect it always ends up derailing threads that could have been interesting.

jimgoose

kunst nugget wrote: »

Thread starts: 'Golly gosh, I didn't expect it to happen to me in my thirties but I think I rather enjoy the single life.'

Sixteen hours later: 'FEEEEEMINISTS!!! AAARRRRGHHH!'

Another one nobbled by the sweaty neckbeards with the social acumen of an autistic chimpanzee, wondering why girls cross the road when they see them. :pac::pac::pac:

Stacksofwacks

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I think one of the benefits of having grown up in the 80s was that we didn’t spend almost all our time indoors staring at a computer screen. I can’t help but feel that there is now a generation of overweight young men who lack both the social and hygiene skills to attract a partner and somehow this is the girl’s fault.

I think porn has changed the landscape aswell. I remember not longer than 20 years ago if you a bit of leg or an arm you'd be ready to come in your pants, nowadays you have kids watching hardcore bondage for hours on end and barely a flicker in their knickers..something unhealthy about that