|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
crusher_of_heads
Joined: 23 Feb 2007 Location: kimbop and kimchi for kimberly!!!!
|
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with the last post.
Of course, at 60, you will more than likely be thinking more of getting up out of bed rather than getting it up-provided you're a dude and not one of those freaky Thailand shemales. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
flakfizer

Joined: 12 Nov 2004 Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Want to avoid heartache? Simply don't love anyone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mateomiguel
Joined: 16 May 2005
|
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| want to avoid heartburn? Simply don't eat anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
crusher_of_heads
Joined: 23 Feb 2007 Location: kimbop and kimchi for kimberly!!!!
|
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Want to avoid having children? Don't have sexual relations with that woman?
Don't want to miss your stop on the subway?
Don't get on the subway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
flakfizer

Joined: 12 Nov 2004 Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Want to avoid this thread? Too late. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lastat06513
Joined: 18 Mar 2003 Location: Sensus amo Caesar , etiamnunc victus amo uni plebian
|
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think the only thing missing from this thread is a beer keg....
And.....I should rename it:
If you want to avoid _______, you should _____________.
Clever........ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Unposter
Joined: 04 Jun 2006
|
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There are social as well as personal reasons to marry. From a social perspective, despite overpopulation, there is a need for a next generation and there are needs for assigning responsibilities for who should raise this next generation. But, certainly in a free society, society should not force people to raise the next generation, though society may want to offer social benefits, which is what most Western nations do.
From a personal stand point, many people actually get satisfaction by raising a family. You may not be rich and powerful; you may not be a movie or rock star; you may just be another normal, relatively middle class person but if you are a parent, you are special, especially in at least one person's eyes. It is one of the greatest creative acts and it is also one of the most satisfying of work.
Now, there are plenty of people who do not see this satisfaction at this point in their lives. Some people like to describe this as "not ready." Whether you are "not ready" yet or you will never be "ready" is not the point. Some people reach a point in their lives when they want more responsibility at work and some people are still working for the weekend. It is just where you are at.
You may not want to marry and have children but that is your wish and has little to do with the institution itself.
I think maybe instead of tearing down the institution of marriage, we need to look for ways of strengthening it.
One of the ways to do that is to encourage no fault divorce. Living together is marriage. It is just that some people see marriage as a prison and others see it as an agreement (the commitment to commit which is exactly what makes a good marriage). With no fault divorce, couples can realize that this agreement is not working and can move on.
The problem is and it another thing I would change is the anachronistic attitude that marriage is there to protect a woman in a paternalistic society. While I don't believe that women as a whole (rich women tend to have more equality than poor women) have reached equality with men and certainly pay discrepency is one example of this not fully equality regardless of how "blind" the law is to gender, their is little reason to economically protect women through marriage. Women can easilly enter the workforce and should be educated to be economically independent.
If this happens then there would be less financial penalties for men if the marriage fails which normally occur unless the woman is found to have cheated.
The problem is still our Judeo-Christian roots. In the Bible, it is a commandment to marry and have children. As long as a significant number of our leaders believe this, marriage will be a conservative institution instead of a liberal institution which encourages love and caring and frees us rather than traps us.
I think you will know when you want to form a family. And, when and if you do, regardless of what you think now, you will do it because well humans have been doing it since their have been humans.
Marriage is a great partnership where people love, care for and help each other. Socialism cannot make us artificially do this. But love and family can bring people together the way no social concept can. Of course, marriages do fall apart. But, as long as we recognize this and change the laws to reflect this reality, marriage will continue to flourish.
If we make draconian laws to force people into unhappy marriages, I think marriages will implode from the unhappiness they bring.
It really is up to you and your attitude, expectation, willingness, and the commitment you bring to marriage. And, of course what your partner brings too. It really can work. It can also fail. But, it is a great thing to try because when you are on your death bed and you look back at your life, it is always good to have loving, caring family and friends there.
It is like the movie wedding crashers. The guy didn't know how important marriage was until he saw a funeral. Then, it all made sense to him.
Good luck with your relationships. They can be worth more than gold. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kimcheechochy
Joined: 22 Nov 2007
|
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 11:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Marriage =
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Atavistic
Joined: 22 May 2006 Location: How totally stupid that Korean doesn't show in this area.
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Unposter wrote: |
| There are social as well as personal reasons to marry. From a social perspective, despite overpopulation, there is a need for a next generation and there are needs for assigning responsibilities for who should raise this next generation. But, certainly in a free society, society should not force people to raise the next generation, though society may want to offer social benefits, which is what most Western nations do. |
You don't need to marry to have children. You don't need to have children if you're married.
| Quote: |
From a personal stand point, many people actually get satisfaction by raising a family. |
Again, marriage does not equal raising a family. Raising a family does not equal marriage.
| Quote: |
| You may not be rich and powerful; you may not be a movie or rock star; you may just be another normal, relatively middle class person but if you are a parent, you are special, especially in at least one person's eyes. It is one of the greatest creative acts and it is also one of the most satisfying of work. |
Good for you for being special, but being a parent is not directly related to being married.
| Quote: |
You may not want to marry and have children but that is your wish and has little to do with the institution itself. |
And what if you want to have kids without being married? Or be married and childfree? Why did you make it an AND? It's not.
| Quote: |
| I think maybe instead of tearing down the institution of marriage, we need to look for ways of strengthening it. |
Let me guess...for the children? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
crusher_of_heads
Joined: 23 Feb 2007 Location: kimbop and kimchi for kimberly!!!!
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| flakfizer wrote: |
| Want to avoid this thread? Too late. |
Want to avoid STD's and divorce?
Don't have sexual relations. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Flash Ipanema

Joined: 29 Sep 2006 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| VanIslander wrote: |
Women around here don't want children at all or not for a long time?
Dang, that's why this thirtysomething guy has to head back to Canada after five years here, as it's time to get married and start having kids. And the prospects of meeting a great woman here who is looking at getting serious in the year or two is.... slim at best.
Puts in the realm of fantasy the thought of meeting a fellow ESL teacher who is happy teaching overseas AND wants to get married and have kids.
*sigh* That's life. |
I pulled this quote from another thread because I find it interesting. My mom told me that women get married when they meet the "right guy" and men get married when it's the "right time." She meant that guys go through life casually dating and whatnot, but once they decide it's time for marriage, they go for whoever's around. Women do the opposite: go for the guy no matter how soon or late it happens. Obviously a gross over generalization, but I think there's a grain of truth.
| Quote: |
| The problem is and it another thing I would change is the anachronistic attitude that marriage is there to protect a woman in a paternalistic society. While I don't believe that women as a whole (rich women tend to have more equality than poor women) have reached equality with men and certainly pay discrepency is one example of this not fully equality regardless of how "blind" the law is to gender, their is little reason to economically protect women through marriage. Women can easilly enter the workforce and should be educated to be economically independent. |
I agree, I think alimony is bizarre in the present age. However, I've heard a lot of men complain that their child support is going to the mom instead of the kids so they don't like to pay, and that's when I start getting pissed. Rent for a larger apartment, higher electricity bills, higher food costs - those are all the "little" things that add up to a lot more money and thus the need for child support. Trying to cop-out by buying your kid a PS3 because it's worth the same money as child support doesn't cut it.
But to get back on topic, the only reason marriage really matters now is for legal reasons. Excellent article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/26/opinion/26coontz.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Flash Ipanema

Joined: 29 Sep 2006 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
From the link I posted above:
| The New York Times wrote: |
WHY do people � gay or straight � need the state�s permission to marry? For most of Western history, they didn�t, because marriage was a private contract between two families. The parents� agreement to the match, not the approval of church or state, was what confirmed its validity.
For 16 centuries, Christianity also defined the validity of a marriage on the basis of a couple�s wishes. If two people claimed they had exchanged marital vows � even out alone by the haystack � the Catholic Church accepted that they were validly married.
In 1215, the church decreed that a �licit� marriage must take place in church. But people who married illictly had the same rights and obligations as a couple married in church: their children were legitimate; the wife had the same inheritance rights; the couple was subject to the same prohibitions against divorce.
Not until the 16th century did European states begin to require that marriages be performed under legal auspices. In part, this was an attempt to prevent unions between young adults whose parents opposed their match.
The American colonies officially required marriages to be registered, but until the mid-19th century, state supreme courts routinely ruled that public cohabitation was sufficient evidence of a valid marriage. By the later part of that century, however, the United States began to nullify common-law marriages and exert more control over who was allowed to marry.
By the 1920s, 38 states prohibited whites from marrying blacks, �mulattos,� Japanese, Chinese, Indians, �Mongolians,� �Malays� or Filipinos. Twelve states would not issue a marriage license if one partner was a drunk, an addict or a �mental defect.� Eighteen states set barriers to remarriage after divorce.
In the mid-20th century, governments began to get out of the business of deciding which couples were �fit� to marry. Courts invalidated laws against interracial marriage, struck down other barriers and even extended marriage rights to prisoners.
But governments began relying on marriage licenses for a new purpose: as a way of distributing resources to dependents. The Social Security Act provided survivors� benefits with proof of marriage. Employers used marital status to determine whether they would provide health insurance or pension benefits to employees� dependents. Courts and hospitals required a marriage license before granting couples the privilege of inheriting from each other or receiving medical information.
In the 1950s, using the marriage license as a shorthand way to distribute benefits and legal privileges made some sense because almost all adults were married. Cohabitation and single parenthood by choice were very rare.
Today, however, possession of a marriage license tells us little about people�s interpersonal responsibilities. Half of all Americans aged 25 to 29 are unmarried, and many of them already have incurred obligations as partners, parents or both. Almost 40 percent of America�s children are born to unmarried parents. Meanwhile, many legally married people are in remarriages where their obligations are spread among several households.
Using the existence of a marriage license to determine when the state should protect interpersonal relationships is increasingly impractical. Society has already recognized this when it comes to children, who can no longer be denied inheritance rights, parental support or legal standing because their parents are not married.
As Nancy Polikoff, an American University law professor, argues, the marriage license no longer draws reasonable dividing lines regarding which adult obligations and rights merit state protection. A woman married to a man for just nine months gets Social Security survivor�s benefits when he dies. But a woman living for 19 years with a man to whom she isn�t married is left without government support, even if her presence helped him hold down a full-time job and pay Social Security taxes. A newly married wife or husband can take leave from work to care for a spouse, or sue for a partner�s wrongful death. But unmarried couples typically cannot, no matter how long they have pooled their resources and how faithfully they have kept their commitments.
Possession of a marriage license is no longer the chief determinant of which obligations a couple must keep, either to their children or to each other. But it still determines which obligations a couple can keep � who gets hospital visitation rights, family leave, health care and survivor�s benefits. This may serve the purpose of some moralists. But it doesn�t serve the public interest of helping individuals meet their care-giving commitments.
Perhaps it�s time to revert to a much older marital tradition. Let churches decide which marriages they deem �licit.� But let couples � gay or straight � decide if they want the legal protections and obligations of a committed relationship.
Stephanie Coontz, a professor of history at Evergreen State College, is the author of �Marriage, a History: How Love Conquered Marriage.� |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
karma police

Joined: 01 Sep 2007 Location: all roads lead to where you are...
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
a good thing about being married is that i haven't needed to clean the bathrooms since we tied the knot...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mix1
Joined: 08 May 2007
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Flash Ipanema wrote: |
.... My mom told me that women get married when they meet the "right guy" and men get married when it's the "right time." She meant that guys go through life casually dating and whatnot, but once they decide it's time for marriage, they go for whoever's around. Women do the opposite: go for the guy no matter how soon or late it happens. Obviously a gross over generalization, but I think there's a grain of truth.
|
There probably is something to that. I've let a few awesome girls go, not because there was any problem with them, but because I knew they wanted the "real" deal (possibly marriage) and I wasn't ready. I'd always say, "She'd probably make a perfect wife...but oh well. " It's not the best attitude, but I bet it's fairly common among men. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gamecock

Joined: 26 Nov 2003
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| .... My mom told me that women get married when they meet the "right guy" and men get married when it's the "right time." She meant that guys go through life casually dating and whatnot, but once they decide it's time for marriage, they go for whoever's around. Women do the opposite: go for the guy no matter how soon or late it happens. Obviously a gross over generalization, but I think there's a grain of truth. |
Interesting. I've always thought it was exactly the opposite! In general, I see guys casually dating and playing until they meet someone who makes them willing to leave behind bachelorhood altogether because they are so crazy about her.
In contrast, most of the women I grew up with and was good friends with in University seemed to have an alarm clock that went off in their head at about 24 (give or take) and they were READY to get married. At that point the next guy they dated was lucky enough to hit this window of opportunity and grab her for life. I can't tell you the number of amazing, beautiful women I know who married total douchebags because they were ready to start having babies. With that said, at that time in my life my social circle was full of conservative evangelical Christians. So this observation may only be representative of that subculture.
IMO opinion marriage is an overhyped social construct. Beneficial for raising children, but with lots of artificially constructed pressures and pitfalls otherwise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|