I do, I do, I do

[RB]

Why are men hitting overseas to find brides - isn't this the same as the arranged marriage practiced by the Indian culture

Aren’t there enough potential North American mates to choose from?

[Renegade]

Why are men hitting overseas to find brides - isn't this the same as the arranged marriage practiced by the Indian culture

Aren’t there enough potential North American mates to choose from?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There probably are potential mates but the potential mates probably don't meet the criteria these men are looking for. (eg specific cultural background, or more "subservience" than would be found in a typical North American mate.

Also, I would suspect that there is mutual benefit for finding an overseas bride. For the women, they get more economic benefit than by finding a local mate. For the men they find a more attractive woman than they would have, had they restricted their search locally.

[Argus]

Why are men hitting overseas to find brides - isn't this the same as the arranged marriage practiced by the Indian culture

Aren’t there enough potential North American mates to choose from?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There probably are potential mates but the potential mates probably don't meet the criteria these men are looking for. (eg specific cultural background, or more "subservience" than would be found in a typical North American mate.

Also, I would suspect that there is mutual benefit for finding an overseas bride. For the women, they get more economic benefit than by finding a local mate. For the men they find a more attractive woman than they would have, had they restricted their search locally.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think the differences are that third world women are still at the stage of instinctively looking for a man who will support them and their children. Looks are secondary.

Most younger women in western society are looking for flash; someone sexy who can dance and show a flat belly, who they find sexually attractive, fun to party with, etc. etc. I don't think the foreign women give a damn if their potential husband can party or looks hot in his leather jacket. They're looking for a stable man who will keep them safe and secure. As to the men ordering them, I think finding a "meek" wife might be part of it. For others its a matter of being unable to find a woman here who is interested in what they have to offer. They probably aren't great lookers, and not exactly suave and sexy. They're probably middle aged, with decent jobs, but that's it. Some will be misfits. Some will be the proverbial "nice guy" who doesn't know how to ask girls for a date.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear RB,

Why are men hitting overseas to find brides - isn't this the same as the arranged marriage practiced by the Indian culture

Aren’t there enough potential North American mates to choose from?

I expect Argus' and Renegade's replies to be mostly true. However, I would also expect that the 'applicants', from both sides, will run the gamut from 'control freak' (and possibly closet rapist) to 'gold-digger' and 'citizen wannabe'.

Then again, there might be some really nice people, who actually do find happiness. Probably more than your previous post about Tom Cruise and 'Penelope Pre-Nup'.

[RB]

The divorce rates are pretty high in Ontario it is about 40% and Alberta even higher. Are these mail brides part of the stats. I mean the trend is towards common law so splitting up is not captured in the divorce rates.

But here is what I believe that men "fool" around with the North American women -how long would a relationship last 6 months, 2 years then lose them

The women of course offer the men their talents and support them as their mates:

1) I can clean

2) I can do the dishes

3) I made the bed

4) I can cook

5) here is breakfast in bed

6) I'll do anything

7) I believe in you

8) You can do it

9) I check the stocks

10) Its amazing how much youger you look

11) have I told you how much I love you?

12) have you been working out?

Here I was thinking that because of 9/11 and these threats of terror that we now face, thats why men became more family oriented and became protective of their women.

Instead they run off to look for those who wish for monetary security, in search of those who are meek?

[Riverwind]

The divorce rates are pretty high in Ontario it is about 40% and Alberta even higher.  Are these mail brides part of the stats.  I mean the trend is towards common law so splitting up is not captured in the divorce rates.

In my grandparents time divorce was not an option so people stuck together during the tough times. Unfortunately, this meant that many people were stuck in unhappy and sometimes abusive marriages. On the other hand, it forced many people to work out their issues instead of running for the door the second things got tough.

Many people today view marriage as a short term fling to be discarded as soon as the romance is gone. For that reason, a marriage that is based on economics and a desire to raise a family would likely be more durable than a marriage based on 'romance'.

At the end of the day it does not make a difference why two people are together. If they are happy with the arrangement then no one should really question it.

[RB]

If they are happy with the arrangement then no one should really question it.

The mail orders is a growing trend

Why we should not be concern? This is a way we are contributing to the deterioration of morals in this society

or you simply just want me to view this whole affair with suspicion that all the folks really want, is to cross breed to get in that extra ½ chromosome

[Riverwind]

Why we should not be concern?  This is a way we are contributing to the deterioration of morals in this society

Personaly, I think no fault divorce and officially sanctioned common law relationships are more signficant contributors to any 'deterioration of morals' in society.

I find the mechanisms that our society has to hook prospective mates together are woefully inadequate. If you want a stable long term relationship then the last place you will find it is in a bar or a night club. This means people looking for these kinds of relationships turn to the internet, personals ads or similar approaches. I don't see a mail order bride as any different from a personal ad.

[RB]

Why we should not be concern?  This is a way we are contributing to the deterioration of morals in this society

Personaly, I think no fault divorce and officially sanctioned common law relationships are more signficant contributors to any 'deterioration of morals' in society.

I find the mechanisms that our society has to hook prospective mates together are woefully inadequate. If you want a stable long term relationship then the last place you will find it is in a bar or a night club. This means people looking for these kinds of relationships turn to the internet, personals ads or similar approaches. I don't see a mail order bride as any different from a personal ad.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I went through the Divorce Act and there is nothing like "no-fault" divorce

There is some pretty line up right here though - why go overseas

Victoria Secret

- got to run now but will writing here later

[Riverwind]

I went through the Divorce Act and there is nothing like "no-fault" divorce

You missed the part about alimony being calculated by need and that the behavoir of the spouse receiveing the alimony may not be considered.

The current divorce laws are set up to provide a lifetime pension for a woman. They make it rediculously easy for a woman to get married - stay at home goofing around for a few years and then ask for a divorce because she is 'bored'. This then makes her entitled to a piece of her ex-husbands income for the forseeable future.

The supreme court upheld a ruling yesterday that child support is not about caring for the children: the primary objective of child support is to ensure that ex-wives get to have the same standard of living that they would have had if they stayed in the marriage.

Of course, such rules could be reasonable if the husband was the primary cause of the marriage breakdown, however, in 50% of cases the wife is primary cause. That is why I say our no-fault divorce laws are a problem: they provide a financial incentive for people to abandon a marriage because it is easier than working problems out.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear RB,

There is some pretty line up right here though - why go overseas

Victoria Secret

Ugh. Women like that have plastic souls and plastic tits. Don't want this to sound like 'sour grapes', but usually women that are treated (and treat themselves) as 'objets du art' are elitist, meaning you probably have to have an 8 figure income and a foot long wang to even be considered as a 'possible dinner date' to them. Not all, to be sure, but industries like that aren't likely to reinforce humility.

[Argus]

Why we should not be concern?  This is a way we are contributing to the deterioration of morals in this society

Personaly, I think no fault divorce and officially sanctioned common law relationships are more signficant contributors to any 'deterioration of morals' in society.

I find the mechanisms that our society has to hook prospective mates together are woefully inadequate. If you want a stable long term relationship then the last place you will find it is in a bar or a night club. This means people looking for these kinds of relationships turn to the internet, personals ads or similar approaches. I don't see a mail order bride as any different from a personal ad.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I went through the Divorce Act and there is nothing like "no-fault" divorce

There is some pretty line up right here though - why go overseas

Victoria Secret

- got to run now but will writing here later

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Because none of those women will touch you with a fourteen and a half foot pole.

Well, unless you've got an oreo in your pocket, or a spoon full of coke.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Argus,

or a spoon full of coke

Didn't Julie Andrews sing about this in Mary Poppins? "Just a spoon full of cocaine helps the supermodel go down, supermodel go down,.....in a most delightful way...."

[RB]

I went through the Divorce Act and there is nothing like "no-fault" divorce

You missed the part about alimony being calculated by need and that the behavoir of the spouse receiveing the alimony may not be considered.

The current divorce laws are set up to provide a lifetime pension for a woman. They make it rediculously easy for a woman to get married - stay at home goofing around for a few years and then ask for a divorce because she is 'bored'. This then makes her entitled to a piece of her ex-husbands income for the forseeable future.

The supreme court upheld a ruling yesterday that child support is not about caring for the children: the primary objective of child support is to ensure that ex-wives get to have the same standard of living that they would have had if they stayed in the marriage.

Of course, such rules could be reasonable if the husband was the primary cause of the marriage breakdown, however, in 50% of cases the wife is primary cause. That is why I say our no-fault divorce laws are a problem: they provide a financial incentive for people to abandon a marriage because it is easier than working problems out.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree that divorce laws are favorable to women.

You would also have to agree that you couldn’t make scurrilous charges against women because they are in fact "manmade women". What I mean is that you promised them security as in finance, and support. Look, you even go way out to mail order them in. Then you divorce them.

Did you know that marriages that end in divorces, men over the age of 40 find a mate as quickly as possible over 60% of the time. Women looking for a relationship as in marriage after divorces and especially if they have children only land into relationships 29% of the time. A bit unfair don't you think.

The law is fair in my view. Women by themselves will fail to provide substantial and equal quality of life for the children if no help is given from the ex. Until women can compete equally in the marketplace most of the financial burden rest with the male because you promised.

It is a shame that two adults cannot come to agreements all by themselves instead of involvement of lawyers and courts etc. with this divorce affair

A divorce should only cost $6. The rest is just paperwork to the courts on what you have decided. Usually it is good to have the trial separation agreement so it makes the divorce process even easier.

[RB]

Dear RB,

There is some pretty line up right here though - why go overseas

Victoria Secret

Ugh. Women like that have plastic souls and plastic tits. Don't want this to sound like 'sour grapes', but usually women that are treated (and treat themselves) as 'objets du art' are elitist, meaning you probably have to have an 8 figure income and a foot long wang to even be considered as a 'possible dinner date' to them. Not all, to be sure, but industries like that aren't likely to reinforce humility.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you mean that women with cosmetic makeover can expose their breast without sensitivity

I mean Dolly Parton said it cost her like lots of money for her to look that cheap

[RB]

I am not an expert on the "penis" but I am afraid that men put their penis under sever scrutiny. Men think that their penis is ugly and they are not about have any fantasies to expose it.

I mean when men were asked whether they rather be 5'2" in height with 7" penis or 6'2" in height with a 3" penis. 62% of males picked the 7" penis only 36% picked 3".

If you wanted to impress women, in a survey of women who describe themselves as average, only 44% cared about the width of the penis while and 34% cared about the length.

It’s a shame about this unconscious pressure to view your penis as who you are.

[Riverwind]

Did you know that marriages that end in divorces, men over the age of 40 find a mate as quickly as possible over 60% of the time. Women looking for a relationship as in marriage after divorces and especially if they have children only land into relationships 29% of the time. A bit unfair don't you think.

The current child support laws make men finanically responsible for children even if they are not genetically theirs. Furthermore, it is legally impossible to avoid this obligation for step children even with a prenup. In short, a man would have to be crazy to risk financial ruin paying child support for someone else's kids if a relationship with a divorced woman fell a part. If you want to address the unfairness then start by changing the law that allows women to collect child support from multiple men for the same child.

The law is fair in my view.  Women by themselves will fail to provide substantial and equal quality of life for the children if no help is given from the ex.  Until women can compete equally in the marketplace most of the financial burden rest with the male because you promised.

If the father is better able to care for the kids financially then the father should have custody. It is asburd to award sole custody to a mother who cannot support the kids on her own and then go after the father for money to make up the difference. There are fathers who attempt to cut and run and deserve that kind of treatment, however, the are also many caring fathers who are shut out of their children's lives by a hostile ex-wife and have over half of their income confiscated to ensure that the ex-wife continues to live in the style to which she has become accustomed.

It is a shame that two adults cannot come to agreements all by themselves instead of involvement of lawyers and courts etc. with this divorce affair

Most divorces do not go to court largely because the man is told early in process that they will be screwed no matter what they do they should just give up while they are 'ahead'. I had a friend whose marriage broke down because of things his wife did and he was able to come to a negotiated settlement only to be told that the court would likely overrule it because it did not conform to the 'guidelines'.

[BHS]

Sparhawk:

Your post fits in with the current debate in the US about abortion law, following the Alito nomination. If a man wants to have kids but his wife wants to have an abortion, there's nothing he can do to stop her. Also, if the woman wants to have kids and the man doesn't but a faulty condom leads to pregnancy anyway, there's nothing he can do to force her to terminate the pregnancy. So women have all of the reproductive rights, but as you've written the responsibility splits fifty-fifty (or worse, from the man's perspective). I have a feeling that the only remedy to this situation is the future adaptation of social custom making the legal perspective obsolete ie. it's considered socially unconsionable for a woman to make multiple live-in boyfriends all responsible for her childrens' welfare, and no self-respecting woman would ever seek a court order along these lines.

[Riverwind]

woman to make multiple live-in boyfriends all responsible for her childrens' welfare, and no self-respecting woman would ever seek a court order along these lines.

There are too many people in society that don't care about self respect if it means they can make money: look at all of the volunteers for reality TV shows. This will never change so we need a legal remedy. There was a case in the US where a man had oral sex with a woman who, without his knowledge, kept his sperm. She later impregnated herself, sued for child support and won. This case demonstrates a general lack of ethics in judiciary and a willingness to forgive the most appalling behavior on the part of a woman when child support is involved. Society needs to recognize that there are as many 'deadbeat' moms out there as 'deadbeat' dads.

[Melanie_]

Women by themselves will fail to provide substantial and equal quality of life for the children if no help is given from the ex. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It isn't a matter of "help" from the ex. Ending a marriage doesn't end a man's obligation to his children. Saying a man "helps" with the expenses of raising children implies that he shouldn't really be expected to, but chooses to out of the goodness of his heart. Those are his kids, no matter what his relationship is with their mother, and he is responsible for their welfare just as much as she is.

If the child is not genetically his, but he has taken on the father's role in the child's life, I can see a case being made for support, but it would be on a case by case basis. I knew a boy who had considered his mother's husband to be his father for 10 years, from the time he was 4 til they divorced when he was 14. His "dad" drove him to hockey practice, went to the school conferences, etc. Should that relationship be recognized in the divorce proceedings, allowing "dad" access, but also giving mom child support?

[Renegade]

You would also have to agree that you couldn’t make scurrilous charges against women because they are in fact "manmade women".  What I mean is that you promised them security as in finance, and support.  Look, you even go way out to mail order them in.  Then you divorce them. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

RB, your making it sound like it was a one way set of promises. Do women have reciprocation of obligations? If so what is it they are commiting to?

Your statement demonstrates exactly why I state that a pre-nup is required. So that each party clearly understands its obligations.

[Riverwind]

It isn't a matter of "help" from the ex. Ending a marriage doesn't end a man's obligation to his children. Saying a man "helps" with the expenses of raising children implies that he shouldn't really be expected to, but chooses to out of the goodness of his heart. Those are his kids, no matter what his relationship is with their mother, and he is responsible for their welfare just as much as she is.

Consider these cases:

1) A man was ordered to pay $6000/month child support even though that amount had absolutely no connection to amount of money needed to raise his children The father in question was involved with his children even if he did not have custody and had no issue paying child support that was connected to thier needs. He also had no problem giving money directly to his kids. However, the court ruled that his ex-wife deserved to have the same standard of living as him. BTW - the wife had 60K/year government job and was not in difficult financial circumstances.

2) A man and woman have joint custody and the children spend 50% of the time with each parent. The man pays all expenses for his children while they are with him but is also expected to pay child support as if his wife had sole custody. The rational the court uses is the wife should not have to accept a lower standard of living than the husband. In reality, the wife had much a higher standard of living because her live in boyfriend paid many of her expenses while she collected half her ex-husband's income.

If the child is not genetically his, but he has taken on the father's role in the child's life, I can see a case being made for support, but it would be on a case by case basis.

The current law is automatic - no consideration is given for individual circumstances. If you marry or co-habit with a woman with kids from a previous relationship then you are automatically financially responsible for those kids.

I knew a boy who had considered his mother's husband to be his father for 10 years, from the time he was 4 til they divorced when he was 14.

What if a woman moved in with her brother and the brother assumed the 'father' role for a number of years. Should he be obligated to pay child support when his sister moves out? What you are saying is nice guys who treat their spouse's children with respect should be saddled with the obligation for somebody elses kids but not-so-nice guys who refuse to take on an father role should be let off the hook.

If a man knowingly adopt a child that is not his own then he should be obligated. If he just helped out because he was around the kids all the time or if his wife duped him in believing that a child was his when it was not not then he should have zero obligation.

[Montgomery Burns]

Eastern women are generally more "traditional" than Western women. Some guys like that. The male can find an attractive bride a decade than himself. For the women, I suspect their motives are probably security/financial as much as love.

[RB]

Eastern women are generally more "traditional" than Western women.  Some guys like that.  The male can find an attractive bride a decade than himself.  For the women, I suspect their motives are probably security/financial as much as love.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Traditional = demise of all women

Men are looking for slaves - folks that they can dominate

[RB]

You would also have to agree that you couldn’t make scurrilous charges against women because they are in fact "manmade women".  What I mean is that you promised them security as in finance, and support.  Look, you even go way out to mail order them in.  Then you divorce them. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

RB, your making it sound like it was a one way set of promises. Do women have reciprocation of obligations? If so what is it they are commiting to?

Your statement demonstrates exactly why I state that a pre-nup is required. So that each party clearly understands its obligations.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I believe that men seek to travel afar for wives because of the general wide-spread acceptance of premarital sex in the Western Society. This is what I attribute to the decline of morals. The women here are considered useless. Men hide behind the facade that they will get something better abroad - wide-eyed and innocent, someone to mold with less yearning power to topple men.

I mean they are lots of leaning arguments in favor of women looking for security and finances.

First, there are lots of examples of rich women who marry men who have more money than themselves. Next, women living with men with low scocioeconomic will say no to marriage.

When women cannot find men to support them they turn to the government for their security.

Incidentally, this is a reason why a liberal government is this huge, noticed also how they promote alternative lifestyles e.g. gay marriages

Women enter into relationships, they are looking for partners in a relationship - thats all.

ok I have to go now - but I haven't finish my thoughts here