Divorce thread....

[Robocok]

Then ignore it fuck wit.

Seems pretty simple, no? But instead you had to open your gob hole and put your $0.02 in right? How about fuck off?

Nice little temper tantrum

 

[Robocok]

I knew my marriage was over a few months after getting married. I didnt want to get married to begin with. I felt pressured by my ex and her family. On top of that I just lost my family so I had no one really. I hung in there for a total of 8 months or so because my ex was pregnant at the time..

My life took a nosedive financially. I couldn't stand to be around my ex and pretty much lived at work. I worked as much as I could to keep up the Bill's and to stay out of the house..

I had 10 years on her and I felt more like her dad then a husband. She never had a father btw..

After divorce they shut me out of my kid's life and I had to take it to court.

All the sudden they made me out to be this evil abusive guy because I didnt want to be with her anymore..

Went from being the greatest guy that the family loved to being the devil overnight pretty much..

Now I just stay single.. I bang the occasional chick, and I spend every other weekend with my daughter. I pay child support as well.

I love my daughter. I'm free. I do what I want. I don't have to worry about anyone or anything anymore. No stress.

Marriage just was not for me. I thought I was lonely, then got married and found out real quick that I'd rather be alone

I'm happy now for the most part. Wish my daughter lived with me. I think she would rather live with me. She doesn't want to go home when the weekend is over. She is only 4 years old. I spoil her

Marriage was the dumbest thing I ever got myself into but I got a daughter out of the deal so it was worth it

Good man. Went through the same thing with my exwife. She pulled every dirty trick in the book on me in family court after I decided that I'd had enough. Lied and claimed abuse and everything. She's a total monster.

..but I got my son out of the deal and the older he gets the more he understands everything. I wouldn't change anything even if I could.

 

[lsa]

The exact moment?

She was washing dishes, I was stripping down to take a shower.
She and I were talking the entire time, eye to eye.

I step into the shower. Immediately, I hear muffled shouting coming from her. I get out dripping and go to see what the problem is.

She was losing her shit because I was using the hot water and she couldn't do dishes with warm water.
I told her the next day I was gone.

Sounds like the beginning of a porno.

 

[Pugilistic]

She's worse in a way. She learned her lesson about getting physical with me when I physically overpowered who once but now she's quick to call the cops and play the race card. She took my dog to a pound and dropped her off. Cleaned out my bank accounts and took the car. She's a nightmare.

I would've walked out at getting physical. But I guess having a kid would make things harder. Everything else though...That's no environment for a kid to grow up in.

 

[Oliver Clothesoff]

It's such a beautiful thing when the first post nails it.

It's like the sherdog equivalent of a slam dunk.

Hate to admit it, but I'm not getting the meaning of the iPads. Care to help a brother out?

 

[fungi]

Marriage is awesome. It can be the greatest thing you can do for yourself. Of course that means rising to the challenge, as well as assessing said challenge. But when it works it's sublime.

Agreed.

The thread is depressing because it's all about the wrong things happening in marriage.

I've had some insane fights with my lady and she has gotten physical with me a couple times. Honestly though we've been doing great for awhile now. Our communication has improved and we love each other.

I think she is an anomaly though and ordinarily I'd agree with you. That and I like a little bit of crazy.

Dunno mang. If there's physical fighting involved, I'd rather walk out. Fuck that! And fuck crazy! Not my cup.

Well, as long as you're happy, eh?

 

[fungi]

Hate to admit it, but I'm not getting the meaning of the iPads. Care to help a brother out?

Look up bailey jay, you'll understand.

 

[minute bull]

I knowwwwwww, it's just that gallows humor is like the ultimate commiserator.

 

[sweetviolenturg]

Look up bailey jay, you'll understand.

OK, now that I know who she is what does the iPad have to do with it?
I'm not really in the position at the moment to delve into a bunch of shemale porn vids. Wouldn't be cool at the moment. LOL.

 

[Robocok]

Agreed.

The thread is depressing because it's all about the wrong things happening in marriage.



Dunno mang. If there's physical fighting involved, I'd rather walk out. Fuck that! And fuck crazy! Not my cup.

Well, as long as you're happy, eh?

It's not so much the irrational kind of crazy as the passionate kind and yeah... for some reason we just fit each other. She understands me.

 

[sweetviolenturg]

Agreed.

The thread is depressing because it's all about the wrong things happening in marriage.



Dunno mang. If there's physical fighting involved, I'd rather walk out. Fuck that! And fuck crazy! Not my cup.

Well, as long as you're happy, eh?

Yeah, both the women who bore my children had their crazy moments & they both got physical with me toward the end of our relationships & afterward I just emotionally checked out for good. Not so much because of a few slaps & a fork in my lip because what's a little pain, right? But because of the betrayal involved in their taking it to that level knowing damn well that I would never retaliate. They were both acutely aware that I can from a home where my father was physically abusive to my mother when drunk so after growing up witnessing that I swore that I'd never hit a woman & I never have. So, when they got physical with me I immediately saw them as being beneath contempt. So, the eight year relationship with two kids ended with the one & the twelve-year marriage with one kid ended with the other.

 

[Da Speeit]

As a 20 year old I don’t see the benefits of marriage. I could never allow a woman to “own” me.
it.

The fact that you think loving someone is a dominance hierarchy, at the age of 20 no less, is proof that your parents fucking sucked. No offense.

 

[fungi]

Yeah, both the women who bore my children had their crazy moments & they both got physical with me toward the end of our relationships & afterward I just emotionally checked out for good. Not so much because of a few slaps & a fork in my lip because what's a little pain, right? But because of the betrayal involved in their taking it to that level knowing damn well that I would never retaliate. They were both acutely aware that I can from a home where my father was physically abusive to my mother when drunk so after growing up witnessing that I swore that I'd never hit a woman & I never have. So, when they got physical with me I immediately saw them as being beneath contempt. So, the eight year relationship with two kids ended with the one & the twelve-year marriage with one kid ended with the other.

Yeah, once that line is crossed, there's no going back.

Well, that shit must've been hard on the kids. Sorry bout that.

 

[sweetviolenturg]

Yeah, once that line is crossed, there's no going back.

Well, that shit must've been hard on the kids. Sorry bout that.

Well, it wasn't great for them to have my relationships with their mothers end but all three of them are doing great now. So, it all worked out OK.

 

[fungi]

The fact that you think loving someone is a dominance hierarchy, at the age of 20 no less, is proof that your parents fucking sucked. No offense.

Haven't you seen his login, Daspy?
Fk your feelings... Nuff said.

 

[IloveTHIS]

When the blowjobs start becoming sad blowjibs. Like, they will still do it, but with absolutely zero enthusiasm and try to end it as quickly as possible.

When she ate 3 out of 4 slices of my leftover pizza I was looking forward to ALL DAY. I mean really? Not 1. Not even 2, which would be half. BUT 3. 3 OUT OF 4 SLICES. WTF?

That was the deal breaker

 

[Da Speeit]

We used to live just like other animals, in large groups. So individuals were protected by the group.

Okay, this is where you lost everything completely. Like, sure, you were already plunging hilariously low (throwing out "ad hominem" and other rhetorical devices after you called someone a "Fuckwit").
There's this ridiculous fallacy among really insecure people who are usually, nay, almost always socially inept, that we lived in these big hunter-gatherer groups where everyone was fucking everyone, the alpha males were having sex with every female. This is hardly replicated in higher Ape communities, of which we undoubtedly stem from.

I had to type this out to someone who recently who was proposing the same ideas you were, but alas, cannot find the post; basically humans were down to anywhere between 5,000-10,000 people and inhabited the Eastern horn of Africa; this may be skewed by the idea that man groups left Africa at that time, but the lack of biodiversity in the human genome is evidence of the contrary. The only reason human beings survived this near-extinction was obligation to group preservation and sub-groups, yes, but to misconstrue that as having diverse sociological/sexual relationships is...well, pretty stupid.

Gorillas, Chimps and Bonobos all have very intuitive and emotional attachments to one another within their societies. For instance, male chimps who are especially mean and brutal as "Alphas" are quickly murdered and ripped to shreds the moment they show any sign of weakness. The contrary is valid, as males who care for their young as well as the young of others within the society, are more accepting to outsiders (lost, solitary apes, etc) are treated with regard and respect. This is evidence of a baseline knowledge of a necessity for community and most of all...trust.

This new-age idea that animals appoint "Alpha's" based on sheer strength and brutality is just as false as can be. Sure, that Alpha usually better know how to fight and provide for the group, gander or pack, but they also have to be intelligent, compassionate and awre of their surroundings...things that signal they are to be trusted.

Does it sound likely to you, that human beings, who at that point had skills to hunt, create, gather, cultivate, procreate with intention, laugh, cry, create art and speak a language of sorts would be willing to let someone else in their group fuck and possibly impregnate their partner? Highly unlikely. There's this very convenient argument people make on bio-sociological levels that human males are "Hardwired to pro-create at whatever cost" and while yes, that is absolutely true, the fact that we lived in groups and sub-groups means we were around and housed fellow males, and were fully aware of their intentions and their basic nature.

So you, Brandon, are a pre-bronze human male living off the Eastern horn of Africa. You have some t h i c c little piece you've grown up fishing with in your group of maybe 30-40. You have your own little cave where she comes to sleep when tide gets too high. You think you're just gonna let Da Speeit smang her with no defense, recourse or fight? Wow. What a cuck. I know we all like to think of pre-Bronze humans as stupid neanderthals who just want to eat and fuck, but on the contrary, that was when we were at our most emotive (note, emotive, not emotional) and visceral. These days we have reason. "Ah she's out with coworkers, she won't cheat". Back then, you see her at my cave, you know exactly what's up and your brain is telling you to murder me. And my brain is saying "Hey, that Brandon is an amateur fighter, if I fuck his girl he's probably gonna kill me".

I'm just sick of lonely unfulfilled men rationalizing their loneliness with nihilism and this idea that we were purer without societal strain. There is a reason HUMAN societies work with monogamy, if we weren't wired that way, we simply wouldn't practice it. It's such an arrogant thing to say.

Also, people forget that human pregnancy is fucking rough as it comes and the mortality rate is STILL absurdly high, but not even remotely close to what it once as. When females died, who cared for the children? The group? I mean, sure, but it was more than likely the fathers in that group doing so. You can't tell me stone-aged humans just looked at human children that had their face, eyes and features and thought "meh, i'll just chuck it in the ocean since its mother is dead". Mind you, we were burying our dead at this time in our development. So this detached semi-monogamy can't be true if we somehow survived all of this.

If you want to get even crazier, some believe we didn't live in groups at this time, but literally in small family units across the eastern coast and slowly migrated inland as our numbers grew and only lived in groups as predators became an issue. I might believe that.

Either way, just shitting on your little parade here. Human "Biology" that you're so fond of doesn't actually support what you're saying, and neither do epigenetics, which you touched on terribly previously.

 

[Phlog]

Okay, this is where you lost everything completely. Like, sure, you were already plunging hilariously low (throwing out "ad hominem" and other rhetorical devices after you called someone a "Fuckwit").
There's this ridiculous fallacy among really insecure people who are usually, nay, almost always socially inept, that we lived in these big hunter-gatherer groups where everyone was fucking everyone, the alpha males were having sex with every female. This is hardly replicated in higher Ape communities, of which we undoubtedly stem from.

I had to type this out to someone who recently who was proposing the same ideas you were, but alas, cannot find the post; basically humans were down to anywhere between 5,000-10,000 people and inhabited the Eastern horn of Africa; this may be skewed by the idea that man groups left Africa at that time, but the lack of biodiversity in the human genome is evidence of the contrary. The only reason human beings survived this near-extinction was obligation to group preservation and sub-groups, yes, but to misconstrue that as having diverse sociological/sexual relationships is...well, pretty stupid.

Gorillas, Chimps and Bonobos all have very intuitive and emotional attachments to one another within their societies. For instance, male chimps who are especially mean and brutal as "Alphas" are quickly murdered and ripped to shreds the moment they show any sign of weakness. The contrary is valid, as males who care for their young as well as the young of others within the society, are more accepting to outsiders (lost, solitary apes, etc) are treated with regard and respect. This is evidence of a baseline knowledge of a necessity for community and most of all...trust.

This new-age idea that animals appoint "Alpha's" based on sheer strength and brutality is just as false as can be. Sure, that Alpha usually better know how to fight and provide for the group, gander or pack, but they also have to be intelligent, compassionate and awre of their surroundings...things that signal they are to be trusted.

Does it sound likely to you, that human beings, who at that point had skills to hunt, create, gather, cultivate, procreate with intention, laugh, cry, create art and speak a language of sorts would be willing to let someone else in their group fuck and possibly impregnate their partner? Highly unlikely. There's this very convenient argument people make on bio-sociological levels that human males are "Hardwired to pro-create at whatever cost" and while yes, that is absolutely true, the fact that we lived in groups and sub-groups means we were around and housed fellow males, and were fully aware of their intentions and their basic nature.

So you, Brandon, are a pre-bronze human male living off the Eastern horn of Africa. You have some t h i c c little piece you've grown up fishing with in your group of maybe 30-40. You have your own little cave where she comes to sleep when tide gets too high. You think you're just gonna let Da Speeit smang her with no defense, recourse or fight? Wow. What a cuck. I know we all like to think of pre-Bronze humans as stupid neanderthals who just want to eat and fuck, but on the contrary, that was when we were at our most emotive (note, emotive, not emotional) and visceral. These days we have reason. "Ah she's out with coworkers, she won't cheat". Back then, you see her at my cave, you know exactly what's up and your brain is telling you to murder me. And my brain is saying "Hey, that Brandon is an amateur fighter, if I fuck his girl he's probably gonna kill me".

I'm just sick of lonely unfulfilled men rationalizing their loneliness with nihilism and this idea that we were purer without societal strain. There is a reason HUMAN societies work with monogamy, if we weren't wired that way, we simply wouldn't practice it. It's such an arrogant thing to say.

Also, people forget that human pregnancy is fucking rough as it comes and the mortality rate is STILL absurdly high, but not even remotely close to what it once as. When females died, who cared for the children? The group? I mean, sure, but it was more than likely the fathers in that group doing so. You can't tell me stone-aged humans just looked at human children that had their face, eyes and features and thought "meh, i'll just chuck it in the ocean since its mother is dead". Mind you, we were burying our dead at this time in our development. So this detached semi-monogamy can't be true if we somehow survived all of this.

If you want to get even crazier, some believe we didn't live in groups at this time, but literally in small family units across the eastern coast and slowly migrated inland as our numbers grew and only lived in groups as predators became an issue. I might believe that.

Either way, just shitting on your little parade here. Human "Biology" that you're so fond of doesn't actually support what you're saying, and neither do epigenetics, which you touched on terribly previously.

Saved me the bother on a hangover. Nice.

 

[Da Speeit]

To add to that, the lack of biodiversity in the human genome contradicts the idea that we were just crazed sex fiends living outside of monogamous strains. For example

If A(lpha) impregnates C, D, E and F and B(eta) impregnates G and H
then we have
AC, AD, AE, AF and BG, BH in the genetic pool.
Let's say we have AC breed with BH, BG Breeds with AE. Then BG has a child with AF as well.
ACBH, BGAE and BGAE.

We'll introduce IJ, who breeds with BGAE

The genetic biodiversity, even from a singular ingroup of a small sect of humans (maybe even 5,000) would become massive, or we would become insanely inbred (entirely possible and in later data of human movement, probably entirely true (*cough*middle east *cough*). The problem with inbreeding is sterility and massive deformities and mutations that would make human life near unsustainable.

Now the inverse

A impregnates C
B impregnates G
I impregnates D
K impregnates J

AC, BG, ID, KJ are now in their own pool, as well as any siblings.

I know it is wayyyy more nuanced than that, but the idea of alpha males or singular males impregnating multiple females is very very counter-productive to any discussion regarding human reproduction. It would end up like monopoly where someone winds up with all of the money after a set amount of turns; this sounds like it compliments the lack of biodiversity in us, but the fact that we have sprouted from 5,000 to 8 billion and are still as biodiverse as we are and intelligent as we are means something's not sitting well with this anti-monogamy sentiment.

 

[Da Speeit]

I don't like citing religion in discussions like these, but the story of David is freaking apt here it's not even funny. The entire point of the Old Testament is to dispel barbaric myths regarding the baseline operations of man, and David smashing a fucking rock into Goliath's head is about all you need to know about human power dynamics in tribes and groups. If these guys who are obsessed with this alpha/beta complex within human social hierarchies think that the "Beta" males whimpered in the corner as the "Alpha" cucked them and got their partner pregnant, instead of being, ya know, walking, talking, thinking, cognizant hominids who are more than willing to smash someone else in the head with a rock for pissing them off, they're sadly mistaken.

The scary thought they don't want to have is that men were probably more than likely far more forceful to women than they were to other males in regards to monogamy and procreation. These guys have all been reading too many magazines where they're promised a supermodel who is going to try to "hold them down" and "own them" and "Tie them down" in these social stereotypes they forget men are hardwired to be possessive, jealous and willing to use force to keep what their psyche deems as "theirs". It's not out of the realm of possibility that monogamy is a male invention, but then again what isn't