the road goes ever on and on...

[Painter]

Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner, Zues, I couldn't type from my phone. I'm in WI, next door. Enjoying spring here very much, especially the lilacs!

A business partnership is rarely 100% financial - and they often fall apart for non-financial reasons. There is a financial aspect to M, and since you can't legislate feelings, they legislated the parts they could - the financials and the possession of the children in case of a breach or contract. Not very long ago, women could be put out from their home and the husband kept the children. The laws were like what you see in the Middle East today. They were eventually changed to protect the women from being so vulnerable.

It is very, very recent that women have been able to support themselves financially, very recent that they had any legal rights, that they weren't chattel (owned) by their fathers, then their husbands. My grandmother was the first generation of women who could vote. Many, many women experienced being looked down upon because they worked - in my lifetime. And the gender gap in pay is still dramatic.

Do the laws need tweaking? Definitely. I think the no-fault concept has gone too far, it shouldn't be the only option.

I think your idea of why men and women marry, is incorrect. Historically, women needed protection and men wanted heirs, and trust me, the women were not so crazy about having all those children - they knew the risk of dying in childbirth, and how it would wear their bodies down. That's why many men were widowed and went through multiple wives because they were simply wore to death.

Also, it was more common to live in extended family groups or tribes where everyone took care of each other. Modern marriage is completely different than it was just a few generations ago.

It has also been a strategic alliance - that's how it became a religious rite - the church wanted in on the power brokering.

Men has always had access to sex if they wanted, there was no reason to marry for that.

The support is usually meant so the W can continue to do her part of the partnership... raise the children. As society evolves, the laws should evolve with it, but there's definitely a lag. Men are increasingly getting shared custody, but that is a completely new thing.

[SunnyB]

Zues, nice update. Happy for you on the house, on the increased child sharing, on playing pool and doing things that make you happy.

The financial part of a D is complicated for sure, more so in some states than others. My state is no fault, it doesn't matter who wants out for what reason, there's no financial impact for adultery. Mr P and I negotiated what I consider a fair split of assets, and because we used the collaborative process, we were able to do it without the constraints that would have been in place in a traditional D. And although I receive no alimony, I'm happy with what we came up with. I know not everyone feels that way.

You like to call yourself cynical, but I think that's just your analytical nature, your ability to detach and see things from afar. That's a great skill to have, Zues, but I hope someday you are able to let go and just feel your way in and through a new R. I really do.

[Vanilla]

Zues

I keep on reading along.

Just sayin'

V

[Zues126]

Thank you V, and thank you Sunny. I post less and less, but while the role of the forums in my life may be overall a bit less, the joy I get from our shared time only becomes richer.

Painter, thank you for your reply. So spot on. And it's a good reminder about not being able to legislate feelings. You're all right, it is complicated and there is no pretty way that is going to be absolutely optimal for every situation. And there is no way to divorce that isn't devastating emotionally, financially, and in terms of destroying the lives we wanted for our children and the time we share with them.

It keeps bringing me back to why I am so adamant divorce in general is wrong, but even Zues here will admit that even that isn't black and white as you can't legislate morality and there are times when people need to protect themselves from a truly destructive situation. And while everyone that files makes that claim and the vast majority don't understand the commitment it takes in a marriage and are just cheaterpants (was it Ahoy that used to say this? ), you have to make provisions for those that need that protection.

I realize that I am still feeling some resentment towards the world. I sometimes feel that as a culture we've disapproved of some social structures so we tore them down, but we failed to replace them with something better. The result is just chaos. It didn't start in the 60s but the hippies were a great example. They picketed Viet Nam and wore tied dyes instead of ties, and said 'hey, man, this system [censored]!' But 20 years later they were in corporate jobs driving beamers because they realized that the societal structure was there for a reason, it was a way we could provide for children, couple up, and meet most of our needs. Whereas sex/drugs/rock&roll isn't necessarily an improvement.

But my dad and mom were both true hippies. And my sister today is a nationally renowned (has used an alias name for over a decade) spokesperson for the revolutionary communist party, fighting against the patriarchy and oppression against women, pro-choice rights, fighting against the war, and frankly fighting against our capitalistic society. And I can see that a lot of change was needed, and is still needed.

So on the one hand I'm like 'Hey, world, great job, you've torn everything apart, and now we're all pissed off and nothing's working because we're all beating to different drums and no one can agree on anything anymore.' Which leads me to think, which is worse, having one form of social indoctrination that can be discriminatory and cultish at times, but also provides coherence and stability, or a culture in which nothing works but we are all free to choose our own part in the anarchy? Is there a balance in which we have some structure provided to encourage lasting relationships and permanent families for our children?

Tough questions for sure.

My dad is back from his hiatus in Mexico. He remarked how fast the world is changing and how it will change faster in the next decade. We talked about how 20 years ago internet was just starting to be a resource, 15 years ago it was a minority of people using it for limited purposes in a few countries, 10 years ago it was mainstream in the US, and now it is mainstream world wide. Point is in Mexico villages where most people live in poverty and have very little, they all have cell phones, they all can stream videos, etc. For the first time EVER the entire world can see the entire world. Those in poverty can see the way those in the US live, the cars we drive, the food we waste, etc. Everyone is wanting equality, everyone is wanting opportunity. Education is available. Online communities are there to unite and group people together so they can have a voice. The point was mainly that the status quo won't stay the way it is much longer, the world is too small, and that the way in which this world lives will change substantially before our eyes.

Pretty crazy. That for the entirety of human history change happened relatively slowly, and usually only in little ways as the underlying patterns took hold. And to think we can watch it all flip, twist, and fold around like a kaleidoscope practically in real time, in ways that it never has before. Very tripped out.

So yes, it is painful to go through the loss of divorce. And it's easy to see some things that are lost in our society as this shifting occurs. But it isn't bad. If it's not all good, it is necessary, inevitable. And whatever happens, the overlying pattern will be that things will shift in ways that are best for ALL people, and for mother Earth. And that is a good thing. Sure it stinks to bear the brunt of a loss of family caused in part by society's abandonment of traditional values. But it stinks more for someone in a third world country to lose their child because of lack of medical care. So if things can trend towards a better world for all, and I hope they do, then I will look at my suffering as a necessary contribution to that end.

OK, world, I am working on forgiving you for the pain I've endured. I'll go back to owning my part in the breakdown, trying to make my contribution overall and to my children the best I can make it, and being appreciative of everything, the front row seat during these times not least.

Thanks my DB friends for your kinship.

[SunnyB]

Zues, it occurred to me this morning that your views on society's abandonment of traditional values is a defense mechanism, a way to avoid getting hurt again. I'm not saying you don't mean it, I'm certainly not suggesting it's not entirely true, but I am saying that maybe you are using it like a shield, a reason not to put your heart out there again. Maybe?

[Ginger1]

Just curious,

Did you view the world and society and it's changes/problems the same way before the divorce? When your M was in a good place, were you viewing society as you do now?

[JujuB]

Zues,

Thanks for sharing. I thought I was the only one with extreme socialist parents! (My dad is Ralph Nadars long lost twin. Not really a hippie though).

I like their views....I just wish they would get rid of the box t.v.

I think we are both a bit idealistic and perhaps that's why.

[Zues126]

Absolutely Sunny.

With second marriages ending in divorce something like 2/3rds of the time, infidelity rates approaching 50% on those that remain married, and more and more people accepting this as normal (over half of college age students now say that a marriage wouldn't have to last to be considered a success) I realize the odds of achieving any long lasting partnership to be pretty small.

Abandonment and disloyalty are not acceptable to me. I won't allow myself to be disrespected and mistreated in those ways. And I have no interest in connecting with people that think this is ok.

And yes, it was deeply troubling. Last night I had a very, very, very vivid and powerful dream. In the middle of it I was in the same room with XW. We were both caring for our children. Loving our children. We were not together, but we were aware of each other's presence. There was a connection between us as we were both aware of the love in the room. One so powerful it was hard to ignore. It was all powerful, the bonds were so strong that no romance, affair partner, or fantasy could offer something more compelling. It felt like there was no way we could not reconnect to preserve the opportunity to all share this eternal love. It was such a real dream I was surprised when I woke up. Then, when I fell back asleep, the dream resumed right where it was before, and I had the same experience again.

These days I'm pretty well at peace. I enjoy my life, I'm not in daily pain, I have no feelings towards XW that compare with repulsion, and overall things are better than ever. But to say that I wasn't scarred to my soul would be a lie. The fact is that nothing will ever shatter me the way this loss did. The death of my parents and even children would be horribly tragic, but even then wouldn't be by the choice of someone that pledged to cherish my heart.

Frankly there is no way I could go through that again. Nothing could do that to me again. Maybe because I won't permit the opportunity, either I won't partner with anyone, wouldn't be able to be that trusting again, but certainly because I won't share children and build a family and bring life into the world again.

So between the mockery that future relationships would be in comparison to what the lifelong partnership with the mother of my children could have been, and the increased likelihood that it would result in a similar rerun, I just don't see it. And I do tend to blame the world for being this way, for if marriage rates and people's commitment to each other were statistically better, then it might be easier to convince myself that it is a good investment. But I am not interested in games that can't be won. As I've said, traditional marriages are phasing out and haven't been replaced by a model that works any better.

Maybe someday I can follow the herd, abandon my beliefs, and endorse the idea of a series of 5-10 year relationships that end with betrayal and abandonment citing escape from abuse and framing it as a positive experience due to the ensuing personal growth. But at this time that seems totally appalling to me and I don't feel this world offers what I'm looking for. I know the saying that there is someone out there, but that is a saying, it is designed to keep people optimistic and doesn't address the reality of the current landscape. There may be someone out there, but statistically speaking I would probably never find them and instead rinse and repeat this destruction again and again. I believe that's the definition of insanity.

It is too bad, while everyone here is grieving the loss of their M, I am grieving the loss of the idea of having a relationship in my life ever, and I do think I'm a bit outside the norm in that regard. But I thought I'd share that because I can't be the only one that feels this way, that is making these conclusions, and is dealing with this fallout.

Sorry to be a downer, I'm going to have a great day today and enjoy what this life still offers. Don't worry about Zues. It's sunny out in MN and things are allright.

[JujuB]

And I really do believe that the line of beliefs your describing has the potential to be very conducive to traditional family values!

[Ralph88]

Wow zues, a powerful message today. I do think there are two primarily typed people nowadays. Those that believe in commitment at all costs (barring abuse, drugs, etc) and those that are only committed when the times are good and they are satisfied. I think committed people try to think about everyone's needs not just their own, and the other type think about their needs mostly or only.