sj10460
Don't Come for me unless I send for you!
Why are you blowing your 400 discretionary every month. Plus you have a savings.
LOL, I love how dedicated you are to the OP.
Why are you blowing your 400 discretionary every month. Plus you have a savings.
Umm...the last few pages will give you an idea . But I do think "some people " have been indirectly responding to yardyspice and I guess the people who thanked her post (??) throughout this discussion.LOL so per your post, who are "some people" that should just directly respond?
Umm...the last few pages will give you an idea . But I do think "some people " have been indirectly responding to @yardyspice and I guess the people who thanked her post (??) throughout this discussion.
LOL, I love how dedicated you are to the OP.
Umm...the last few pages will give you an idea . But I do think "some people " have been indirectly responding to yardyspice and I guess the people who thanked her post (??) throughout this discussion.
On the first page of this thread, people are responding to the question asked by the OP and basing their opinions on what worked for them.
There are a lot of things I believe in, people on this board do not. I never ever take it personal. I have had sex within a week of meeting a man, I have lived with men many times without marrying them or intending to marry them, and so much more . When people state why they think these are bad ideas or what type of women they think these people are, I take it as their opinion formed by their experience and do not take it as a personal insult.
it's your choice not to take personal insults as personal. Others have the choice to fire back. As opposed to be silent about it.
The shades about women who don't have a man paying everything for them didn't even apply to me. I am currently living with a dude that's paying almost everything, so I can save money while building up my career. I do find it irritating though, the constant snide remarks about women who don't have men doing everything for them and the implication that they are damaged. The constant pontificating, this is what a marriage is supposed to be like. Enough already.
We are >>here<<<. That's why I just roll my eyes at the people (i think it was barbie and yardy) who try to intimate "abandonement issues", or "trust issues". Or the one who said black women need to aspire higher. Lol if only you knew the half. Get on my level and then we can talk.
How old are you Kurlee? I'm not being facetious at all and you don't have to answer if you feel I'm being snarky or facetious in any way
Y'all would think this was your budget
Haha, so thats what people are offended about.
had no idea. lol
just my experience about women that insist on 50/50--usually daddy issues. (even if there parents are married). people can disagree if they want lol
The situation we were discussing wasn't 50-50 though. And no one is insisting on anything. You're trying to create issues where there are none.
Do y'all want a husband or a daddy? This thread is getting weird.
OT: What's with the sudden distaste for the word "fair?" So there's a new definition, now?
To ME, fair is knowing that should DH and I ever split, we aren't gonna have a D. Wade type situation where he's trying to ruin my image and take my kids from me. Taking the kids' feelings into consideration is fair. That's what I'd attribute to being fair and a main attribute I'd look for in a man in general. Or he isn't gonna get mad and post intimate pics to some website for revenge. That is fair. Y'all talking about "I don't want a fair man," or "everything in a marriage won't be fair" so casually as if he were to decide not to be fair in a situation that would put you at a disadvantage, then that'd be ok. You know you wouldn't accept that.
Umm...the last few pages will give you an idea . But I do think "some people " have been indirectly responding to yardyspice and I guess the people who thanked her post (??) throughout this discussion.
social context is everything.This is a very interesting thread. A lot of what I hear does not take into consideration that times have changed. Those saying that a "real" man takes prides in paying for most everything in their marriage are passing judgement on what manhood is like. Just like people love passing judgement on what womanhood is supposed to be.
The idea that men should foot all or most of the bills in a marriage has been used for centuries to support the idea that men should get better jobs then women and get paid more for doing the same, since men have the burden to support families. How is our society supposed to function if we keep demanding work equality for women, but at the end of the day, "real" men have to foot most of the bills in their marriage? As more women are climbing up the career ladder and leveling out the workfield, the men that fit those manly standards for husbands will have to make even more money than they are. Eventually, where are they going to find those men?
OMG, this post reminds me of Tasha Marbury's marriage. Her DH had an estimated worth of $45million and she said that she's always worked and always had to (including paying off the woman that slept with her husband) because he kept his money to himself.
She shoulda married a man with less money that treated her well for all of that.
Who said their life or marriage was perfect? I've been here a long time and I've seen VERY candid posts from married members talking about their ups and downs.
Happy doesn't mean perfect. But on that note, why is someone else's happiness so insulting that people need to tell them to stop fronting or be real?
Sent from my DROID BIONIC using LHCF
Yep. Many people always sound mad at women with provider husbands when this topic comes up, and they must be lying.
I don't see it that way. From what I see, the women who have husbands paying 100% of everything seem to imply that their marriage is the blueprint to all marriages and if yours is not like that then your marriage ain't the real deal and you don't have a real man. That what it reads like to me.
There is so much snark in this one thread. Times like this I'm glad I don't pt too much of my life out there for public consumption.
I don't see it that way. From what I see, the women who have husbands paying 100% of everything seem to imply that their marriage is the blueprint to all marriages and if yours is not like that then your marriage ain't the real deal and you don't have a real man. That what it reads like to me.
There is so much snark in this one thread. Times like this I'm glad I don't pt too much of my life out there for public consumption.
it's your choice not to take personal insults as personal. Others have the choice to fire back. As opposed to be silent about it.
The shades about women who don't have a man paying everything for them didn't even apply to me. I am currently living with a dude that's paying almost everything, so I can save money while building up my career. I do find it irritating though, the constant snide remarks about women who don't have men doing everything for them and the implication that they are damaged. The constant pontificating, this is what a marriage is supposed to be like. Enough already.
I think the women here should just do what they've always done and just keep mum on these topics, let people figure out their own stuff.
Pa fout mande mwen.
All I have to say is that I'm in my early twenties and have been paying all of my own bills since May and I hate it. I'm looking for a sponsor I'm having lunch with a well connected older gentleman next week and I'm sure he'll broach the matchmaking subject.
I think it's weird that a man would expect his future wife to contribute to bills. Savings and rainy day funds, yeah sure. Mortgages and stuff. Hell no. A man should be prepared to foot the bills simply because if his wife decides to have children, it could be years before she works again. That's just the way I was raised.