Why is no one talking about the cohabitation menace?
Men and women should be legally required to get married before they move in together.
Combined with the outlawing of no fault divorce, I believe this would rectify declining marriage rates and have great benefits for the next generation
Other urls found in this thread:
encyclopediadramatica.se
unmarriedamerica.org
twitter.com
The Fendippitous Eggmen are returning soon.
The Fendippitous Eggmen are returning soon.
encyclopediadramatica.se
they call me the forced meme killer
Thank you for your posts
I don't expect any argument desu, so meme spam is needed to bump the thread and redpill everyone
>getting married
>at all
Yeah, sure do want to give 50% of my stuff away to a walking hole. What if we have a kid, well ofcourse she deserves it more, I mean men are just crazy rapists who wouldn't be able to raise a child.
Fuck (((marriage))) and fuck (((women))). Unless there's a death penalty for divorce or something I'll never trust the walking holes. Literally no point in getting married for men since they get nothing out of it (well they get to fuck a hole) while women get cash, a place to stay(women would ofcourse take the opportunity to steal a man's home as well ofcourse), and a child, also 50% of what the man owns.
M8 you're taking this "brits are muslims now" bants a bit too far
That's a very self interested view to take.
The point isn't to give women money to spend on luxuries, but to make sure she can afford to take care of the man's children. There is an obligation to provide for the child, and the mother is the one most competent to spend money on the child.
Marriage is a way to raise a child with a sensible woman- if she's sensible she won't raise a child outside of marriage, because she wants the security of knowing she'll be able to take care of it
>unenforcable laws
Stop appropriating leftycuck culture.
>That's a very self interested view to take.
You're going to one day realize that the majority of outlook is self-interested -- and, no, it's not inherently-negative, it's natural [and don't take me saying it's natural as me saying it's "good;" it's just how it is, for better or worse.]
Cohabitation doesn't seem like that bad of an idea. Interim period where you assess the stability of the relationship in a household setting before making a massive financial and personal commitment in a time where you could flip a coin for whether you get a divorce or not.
It would be better just to remove alimony altogether or return to culture with a lot more respect for marriage, but in lieu of that this works.
It's still enforced some places in America I think
unmarriedamerica.org
Although they would need to make more of an effort.
The legal term for it is 'living in sin'
Well put, that
It's literally unenforcable without going into people's homes, in addition to most likely being unconstitutional in the United States.
>The point isn't to give women money to spend on luxuries, but to make sure she can afford to take care of the man's children
Hahaha, yeah right. She'll spend it on luxeries, kid will grow up with a single mother which is bad since they either turn out mentally unstable or unsuccessful.
>the mother is the one most competent to spend money on the child.
According to who? Sounds like complete bullshit. Why wouldn't a man be able to spend money on a child, sounds completely retarded mate.
>Marriage is a way to raise a child with a sensible woman
Marriage is a way to raise a child together with a woman so she would be able to divorce the man later on and get 50% of his stuff while also recieving money from the man in child support while also stealing away his home and child.
FTFY
Women live life on easy mode and why would they voluntarily raise the difficulty by: getting a job, properly raising a kid, staying faithful to her husband and not leaving him and fucking him over? They'd rather fuck the man who has to play on either normal or hard difficulty just so they'd make is even more easier for themselves. Not only do the men have it harder in life as everything is stacked against them but they also have to: look good to impress a women, be socially interesting, take the woman out on dates (cost lots of money, which the man pays ofcourse ;^) ), have a house to take the woman home to, have a stable job, buying the woman gifts and shit like jewelery and so on. I could go on but I think you know where I'm getting.
Until society fucks off with favour to either sides when divorcing or in court there's literally no reason to marry since you'll only get fucked over, unless it's a retarded woman.
But the laws have been around for centuries, I don't see how they could be unconstitutional
And if they're allowed in one place the other states have an equal right to bring them in
Also, going into people's houses is allowed when they're suspected of breaking the law.
Men would be able to look after children too, but maybe the idea is they will be more attached to their mothers and the man will be working all the time anyway.
Clearly you think women are always selfish, but I don't know if it's true. Actually I think science says they care about their children more than men do.
If they really only care about themselves, don't marry them- maybe some modern women are like that, but I wouldn't get too carried away with that viewpoint. Impressions aren't always the same as reality
>There is an obligation
hahahahahahahahahaha
that girl has a big, pretty butt and i want to fuck her.
Lmao someone is a baby man
>Violated privacy rights because women are leeches sometimes
>women
>wanting co-habitation over marriage
wut
>Trying to sell a cow
>give its milk away for free
>someone eventually is stupid enough to want to buy the cow
>decline the offer and continue giving him the milk for free
>Also, going into people's houses is allowed when they're suspected of breaking the law.
Wrong. I know the bobbys can just raid your house on suspicion of grade V spoon possession in the people's republic of Britianstan, but in America you need HARD PROOF OF WRONG DOING SHOWN TO A JUDGE before going into a home.
It's almost as if we included that amendment because of you faggot.
The law is unconstitutional with the 9th amendment.
Tons of unconstitutional laws are active. Just look at faggot Cali with their gun laws.
Having a good relationship doesn't mean shit if you can't leave together. End of story.
Don't you mean the 4th Amendment?
You need 'probable cause'
What would probable cause mean in cohabitation?
Surely you can deduce that two people seem to be living in sin together, so to speak
This has not much to do with women being leeches
>Be at uni
>Meet girl
>Parents say we are 'too young' to get married despite all our grandparents marrying younger than we were.
Cohabitation or the cesspool of degeneracy that was halls/house share was our only choice.
Disregard coupling.
>Men and women should be legally required to get married before they move in together.
stop wanting to control people fuck boy
>muh 50%
That's not how it works in Sweden you fucking mong. You've been on this American Animations and Cartoons Discussion Forum for too long.
At least you tried.
I hated the halls as well
It's a moral dilemma alright
Are you anti-marriage?
>tfw undesirable to women
At least I don't have to deal with this shit.
>dating same girl for 7 years since high school
>never even spoken about marriage
feels good desu
That seems pretty insulting to me
We just considered ourselves married and moved in together, lived as a married couple for several years before parents gave their blessing and we tied the knot this year.
Funny thing is people still say 'oh you are married, everything will be different now' well no its not because we considered our relationship to be lifelong and serious before we moved in together.
People are afraid to go all in and commit and if you are like that cohabitation is great as there is always an easy way out.
>>dating same girl for 7 years since high school
>>never even spoken about marriage
i have some bad news for you
But there is clearly a difference between considering yourself married and actually being married.
Especially if things hadn't gone so well.
An easy way out isn't necessarily a good thing, so people deliberately bind themselves together because they know in the long run they would prefer to be in a relationship, even if in the short run they can have dynamic preferences which say otherwise