Why Are Right Wing Men So Sad?

Post Reply New Topic

Marriage is a commitment to another person. You make vows to be there for them and stick with them.

How can a teenager know who is compatible with them for the rest of their life? That's nuts.

If I had married the person I thought I was in love with at 15 -17 my life would be miserable. He was a horrible person. He was just very polite and people often couldn't see through him. He could say "the right things". You might even think he was a stand up Christian guy. But he was manipulative and controlling and a gaslighter.

He was 9 years older than me. But I thought I was cool because an older man likes me. I was vulnerable and he took advantage - to a certain extent. I was a black and white thinker and said no to him pushing things too far. I had a line in my head he wasn't to cross, but someone not so black and white would have got into a place they would have regretted.

Absolutely ridiculous statements Angelrho!

To be fair I was protected. Older people saw what was happening and had words with him and he left me alone.

See that. Wiser people than myself stepped in and averted the danger.

The problem with conservative ideals is that they don't take into account protection from Narcissists and other bad people. If you are an outlier you're screwed. They are simple ideals. It would be lovely if everyone was above board, but they're not. Vulnerable people need protecting.

That's why one of my earlier comments applauded the compassion that younger generations have developed.

I want it shown for the record you are twisting my words and misrepresenting my position. I’m not defending anything of the sort. I wasn’t even talking in absolute terms that my opinion is what everyone should think or do. You purposefully ignored all the time I started a statement with “I think.” If you don’t work with teenagers, you won’t understand how mature they really are. Perhaps you just forgot what it was like to be 17 years old, or you are projecting your own mistakes OR—and I’m truly sorry if this is the case—you were a victim of a predator or abuser yourself. If that’s the case, then we aren’t going to be able to have an objective discussion regardless and I’ll just stop responding to you. Just give me some indication how you want to handle this, but I don’t like to assume things.

The whole marriage law thing is something I don’t know the exact justification for. I’m only speculating that it is about tradition or religion, but given that people in this country have freedom of religion, that extends to raising children and might touch on marriage. It has to at least be an option, EVEN IF nobody actually makes use of it. I’m completely unaware of anyone who has chosen to go through the process of obtaining marriage for underaged teenagers. Don’t confuse the right of someone to do something with a demand or requirement that they do it. I do maintain that pushing marriage and family into the 30’s when the sex drive is probably highest in the teens and 20’s is unreasonable when religious people insist that they must reach a number of milestones before marriage. Can you think of a non-emotional, objective reason to push family almost past the point of childbearing age? The only reason I can think of is purely societal pressure, and I don’t care one bit about conforming to what society thinks.

What are you on about? The law says you can get married at 18 if you want to. No law dictates marriage at 30.

I hate to say it, but, honestly, that’s one of those things that doesn’t get easier the older you get. I’m totally aware of the knuckleheadedness of teenagers, but I’m also constantly in awe of how wise many of them really are. They deserve more credit than we tend to give them. I don’t hold to the view that all teens are stupid.


Same. Sounds like your ex and my ex should go out together.


Maybe, but don’t paint the whole with the same brush as your own experiences. Not all teens are like us. I was only a year older than my ex, but even so it was someone younger than me being manipulative and gaslighting. And don’t misunderstand my words as more than they really are…as far as teen marriage goes, I’m only trying to guess as to why those laws are even on the books. If it’s ridiculous, take it up with those who actually care about it. I’m not allowing my kids to get married. What they do when they leave my care is beyond my control.


Good.


I’m not particularly conservative, though. I share a number of conservative values, but that’s like saying education is a liberal values education, so if you value education, that makes you a liberal. I’m more concerned about individual freedom. Sure, it’s possible evil people can manipulate the system, but there’s also a thing called justice. I don’t have a problem with protecting vulnerable people. I just think that it’s immoral to impose limits and controls on good, decent people for the sake of stopping the one or two occasional bad actors.

Let me put it another way: Teens sneak drugs and alcohol to a party. Teen girls wear suggestive clothes to the party. Boys interpret this as girls “asking for it” and have sex with girls while they are passed out from the effects of drugs and alcohol.

Teens need protection from Narcissists who drug and rape them, yes? So we need to pass laws that ban teen girls from wearing skimpy clothes because it sends the message they are there to have sex with boys.

In the interest of protecting vulnerable girls, is the above statement appropriate or not? Underage drinking and drug use are not in view because there are already laws prohibiting those things. The rape itself is not in view because there are already laws in place against rape, including date rape and statutory rape—meaning that these girls already lack the legal right to give consent, anyway. So the only thing left to do is tell girls what they can or cannot wear. Because we're protecting them. What is wrong with this?

In Mississippi, you cannot get married before 21 regardless of gender. To get married earlier requires both sets of parents to give permission AND it had to be approved by a judge. You’ll finish college by around 21 or 22, give or take some, and start working on your career. If you happen to do well, you can pay off student loans in about 20 years and pay off a mortgage in about 15. If that is the criteria society sets for achievement before one is secure enough for marriage and family, it pushes the de facto age for marriage into the 30’s. More women are waiting into their 30’s to marry and start their families. I think waiting that long for marriage is unreasonable.

It does in Australia. We have to get married at 30 whether we want to or not.

I think you will find the consistent Left opinion that there is no excuse boys interpreting the way a girl is dressed as consent to do things to them. Legally banning girls from wearing skimpy outfits so boys can't go "they were asking for it" is the exact opposite. And it is by these standards that seem to upset a lot of people who are more conservative. Let boys, girls and enby folk dress how they want, as long as they ain't flashing their unmentionables to people who don't consent.

And what I remember as a teen was that I was an idiot, someone who thought they were mature and ready to understand things on an adult level, but took a while longer to mature. The brain still has a lot of development to do as a teenager, and people claiming that a teen is ready to be treated like adult, such as the idea of marriage, is ridiculous. People who claim that teenager are actually mature and able to make such decisions like being with an adult are fooling themselves, and it sounds like feeding into some justification fed by those who want to create a reason for something like a story in the bible. Or justifying some other traditions just because they are a tradition.

If you are unwilling to speak in absolutes, I certainly am. The likelihood of manipulation from an adult to a minor who can't think clearly, is the reason why a minor cannot consent to be with an adult. Just as the likelihood that someone doesn't actually consent to a sexual encounter from something like freezing up and other pressures, is why someone should get active before doing something, rather than taking a lack of a no as a yes. These are not ridiculous standards, and make much more sense than relying on a parent to make the decision of a minor, or have a person defend their actions by saying that they thought that the agreed by not fighting back.

What they not are is prescriptions along the lines of saying an adult has to get married at a certain time, like 30s or something, like you interpreted my accusations of you defending child marriages as you saying a child has to get married at 15. My stance is always the ability for an individual to make informed consent, free from the undue influences of an adult to a minor, excessive alcohol, and other social pressures. I don't care how mature you think a particular teenager might be, or a fear of women being pushed almost passed the point of childbearing age.

I also think that people, including children, have the right to not be cisgender or heterosexual, and no parent should get the right to control their child from not being so by claiming their religion. That is child abuse, and a freedom of religion is not a freedom to abuse children.

I must have misplaced my letter, I only got the one for jury duty. Do you think that it is on myGov or something?

For the record of things, I only started being able to figure out my own sexuality and gender identity recently after being able to unpack all the toxic influences that were forced onto me from all sorts of things. The idea of prescribing what fits individuals based on traditional ideas of what is normal, just seems ridiculous.

And if there is one thing harming younger generations from doing things like starting families, it would be economic junk, that we can't afford it, and these lack of economic stability creates anxiety. It isn't at all something like telling teenage girls that they can go get a career first instead of starting a family. The elements of prescribed gender roles themselves are bunk.

The post is a bit slow recently but they can still fine you for things you didn't get the letter for. Same as they can still fine you when you don't get your letter for the council rates.

Speaking of which…I haven’t noticed any updates on your relational situation. I can’t remember if you married the lady, but our babies are pretty close in age. How are things going a year later?

I’ll have to look this up….but I very much doubt people in Australia have to get married by 30.

I bet Retro is pulling our leg!

And it’s true. There’s no such requirement.

I guess I have to learn when someone is trying to pull a fast one on me

Last edited by kraftiekortie on 04 Aug 2021, 7:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

If there is one thing Australians are known for, it is not making up things about Australia to foreigners to make them believe ridiculous things.

I didn't realise they were close in age. You have more than one, right? I haven't married the lady. She wants to get married but I feel like we need to be a lot more stable first. I always feel like things are on the brink of flying apart so I don't want to make any further commitments yet. Even though obviously we've already made a huge commitment.

The problem with dictating dress is that it doesn't actually prevent attack.

If we all have the mindset that it will prevent an attack, when someone is assaulted the question "what were you wearing?" gains validity in the public consciousness even though anyone can be assaulted no matter what they wear.

It leads to: We believe her if she was covered, we don't believe her if her neckline was plunging.

I heard one court case when the survivor of an assault was questioned on why she had been wearing lace panties. It had no relevance, but the lawyer was trying to besmirch this woman because she bought herself some nice knickers! Totally ridiculous. Should we all wear big cotton briefs just in case we have to defend ourselves in court one day?

Just learn who tries to "pull the fast ones", and then ignore them from then on.

Thus, I would not take RetroGamer87 seriously.

I agree.

There’s still much victim-shaming within courts of law.