kpsm3 | (no subject)

(no subject)

KPOP SECRET MEME PART 660

ip logging is ON / anon is on
no porn pictures / videos / links
no giant picspams / gifspams / gore
no violations of dreamwidth's tos
do whatever the hell else you want!

please report tos violations here!
flat view » last page »

https://discord.gg/kG28rnm4Ch

Spring soon!

💖 mental health support 💖
look after yourselves anons

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

does this count if they're together from like 23 because 26 these days seems like a young age to get married. if they were like 20 it's more understandable. unless every girl is just supposed to assume that every boyfriend she has in her early to mid 20s is just looking at her as a girlfriend and not a wife.

i agree it's a young age to get married but idk, at the same time, what are you doing spending aaaaalllllll your time together for years and years and years? like, either way, it's kind a waste of your youth so maybe you'd better just get married and have more economic stability sooner

that's such a limited view on life lol sorry anon but relationships are only worth it if you get married? no. are your friendships also only worth it if you remain friends for life?

monogamous romantic relationships with men useless longterm if they are not for the purpose of economic stability. let's not pretend that we don't live in a patriarchal, capitalist society, anon. these kind of relationships always become the default primary in a woman's life, draining her time and energy away from other things she could be building. so yes, i said what i said, sure did. if a woman is getting spousal health insurance and tax breaks, etc from spending her youth with a man romantically, she oughtn't do it

if a woman isn't getting spousal health insurance and tax breaks, etc from spending her youth with a man romantically, she oughtn't do it

ok, i disagree with you completely that monogamous relationships with men are only useful from a financial pov lol. but you can have economic benefits from a ltr without getting married? you can live together, buy a house, share bills without marriage. unless you're just speaking from a very us-centric perspective and there's some additional financial benefits i'm not aware of? personally i am very financially stable and i would not want to rely on being married to a man for economic stability.

but in addition to that, things change a lot in relationships around the 7-8 year mark - that's often the time people get the itch to switch. not to mention other things like how you handle significant life events (especially illness or death), 3 years is rarely enough time to find that out and that's massively important to a happy relationship

but ig we probably just disagree on those fronts, good luck finding your man

but you can have economic benefits from a ltr without getting married? you can live together, buy a house, share bills without marriage.

i just threw up in my mouth a little omggg. honestly, love yourself, anon

i really don't understand your attachment to the concept of marriage like that. just because you are legally married doesn't mean a man will treat you better, help with housework or evenly share the mental load of being a couple which are much more important issues to women's happiness

da you’re right, ignore this loser clearly stuck in the fifties and with no money

when your partner is a heterosexual man, there is very little guarantee for any of that in the first place and you just don't know until you know and sometimes, not even then. so the least a woman could do is to protect herself legally. which a smart marriage would do. now, i know you're probably going to say "but isn't the best way for a woman to protect herself legally is to remain unbound to a man"? and to that i say, absolutely. which is why the idea of living with a man and sharing bills and household chores with him for years and years while unmarried is absolutely revolting to me.

a marriage contract doesn't just potentially protect a woman from a man doing her wrong financially but it also protects their assets together in medical emergencies. if that man falls into a coma or dies, his next of kin is kind of anybody but that woman. depending on some important details, she may have absolutely no rights to anything they've built together and she won't have any rights to decide his medical care. and she's at the mercy of his family to treat her nicely and take her feelings into account.

the old ladies here seriously sound like they were born in the 50s. i can't imagine being a millennial or younger and caring about marriage like get a life and a job

are you perhaps mentally stunted? thats the whole reason we can be choosy about men and not spending too much time on dumbasses who are weighing their options. i can manage fine by myself, i have friends, i have a wonderful social life, so why would i give that up for a man that is not contributing anything to my life.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only