white women with black babies on streets?

[redheads]

There isn't a day that goes by that i dont see atleast one white women walking with a black child here on the streets of downtown toronto, canada and on some days i see as many as 4-5 white women walking with black babies/children. Most of the time i dont see any black guys walking with them.

My question is who are these women?? i mean are they the one who do one night stands with black guys and get pregnant with black babies? or are they the wives of cuckold white husbands who get pregnant with blacks guys babies?

 

[Curious Observer]

Far more likely to be feckless promiscuous women who got pregnant by a black guy who then left them or same as before but (in the UK at least) to get a state-provided council house.

 

[sharky20]

I live near Toronto and see this also. Was at Canadas wonderland the other week and saw some of these. I saw this starch white woman with dyed white blond hair with her mixed kids with no father around. Black guys have been known to have wondering dicks. Wherever they find pussy they go. So I think alot of these sluts have been abadoned. Oh well thats they're problem.

 

[Susan's Slave]

Then again, they could be married to successful black men who go to work and leave the wives at home to take care of their children! Unless, of course, one of the women you see is your wife.

 

[ffred]

I fully adree with Susan`s slave. In my opinion there is no reason for estimating a ONS or cuckolding. Sure it can be, but for the European point of view a mixed race marriage should be the most logical possibility.

fred

 

[InDeep]

??????

I find it amusing that people automatically assume that a woman alone in public with a child is a single parent. Yes, there are more mixed race children out there as the stigma slowly goes away, but you can't assume that all of them have absent fathers.

I have a mixed race couple living down the block from me, and yes they have a young child. Seeing her alone with the child at the park shouldn't automatically trigger the single parent vision.

 

[mimi27406]

Who are these women?

What I am about to say will make a lot of people hit the ceiling. Here in Central NC, USA it is just becoming so common that only the raciest take much excetpton to it. It tears up white women's nerves to see a white girl with a black man, so they say, I wonder if they are not jeolous. No body seems to notice the cream of the crop Black women are going after the white male. Hope they don't

Frankly I feel the Black Male and the White Female think alike, and some white women want to rebell against society. Vanase Williams, Halle Barry etc have paved the way.

I have no answers just more questions?

 

[melscuck]

I think Mac has it right. number of mixed children are up, number of single mothers is up. I wish everyone would stop thinking that everytime a white woman has a mixed child that it must be the result of a black man "breeding" a white woman. I have to say, the most unappealing aspect of this and every other cuckold board is this idea that white women are just spreading their legs in the hopes of being bred by a big black bull.

In my case, my wife has 2 mixed children and had them before we were married. She has been promiscuous with her black boyfriend. On the other hand, before him, she was equally promiscuous with white boyfriends.

There is no revolution out there. White women have not suddenly embraced some bizarre cuck mentality. I think there is just more acceptance of whites dating blacks. The majority of children out there are single race. I also have to agree with Susan's Slave. Why does everyone assume the nice white girl with the mixed child couldn't possible be married to a successful, working black man.

Go to the mall, you see white women with black babies all the time ... and rarely with a black male with her. Let's face it, black males find impregnating white females as more of a "statement" and a sport ... white women find fucking black men a exciting taboo which they sometimes pay gravely for with lots of bi-racial children they end up raising on their own.

You read and watch too much porn! Watch out everyone, I see Mandingo lurking around every corner.

Also, look at the large numbers of black single women with black babies, by black men. There is a cultural revolution going on and it's a sad one. That is, the number of young, mostly inner city, black males who impregnate black women but do not act as a father to those children.

 

[Custer Laststand]

There is no revolution out there. ....

See your subsequent statement...

There is a cultural revolution going on, and it's a sad one. ....

The apparent "cultural revolution" you refer to, which is a dramatic and continuing decrease in the percentage of the U.S. adult population who are married, is a symptom of an important related phenomenon: the continuing decline in the real incomes of working Americans since a high point during the years after WW II. Marriage is in large part an economic phenomenon, and fewer and fewer members of the lower classes and what used to be the middle classes see themselves as having sufficient income, future prospects, and stability to enable them to get married. (The marriage rate remains high and is not decreasing among members of the upper classes, which are only a small percentage of the total marriage-age population.)

The decreasing-marriage phenomenon is arguably being driven by the steadily-increasing gap — now a chasm — between the percentage of total U.S. net worth held by the super-rich, and the percentage held by everyone else — in particular, the formerly-middle to increasing lower classes. This, in turn, is closely correlated with... indeed, is in large part driven by... the continuing decreases in the uppermost tax bracket for wealthy individuals accompanied by continuing decreases in corporate taxes, enacted by successive Congresses and signed into law by successive Presidents. We're about to see another enrichment of the rich and further impoverishment of the poor and former middle classes, under the guise of "simplifying the tax code." If the past is any guide, this effort will succeed — despite the arguments by, for instance, Warren Buffett that he and his fellow billionaires should pay higher taxes (see today's New York Times).

As anyone might guess, the decreasing marriage rate has not been accompanied by a decrease in the rate of fucking. Also, as others have pointed out, increasing acceptance of the civil rights of blacks, and of blacks as individuals, is resulting in an increase in the number of sex partners available to white women — while (presumably) the percentage of single white women who fuck without birth control... often, apparently, because they "didn't anticipate the need" and/or they sense social disapproval of their purchase and use of birth control, because it implies non-marital fucking... has remained about the same.

It is a combination of these factors, I suggest... perhaps among others... that is resulting in the observed increase in the numbers of apparently single (but probably a mix of married and single) white women with black babies and youngsters.

A "sad" aspect of it, as mentioned by Melscuck, is the increasing numbers of children... white, black, and other races... born out of wedlock to single women because of the economic forces that are inexorably precluding a larger and larger percentage of the non-wealthy U.S. population (that's the overwhelming majority of us, ladies and gents) from marriage.

 

[renonympho]

Rotflol

I live near Toronto and see this also. Was at Canadas wonderland the other week and saw some of these. I saw this starch white woman with dyed white blond hair with her mixed kids with no father around. Black guys have been known to have wondering dicks. Wherever they find pussy they go. So I think alot of these sluts have been abadoned. Oh well thats they're problem.

Wondering dicks???lol I think you meant wAndering...lol funny how one letter can change the entire meaning. When I think of a wondering dick, I think of US politicians. Now those are a bunch of wondering dicks.

 

[melscuck]

@ Custer-Sorry, I forgot to place the word "cuck" before the word "revolution" as in "There is no cuck revolution out there."

While I tend to agree with your analysis of rich, middle class and poor and note that the middle class is slowly being squeezed out of existence, I find that has absolutely little to do with the number of single mothers and the failure on the part of the men to marry them or support them. I believe that society, as a whole, has become more irresponsible than it was 30 or 40 years ago. Even in the swinging and wild 60s and 70s, more men stepped up and did the right thing when it came to marriage when your girl became pregnant. There was a belief then that life didn't always turn out the way you wanted or wished but you did what you had to do and made the best of the situation. Whether that meant getting a job you didn't necessarily want, but, needed. So be it.

Not any more. We now live in a society where precious few accept responsibility for their actions. Why get married when there is no longer a societal belief that that is the right thing to do. It's easier to live life how you want to than it is to own up to your responsibilities. These scores of inner city youth, they can fuck and make babies but they have no interest in being responsible adults and fathers. It's not just the inner city, it's suburban kids too. As to the women, birth control is cheap and affordable and readily available everywhere. Why don't they use it? Good question and it's one that I have asked my wife countless times. She thought that having children and being single was acceptable. The truth is, it is acceptable now. She also thought her life would be like a movie, that Bryan would financially support her. He did not. Her fortune was in finding a guy like me.

We live in a society where most of our young don't have any urge to be responsible and don't want to live any life other than what they think life should be. My parents were poor, I was raised in a lower middle class home. I'm sure there were many times my parents felt the difficulty of having to raise a family on minimal wages. They did it and I never heard them bitch about it-not once.

I have always been a pretty liberal person. I voted for Obama and every Democrat before him-going back to Walter Mondale. Yet, I can see how society has changed. I don't think this has anything to do with finances. Heck, most of the young fathers out there don't even bother to pay child support let alone try to be good fathers. It's too hard to do that. It's easier to sit on your ass and dream of a good life without having to put too much effort into things.

Here's the thing. You mess around and get a girl pregnant, you should do the right thing. You don't necessarily have to marry the girl because you may not love the girl and that's no environment to bring a child into. At least, though, you should take 2 jobs, if necessary, to pay for your child and you should find time to spend with your child-BE A PARENT.

You make a nice scholarly argument. It ignores the responsibilities that a person should have and own up to whether they are rich or poor. I think I read somewhere that your son is in the Peace Corp. That is an admirable calling. I'm sure you raised him to accept the responsibilities that life thrusts upon him. Why don't others do the same?

 

[shaznie]

well do you blame white woman for choosing black lovers as so many of us white guys are sissy boys so white woman today choose real men like black men, and its becoming more and more common to see white woman black preg

 

[duke9555]

LOL ... shaznie, you don't mince with words, do you? A lot of assumptiveness there.

=========

not subjunctives pal

 

[gottagetlocked]

There isn't a day that goes by that i dont see atleast one white women walking with a black child here on the streets of downtown toronto, canada and on some days i see as many as 4-5 white women walking with black babies/children. Most of the time i dont see any black guys walking with them.

My question is who are these women?? i mean are they the one who do one night stands with black guys and get pregnant with black babies? or are they the wives of cuckold white husbands who get pregnant with blacks guys babies?

This is the product of social engineering.

Look at TV and the Movies. The only White male "heros" have a Hispanic or Black sidekick that helps him though his peril. He will be portrayed as being unable to accomplish his task without his non-white buddy.

Now that the "old, clunky, worn-out, white" version of Spiderman is dead he's now to be replaced with a half Black, half Mestizo -- soon to be homosexual Spiderman to replace him.

The movie Thor has a black man to play the Nordic God Heimdall.

On the news, race-based hatred by whites is alway front and centre -- mob attacks by blacks on whites is kept to local coverage only and race is rarely mentioned [we wouldn't want to look racist or anything]

Long term ******** to this will have an effect on the psyche of White men and women

I like to see black cocks in my Wife as well as white one's; but the whole black-breeding thing isn't good for the couple or the child.... [IMHO]

Reading this might make some people uncomfortable, but it is a possibility of being true.

 

[Custer Laststand]

Melscuck,

Custer — Sorry, I forgot to place the word "cuck" before the word "revolution," as in "There is no cuck revolution out there."

OK. But, are you sure about that? According to Doc in Cleveland (who is evidently a psychologist; you can find him and his thread in the members list), the numbers of men coming in to see him because their wives are fucking other men, and they're having psych problems with being cuckolds... and the numbers of men who want their wives to fuck other men, and they assume that's weird, so they're having psych problems... has been increasing steadily and dramatically in recent years. This actually does seem like something of a societal revolution, albeit under the radar. Perhaps it can be considered a cuckold revolution, in the sense that more and more men are coming out of the closet, so to speak... in part with the aid of forums like this one... and admitting they actually want their wives to make them cuckolds.

While I tend to agree with your analysis of rich, middle class and poor and note that the middle class is slowly being squeezed out of existence, I find that has absolutely little to do with the number of single mothers and the failure on the part of the men to marry them or support them.

I think you're wrong about this. Marriage is, in large part, an economic phenomenon (as I mentioned). If you google, say, "economics of marriage" and/or other permutations of this phrase, you'll find a lot of info on it.

I believe that society, as a whole, has become more irresponsible than it was 30 or 40 years ago. Even in the swinging and wild 60s and 70s, more men stepped up and did the right thing when it came to marriage when your girl became pregnant. There was a belief then that life didn't always turn out the way you wanted or wished but you did what you had to do and made the best of the situation. Whether that meant getting a job you didn't necessarily want, but, needed. So be it.

You're overestimating the "social responsibility" of young men during the "wild 60's and 70's" (I was one of them), and I'm strongly suspicious of sweeping generalizations like "society is more irresponsible now than 30 or 40 years ago" (that's viewing the past through rose-colored glasses). Suppose a man gets a woman pregnant (it happens...), but he can't marry and support her and their child because he can't get a job, even a job he'd rather not have, because it's been outsourced to some other country where labor is cheaper. Then, calling him "irresponsible" is just a cheap attempt to dismiss the truth, which is: he's unemployed. Millions of Americans — young, old, and in between — are in that situation now, and not voluntarily, as you must know.

.... As for women, birth control is cheap and affordable and readily available everywhere. Why don't they use it?

The most probable answers to this question can be seen by comparing the unplanned-pregnancy rate among American teenage girls to the same rate among European teenage girls. In Europe, the rate is much lower. The reasons appear to be societal values and education. Here in the U.S., strong association by religious fundamentalists (who are widely distributed throughout American society) of sex with "evil," combined with strong attempts to stigmatize unmarried women who use birth control as "evil," has resulted in realistic sex education being banned in the public and private school systems. In Europe, by contrast, human sexuality is much more accepted as a human characteristic like any other, and young people are realistically and reasonably educated about sex. A consequence is that the unplanned teenage pregnancy rate is much lower among Europeans than Americans.

We live in a society where most of our young don't have any urge to be responsible and don't want to live any life other than what they think life should be. My parents were poor, I was raised in a lower middle class home. I'm sure there were many times my parents felt the difficulty of having to raise a family on minimal wages. They did it and I never heard them bitch about it — not once.

See above. To be married and raise children with a job that pays minimal wages, you have to have a job.

I have always been a pretty liberal person. I voted for Obama and every Democrat before him, going back to Walter Mondale.

Good... I encourage you to continue voting for Democrats. One of the primary reasons for the disastrous Republican sweep of the U.S. 2010 midterm elections (as I understand it) was, the vast numbers of young people who turned out to elect Barak Obama in 2008 didn't bother to vote.

Yet, I can see how society has changed.

You're right about that. Bob Dylan's well-known line, "The times they are a-changin' ", is no longer true. It has become: "The times they have a-changed."

I don't think this has anything to do with finances.

It has a whole lot to do with economics and finances.

Heck, most of the young fathers out there don't even bother to pay child support, let alone try to be good fathers.

Among those who aren't paying child support (it isn't all unmarried and divorced fathers), are they not paying because they don't want to, or because they don't have the money? Child support is expensive... very expensive. In reality, it's mother support because it's unmarried single mothers who raise children when the father(s) are not there.

Here's the thing. You mess around and get a girl pregnant, you should do the right thing. You don't necessarily have to marry the girl because you may not love the girl and that's no environment to bring a child into. At least, though, you should take 2 jobs, if necessary, to pay for your child and you should find time to spend with your child. BE A PARENT.

I don't know who you mean here by "you," but I don't think it's "me." When I got a woman pregnant it was my wife. She and I raised our son together.

You make a nice scholarly argument.

Thank you. But, it was not a "scholarly" argument (whatever that is). It was an economic argument.

It ignores the responsibilities that a person should have and own up to whether they are rich or poor.

To think that willingness and ability to accept "responsibility" is somehow divorced from one's ability to do so in a financial and economic sense is grossly unrealistic.

I think I read somewhere that your son is in the Peace Corps. That is an admirable calling.

Yes, he was, and I agree. (Even among the volunteers the Peace Corps accepts... and they screen them carefully... only around 50%, apparently, make it through to the end of their 2-year tenure. Physically, mentally, and psychologically, it isn't easy.)

I'm sure you raised him to accept the responsibilities that life thrusts upon him. Why don't others do the same?

Because it's important to choose one's parents carefully. Unfortunately, not all people made good choices when they were infants.

—Custer

 

[melscuck]

OK. But, are you sure about that? According to Doc in Cleveland (who is evidently a psychologist; you can find him and his thread in the members list), the numbers of men coming in to see him because their wives are fucking other men, and they're having psych problems with being cuckolds... and the numbers of men who want their wives to fuck other men, and they assume that's weird, so they're having psych problems... has been increasing steadily and dramatically in recent years.

I hardly consider an anonymous "psychologist" from Cleveland posting his "findings" in a relatively small forum as empirical proof of any kind that a cuckold revolution is upon us. While Cleveland may rock, the Doc's opinions have failed to convince me in the least that the times they are a changing. Talk to 100 women and 100 men and see how many really want an "open" marriage or a cuck lifestyle. Like all sexual lifestyles, it may be out in the open more but I don't think that equates to more people are living that lifestyle. In fact, I can count on one hand the number of "swingers" that I've known in my life and I have lived in some larger cities. Outside of me, I know of not a single cuckold or someone professing to the cuckold lifestyle.

Marriage is, in large part, an economic phenomenon (as I mentioned). If you google, say, "economics of marriage" and/or other permutations of this phrase, you'll find a lot of info on it.

Marriage is in large part an emotional phenomenon. People often get married-and divorced-based on their emotions. They are in love, they are not in love. Economics play a role in the decision as to when to get married or may play a role in the stability of a marriage but it is hardly the reason people get married or stay married.

You're overestimating the "social responsibility" of young men during the "wild 60's and 70's" (I was one of them), and I'm strongly suspicious of sweeping generalizations like "society is more irresponsible now than 30 or 40 years ago" (that's viewing the past through rose-colored glasses).

No I'm not. Consider me a child of the late 70s and early 80s. What happened to most of the hippies from the 60s and 70s? They became the yuppies of the 80s and 90s. "The Big Chill" generation found responsibility and became part of society. You know how many shit jobs that I worked in my life on my way to adulthood? In those days, you did what you had to do to pay the bills and survive. You had dreams for how you wanted life to be but you dealt with the realities of life. Given my wife's age, I am surrounded by early 20 somethings. They have no concept of hard work and responsibility. They don't even have patience. They expect life to be like a cell phone call or the internet-everything has to be instant-instant gratification.

Suppose a man gets a woman pregnant (it happens...), but he can't marry and support her and their child because he can't get a job, even a job he'd rather not have, because it's been outsourced to some other country where labor is cheaper.

I heard the same arguments when Carter was president (remember double digit inflation and interest rates) and when Reagan was president and this country lost MILLIONS of good paying jobs. Every day, I drive by McDonalds, Wendys, grocery stores, and on and on and every day I see "Help Wanted" signs in those places. Those jobs were good enough for me to work to get me through college and graduate school but, what, they're not good enough for a guy who has knocked up a woman and made a child? Sorry, again, if it was my child, I would take any job that I had to in order to take care of that child. Personally, I would love to spend the money that I make, now, on fun things, but, I married a woman with 2 children. I took on that responsibility. Diapers, food, clothes, toys, pre-schools-they all cost money. You do what you have to do to pay the bills.

Millions of Americans — young, old, and in between — are in that situation now, and not voluntarily, as you must know.

Yes, true. Those that are truly trying to find work and can't-my heart goes out to them. I know how hard life can be. I supported myself and, partially, my family, when I was in college. During the 1980s-when Reagan had busted the unions, when no one would hire anyone for more than 30 hours a week because the employer didn't want to pay health insurance.

To be married and raise children with a job that pays minimal wages, you have to have a job

To make children and have unprotected sex when you don't have a job is not only foolish, it's irresponsible. How about being careful and prudent?

Among those who aren't paying child support (it isn't all unmarried and divorced fathers), are they not paying because they don't want to, or because they don't have the money? Child support is expensive... very expensive. In reality, it's mother support because it's unmarried single mothers who raise children when the father(s) are not there.

See above. Don't fuck around and then you don't have to worry about babies and child support. It is very expensive to raise children-if you don't have a job, don't have unprotected sex. Birth control is cheap and readily available.

I don't know who you mean here by "you," but I don't think it's "me." When I got a woman pregnant it was my wife. She and I raised our son together.

These kinds of statements are juvenile. You know that I wasn't referring to you so why waste time commenting on it. If you don't know who I was referring to, reread my post.

Good... I encourage you to continue voting for Democrats. One of the primary reasons for the disastrous Republican sweep of the U.S. 2010 midterm elections (as I understand it) was, the vast numbers of young people who turned out to elect Barak Obama in 2008 didn't bother to vote.

I could never vote for a Republican however I have lost a lot of faith in the Democrats. They are no more concerned about the middle class than the Republican or the Tea Baggers (I know it's the Tea Party but those people are way the hell out there).

Let's talk about responsibility some more. A guy, with no job, knocks up a woman and the guy doesn't pay child support. The mother doesn't have enough to take care of the child. Who ends up partially supporting the child? The tax paying public-of which I am a member. People got greedy in the early to mid 2000s when interest rates dropped and they refinanced their homes. They also bought homes they couldn't afford. When the mortgage companies and banks went bust, the people walked away from their homes. Who bailed the people and the mortgage companies and the banks out? The tax paying public. I didn't refinance. I played it safe and made sure my home mortgage was payed on time. I was responsible. Those that weren't well, again, bailed out by people like me.

Yes, he was, and I agree. (Even among the volunteers the Peace Corps accepts... and they screen them carefully... only around 50%, apparently, make it through to the end of their 2-year tenure. Physically, mentally, and psychologically, it isn't easy.)

And, on top of it and most importantly, it is a humanitarian effort. To dedicate yourself to the cause of peace and development is noble indeed. It embodies the spirit of hard work and responsibility that I speak of. Forgive me, but all you need to do is look around you and see that the younger generation is no longer inspired to take on such challenges. They don't even want to support or acknowledge their own children.

But, it was not a "scholarly" argument (whatever that is).

Sure it was. It was something you might read in a sociology text book. Any time marriage is called an "economic phenomenon," I would say that the argument is scholarly. It is something that college professors might argue about. It's not based in the real world or reality.

You are a wise man, Custer, but I disagree with virtually everything you have said in this post.

 

[Curious Observer]

Bear in mind that many people who live alternate lifestyles probably aren't that many in number and, I would imagine that a disproportionate amount of them post on Internet forums and self-help boards. See the BDSMers, cuckolders, fetishists and so on.

 

[Curious Observer]

Those jobs were good enough for me to work to get me through college and graduate school but, what, they're not good enough for a guy who has knocked up a woman and made a child? Sorry, again, if it was my child, I would take any job that I had to in order to take care of that child.

In the UK, single mothers get child benefits and a council house if they have children with no father. This is true.

Personally, I would love to spend the money that I make, now, on fun things, but, I married a woman with 2 children. I took on that responsibility. Diapers, food, clothes, toys, pre-schools-they all cost money. You do what you have to do to pay the bills.

Many people would think you're deranged for doing this.

 

[Saraha]

Then again, they could be married to successful black men who go to work and leave the wives at home to take care of their children! Unless, of course, one of the women you see is your wife.

You are mostly likely right. If a black man was walking with them, he would likely be unemployed. Hot, white pussy is usually not on it's own very long. White pussy tends to have trophy status.

 

[Custer Laststand]

Melscuck,

I hardly consider an anonymous "psychologist" from Cleveland posting his "findings" in a relatively small forum as empirical proof of any kind that a cuckold revolution is upon us. ….

If you don’t like Doc in Cleveland’s thread, see “Insatiable Wives: Women who Stray and the Men Who Love Them,” by David J. Ley, 2009, 291 pp. (hardcover). (Lay claims to be a clinical psychologist.) The short dust jacket summary begins: “This enlightening work investigates the history, incidence, and causes of a unique sexual lifestyle pursued by an increasing number of couples. The most common terms used to describe it are “hotwife” or “cuckold” lifestyle. …etc…”

Marriage is in large part an emotional phenomenon. …. Economics play a role in the decision as to when to get married or may play a role in the stability of a marriage, but it is hardly the reason people get married or stay married.

You’re partially right. Historically, though, marriage has been entirely an economic phenomenon (among most people… among royalty, of course, it has also been to attain increased political power and/or stability). Consider the tradition of marriage partners being selected by their parents when the couple-to-be were children, and the dowry tradition. These still prevail throughout many non-western societies. It’s only rather recently, historically speaking, that young people have broken free from these tyrannies and selected their own marriage partners based on love and other emotional considerations, including sexual attraction (although not always), as well as on economic considerations.

Now consider, for example, your own marriage as you have described it. You said Mel has told you her lover is her man and always will be (or words to that effect). But, she married you and stays married to you, evidently because you support her and her children in a style far better than she would have with her waitressing work (plus her lover). In exchange, she gives you what you want and need (bad treatment and cuckolding). Almost certainly, she considers that a small price to pay. Ergo, looking beyond your (strongly emotional, no doubt) fetish turn-ons, the basis of your marriage to Mel is economic.

Finally, consider an article on this subject that can be found here:

New Economics of Marriage: The Rise of Wives - Pew Research Center

(I cite it because whether it’s “academic” is irrelevant. The question to ask, I suggest, is whether the authors are right.)

The title, authors, and first 3 paragraphs of this article are:

“New Economics of Marriage: The Rise of Wives”

by Richard Fry and D’Vera Cohn, Pew Research Center,
January 19, 2010

“Executive Summary”

“The institution of marriage has undergone significant changes in recent decades as women have outpaced men in education and earnings growth. These unequal gains have been accompanied by gender role reversals in both the spousal characteristics and the economic benefits of marriage.

“A larger share of men in 2007, compared with their 1970 counterparts, are married to women whose education and income exceed their own, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of demographic and economic trend data. A larger share of women are married to men with less education and income.

“From an economic perspective, these trends have contributed to a gender role reversal in the gains from marriage. In the past, when relatively few wives worked, marriage enhanced the economic status of women more than that of men. In recent decades, however, the economic gains associated with marriage have been greater for men than for women.”

…….. etc ……..

I’ll stop here because our exchange has degenerated to “I’m right you’re wrong,” “No you aren’t,” “Yes I am”... and has drifted rather far from the topic of Redheads’ thread.

—Custer