SA Footy

nuggety goodness wrote:

nuggety goodness wrote:My marriage is great and everyone is happy, what else should i ask for?

As i mentioned, divorce rates were well below current day statistics even 20 years ago, let alone in the 50s. So what has changed? And if my marriage lasts with all parties being happy, then what is wrong with it?!?

Interestingly, after looking at statistics my assumptions were wrong and divorce rates 20 years ago were actually on par with current day statistics (approx 48000 nationally). However 50 years ago, in 1964, there were just over 10000 nationally for the year.

So yeah, take my marriage from 50 years ago when there were distinct roles that men and women played and everyone was happy with that. And if that upsets you then you can deal with that because we are all good at my house.

You have to adjust for the fact that decent jobs were hard to get for women back then and leaving an unhappy marriage was therefore more difficult.
There was more socio-religious pressure to stay in marriage regardless then too.

I rather like the new woman in my life who is quite assertive and prepared to be independent, and whom I can relate on a basis of equality and non-dependency.

RB wrote:

nuggety goodness wrote:In our house i am the bread winner and have the duty of steering my family through life, my wife is submitted to me (voluntarily) and this frees her from that burden so that she can go about her business not worrying about the hard decisions. Of course she is involved in the process and i always consult her for her view but i make the call. Does that make me a chauvanist? I dont think so.

I've read some interesting things on this forum.

This one probably takes the cake.

It's right up there, without question.

Is NG Tony Abbott?

Too articulate to be TA

regardless of "the churches" views on "gay marriage" it is completely out of their hands on whether or not it will be allowed. "the church" does not have a monopoly on the word, or the act of marriage, despite what they claim. they lost the exclusive right to marriage decades ago when the government took over.

the number of people i see coming out of births deaths and marriages on grenfell st after getting hitched in a government office is proof enough of that. marriage has already been separated from the church, they lost the argument long ago, they just never realised it.

thankfully it wont be long before it is legalised (either this current bill, or another soon after) and we can all laugh as these religeous nuts proceed to divorce their wives as it "doesnt mean the same thing anymore".

in a world where two people who have never met each other can legally get married for our entertainment on tv, i think the "marriage is sacred" boat has well and truly sailed.....

tipper wrote:regardless of "the churches" views on "gay marriage" it is completely out of their hands on whether or not it will be allowed. "the church" does not have a monopoly on the word, or the act of marriage, despite what they claim. they lost the exclusive right to marriage decades ago when the government took over.

the number of people i see coming out of births deaths and marriages on grenfell st after getting hitched in a government office is proof enough of that. marriage has already been separated from the church, they lost the argument long ago, they just never realised it.

thankfully it wont be long before it is legalised (either this current bill, or another soon after) and we can all laugh as these religeous nuts proceed to divorce their wives as it "doesnt mean the same thing anymore".

in a world where two people who have never met each other can legally get married for our entertainment on tv, i think the "marriage is sacred" boat has well and truly sailed.....

Exactly!!!

tipper wrote:regardless of "the churches" views on "gay marriage" it is completely out of their hands on whether or not it will be allowed. "the church" does not have a monopoly on the word, or the act of marriage, despite what they claim. they lost the exclusive right to marriage decades ago when the government took over.

the number of people i see coming out of births deaths and marriages on grenfell st after getting hitched in a government office is proof enough of that. marriage has already been separated from the church, they lost the argument long ago, they just never realised it.

thankfully it wont be long before it is legalised (either this current bill, or another soon after) and we can all laugh as these religeous nuts proceed to divorce their wives as it "doesnt mean the same thing anymore".

in a world where two people who have never met each other can legally get married for our entertainment on tv, i think the "marriage is sacred" boat has well and truly sailed.....

Gay marriage is fine, it gives the extremely ugly people double the chances.

Lightning McQueen wrote:Gay marriage is fine, it gives the extremely ugly people double the chances.

affords Gay people the opportunity to be as miserable as the rest of us

bennymacca wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:Gay marriage is fine, it gives the extremely ugly people double the chances.

affords Gay people the opportunity to be as miserable as the rest of us

Maybe you need you wife to submit to you.

HH3 wrote:

bennymacca wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:Gay marriage is fine, it gives the extremely ugly people double the chances.

affords Gay people the opportunity to be as miserable as the rest of us

Maybe you need you wife to submit to you.

lol, in my household my wife is the breadwinner. well, moreso than i anyway. she earns significantly more than i do despite not being full time. i guess i should go home and tell her how unhappy our marriage really is then. i guess we have been wrong all these years, who knew??

No mate, as the bread winner she releases you of all burden and makes decisions for you.

Funny, pretty much like my marriage, just slightly different. I don't listen, nor give a **** and she tells me where I need to be and when.

Perfect!

bennymacca wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:Gay marriage is fine, it gives the extremely ugly people double the chances.

affords Gay people the opportunity to be as miserable as the rest of us

I put that on Facebook last week and copped a barrage.

Booney wrote:No mate, as the bread winner she releases you of all burden and makes decisions for you.

Funny, pretty much like my marriage, just slightly different. I don't listen, nor give a **** and she tells me where I need to be and when.

Perfect!

lol. neither one of us makes decisions for the other. unless it is the really important stuff, like which footy team to follow (North obviously) or what beer to buy (if she suggests west end again there will be trouble .... )

actually, i saw this the other day

what do you call a book club that has been stuck on the same book for thousands of years?


the church

Kyrgios. Poor lad, he's yet to find out the world does not revolve around him.

Booney wrote:Kyrgios. Poor lad, he's yet to find out the world does not revolve around him.

He sounds like he's the Second Coming of 'The Poo'.

Why can't there be more Aussie tennis players like Pat Rafter or 'The Woodies'?

People are so hypocritical though. They long for people with personality that make the sport watchable, then cut them down when they do something out of the ordinary.

Do we want to watch two robots go at it? Raonic looked like he was asleep when he was playing. If his serve wasnt faster than the speed of sound he would be boring as batshit to watch.

bennymacca wrote:People are so hypocritical though. They long for people with personality that make the sport watchable, then cut them down when they do something out of the ordinary.

Do we want to watch two robots go at it? Raonic looked like he was asleep when he was playing. If his serve wasnt faster than the speed of sound he would be boring as batshit to watch.

There's a big difference between 'having personality' and 'being a douche' though...

the pressure of being a 20 year old suddenly thrust into the spotlight and the weight of expectation can rapidly tip that balance though.

Im willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Similar to Hewitt.

If he is 25 and still carrying on then I will rethink my opinion